I see Peter Thiel conversing repeatedly with someone who was convicted in Florida in 2008 for procuring a 17-year-old for prostitution and soliciting a prostitute.
You’re writing a lot here to obfuscate that. If Mr. Thiel didn’t know, that is at minimum a reason to question his judgment.
He wasn’t allowed to end the r&d system in the us, but nobody stopped him. He wasn’t allowed to create export tariffs, go nuts with import tariffs, rip up senate passed treaties, …. As others have said, somebody has to stop the process and to date it’s not been stopped.
Trump has the power to do anything that people (especially Congress) does not push back against.
> 1. Do not obey in advance.
> Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then offer themselves without being asked. A citizen who adapts in this way is teaching power what it can do.
>Trump has the power to do anything that people (especially Congress) does not push back against.
Elections are run at the state level, so it's not like Trump can direct state agencies to stop counting mail-in ballots. That said, the fact that elections are run at the state level, and the fact that only a handful of swing states matter means it only takes a few pliant election officials to change the outcome of the election. eg. if Georgia's governor caved in 2020.
Not really true. In this case he doesn’t have the power to do it because the federal government doesn’t operate elections. He has no lever to pull.
At most he can convince some friendly state legislatures to ban mail-in voting, but even that may not be an automatic process (e.g., maybe some states have requirements to change the constitutional or put the item up on a ballot measure).
Every Trump policy to this point has involved some kind of lever that the executive branch has had power over: tariffs, national guard deployments, and even in the case of ICE enforcement, Trump had to go to Congress to appropriate additional funding to make that viable long-term.
As an aside, I’m not personally too worried about the mail in voting as a hot button issue. I don’t think Republicans will touch it significantly because they need turnout, too, and they need it from key demographics that use absentee ballots like older voters and military members.
Some research seems to show that mail-in voting doesn’t really benefit a specific party.
It's his standard procedure over and over again; works great for him.
Talk it up. If it keeps him in the headlines, great.
Throw it against the wall and see if it sticks. If he gets sued, fine, there's a decade of suits piled up in the queue, no problem. If there's an injunction, maybe ignore it and try anyway (queue full). If he's truly blocked, it's the commie judges and he'll make that better soon. OTOH if he gets away with that, more outrage and more PR for him, success.
Early stage fascism thrives on outrage fatigue to slim opposition. Do three more outrages today. Repeat tomorrow.
Neither is ending birthright citizenship, dismantling USAID, closing the department of education, firing the heads of the National Labor Relations Board and Merit Systems Protection Board (independent federal agencies) without cause, impounding funds appropriated by Congress, etc.
Nevertheless, Trump has started process for all of those, and has been successful at many due to the slowness of the courts.
It is if you live in a state controlled by a GOP governor and legislature. Trump also doesn't have the power to gerrymander Texas, yet he commanded it, and then it happened. Which means he actually does have the power.
Has he "ended" it? Does he have the discipline, intelligence, and patience to do the work to end things legislatively or just make executive orders that will be tied up in courts for years and rescinded as soon he's out of office?
He has codified massive funding to ICE in the BBB, which he has direct control over.
So he can order people to be detained and deported, knowing that the legal system can't handle the appeals of that many people.
Furthermore, the only way he will leave office is if his disease gets bad enough to where he can't function. And then the assumption is that the crazies he has hired aren't going to basically take over the government completely. If he is able to function in 2026 and 2028, US won't have real elections.
Also: even if Millenials were becoming more conservative (which would be very strange for a lot of economic reasons alone), the definition of “minority” held by the media may not really apply if nearly half of the generation identifies as non-white. (https://www.census.gov/newsroom/archives/2015-pr/cb15-113.ht...)
Respectfully, this totally ignores that the funding for most things in this country comes right out of the cities. To use your terminology, "left leaning" places are ~70% of GDP.
Also, just because some guys in rural areas collect guns compulsively doesn't mean they are remotely capable of becoming an organized militia.
This feels like an unreasonable expectation for the people who would be reporting to him.
If someone in your future/present management chain wrote a "I think people like slibhb are bad at this job" missive somewhere, would you then feel the need to wait for examples of bias?
Article title is actually "Introducing Transfer Appliance: Sneakernet for the cloud era", can someone change how it's presented here? This was not a good improvised title.
Take a moment to look at the construction of this report.
There is no easily readable timeline. It is not discoverable from anywhere outside of social media or directly searching for it. As far as I know, customers were not emailed about this - I certainly wasn't.
You're an important business, AWS. Burying outage retrospectives and live service health data is what I expect from a much smaller shop, not the leader in cloud computing. We should all demand better.
Also notably missing is the "we will automatically refund all affected customers" line that we'd expect from somebody who wants to provide excellent service.
A graphical illustration of the service dependencies they were talking about would have been nice as well.
If you request it and provide evidence that they find compelling.
To receive a Service Credit, you must submit a claim by opening a case in the AWS Support Center. To be eligible, the credit request must be received by us by the end of the second billing cycle after which the incident occurred and must include:
the words “SLA Credit Request” in the subject line;
the dates and times of each incident of non-zero Error Rates that you are claiming; and
your request logs that document the errors and corroborate your claimed outage (any confidential or sensitive information in these logs should be removed or replaced with asterisks).
If the Monthly Uptime Percentage applicable to the month of such request is confirmed by us and is less than the applicable Service Commitment, then we will issue the Service Credit to you within one billing cycle following the month in which your request is confirmed by us. Your failure to provide the request and other information as required above will disqualify you from receiving a Service Credit."
Interesting observation. Maybe the answer is it that a behemoth like AWS does this because they _can_ get away with it. In contrast to AWS's cascading failures, the GitLab outage was a mere blip. Because they are several orders of magnitude smaller than Amazon, however, they had to be painfully transparent during their actual restore operations and in the post-moterm.
AWS has more implicit trust that this won't happen again, since they've never (I think?) had something like this happen, so just a few lines about fixing the tool that let all the nodes shutdown is enough to restore confidence.
Emails seem to be going out. I got one a while ago. I suspect this was an initial response geared towards the general audience and a more specific technical response will be forthcoming.
Without some direct information from Apple, it's perfectly valid to wonder if they were manipulated in some way. There aren't any facts available to us that point in one direction or the other.
You’re writing a lot here to obfuscate that. If Mr. Thiel didn’t know, that is at minimum a reason to question his judgment.