Sounds like a fancy bitmask. There are a lot of neat tricks you can do with bitmasks.

That is a very clever solution. I wouldn't have imagined that VARCHARs would allow you to do the types of operations you are describing. I've never used them that way.

I love bit masks. They are so efficient and elegant.

I get it. Bitmasks are awesome. So few processor cycles to do relatively complex operations.

That's a lot like the Walmart effect, where Walmart ends up be subsidized by entitlements programs and ends up making an unfair profit.

I'm a free market guy but stuff like that needs to be remedied.

That site is getting bookmarked.

I mean, Walmart employees don't get paid enough and go on welfare and Walmart is essentially stealing tax dollars in a round about way.

I agree that is a big problem. My parents still use American made appliance like microwaves and freezers that have lasted 40+ years and they bought in the 70's. That shouldn't be too hard to do again. Plus there is the environmental benefit of not buying plastic junk.

I agree. Plus, many of these businesses actually take advantage of illegal immigrants by underpaying them, making them live in substandard conditions, etc. I still think a good solution for human trafficking and drugs coming across the border, but no politician ever talks about solving that part of the immigration problem. Anyway, I'm out. The words are all starting to blur together and that is my reminder to go to bed.

Anyway I'm out. The blurred letters running together means it's time for bed. I'll be around so I'

m sure we can continue this conversation.

Good night.

Same

If this is a tactic and lawsuits are knowingly false, that is an awful thing to do and should lose Trump the respect of the entire nation. I personally think that there are irregularities where fraud could be an explanation but there could be other answers as well. It needs to be investigated to the fullest extent. There will be big issues with our country if they are not.

That's racist here.

The problem is a the legal burden of proof. You can have strong evidence that something bad happened but not strong enough to convince a judge or jury.

In theory yes. I would imagine that it is probably closer to beyond a reasonable doubt in reality. There is too much risk for judges to rule otherwise without having a good defense of undeniable evidence.

Saw that earlier. That is concerning.

There is no way you could possible know that based on the evidence we all have access to. You are just as ignorant to fact of that claim as anyone else.

As much of it as I can with the time I have. There is something strange going on. Doesn't mean it's fraud but it deserves a good look over.

I'm not sold either way other than something is strange and needs and explanation.

Most of the cases have been thrown out based on standing, not on the metrit of the evidence.

It's all about what can be proven. Best to keep an open mind until it is proven.

I saw it a CYA in case Powell comes up short. Nothing more or less.

I think that is a fair point. Two weeks is just too short for me. If it drags on past the first of the year, all credibility for me will be gone at that point. That is fair amount of time in my opinion.

Again, I have not taken a position on Powell's evidence. I think time will indicate the trustworthiness of her statements.

At one point of time people had never seen a black swan before as well. That didn't mean they didn't exist.

I've not ruled that out as well. In fact that was my first thought.

I don't think that is the issue. The issue is how long it takes to organize the evidence to make a compelling case. My view is that IF the evidence exists, we are still within reasonable time scales for that evidence to be processed, prepared, and presented. That doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist even though it may not, just too early for those of us out of the loop to make that determination.

It is possible that Trump had some confidential intelligence that Powell was being played and that is what prompted the shift.

Have you read our Federalist papers? Our whole system is built on distrust of government.

I have. I see different ideas of how government should operate. Either opinion is not falsifiable and it is arguable whether the anti-federalist papers have a stronger bent toward distrust of government.

I don't have any sympathy for people, whatever their origin, who can't separate politics from legal processes. If they can't perform that task they probably shouldn't be participating in self government.

Again, hard to say. I worked for the Federal government for years including many three letter agencies. So many of the decisions made are counterintuitive. It may be she wants credit all to herself and is not sharing the evidence out of self interest. More likely the evidence is lacking but that doesn't mean there aren't other explanations that prove to be true in the end.

My position is that the greatest damage will come from loss of faith in our governing institutions.

I agree BTW. The processes are being followed. Too many people are being distracted by the rhetoric.

You're right. I do have a much better handle on a Constitution Republic than I do a pure democracy .

That has just as much to do with the Democratic party as it does with Trump. There has been a push to use certain tactics by both parties to delegitimatize the processes for political victories. It has been a process that has been going on for 20+ years.

I'm happy to let Britain fight their own wars from now on. Have fun dealing with freedom of navigation and not having countries like Iran choke your economy over disagreements. I've seen way too many of my buddies die protecting your country's interests as the world's international police and am happy to have your country sacrifice your own sons for your economic interests abroad.

America was never involved in Chechnya. That was Russia. Did you do your research? America has not been bankrupted by the war on terror. Your country has barely been involved in the wars. Like I said, many of us are happy to let you finance and fight your own wars and establish your own freedom of navigation.

Not even close. The entire war on terror cost about 2.4 trillion. That is still less than the yearly cost of social security and all of the other entitlements programs.

There is a big difference between the US government and the US people. Most of the people I met in the government were normal hardworking people as long as they had functional jobs. Most of the people I met who worked in D.C. or who were high level managers, directors, etc. were shady AF. It seems like about 90% of the people who make it to the top are power hungry and therefore immoral. We need to rein that in.

It's not so much they are the same thing. It's the fact that the system is set up to make it so you have to play the game that way if you want power.

I would agree, but I think western culture is dying so I have an obvious bias. I would rather not be hired than to be dishonest which works but I have to work much harder to actually do things I say I do.

Just to make it easy: http://www.capdale.com/files/table-2.png

The real problem is having enough independent thinkers. Most campaign finance goes to advertising and advertising can't be effective if people are intelligent and informed.

There have been a few times in history where it has happened. It is not in the best interest of political parties to allow it though.

Or anyone in power.

I think that is changing a bigger proportion of Dems became radicalized. The outright lies this year have been pretty blatant. I'm thinking of the fear mongering over Federal law enforment in Portland. I was watching live feeds and youtube videos directly contradicting CNN while they reported. I think that is going to continue to happen as the ideology shifts and tactics developed by the likes of Alinsky continue to expand.

NYT

Ah cable

Bloomberg

To me that doesn't say alot considering anyone right of center is automatically a racist and bigot now.

I didn't see that coverage. Might have to look into it.

Wait, was that the one that did the event by event replay with references and was very unbiased?

I remember it now. I was surprised at how unbiased it was at the time. That is the only reason I remember it.

I think it also boils down to the fact that the owners of media companies have very definied ideologies that aren't terribly diverse.

https://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6

This is stuck with me for a long time.

That is a big problem when considering other countries that want to influence the internal working of our country if you think about it. Propaganda is one of the most effective weapons of war. Who stands to gain from widening divisions in our country?

Libel and slander are too hard to prosecute which causes those problems.

You have to prove a malicious motivation and not just that the information provided was untrue. The usually remedy is to redact the information but things move so fast now that having something published for a few hours can do most of the damage.

This is where allowing duals to be legal again would solve some of the issues. The problem is that there is no competing interest in whether or not to post misleading or false information. What is the consequence?

This is one of the things that weren't anticipated by the founders. There are no controls. There was the assumption that media had limited power and the only interest of media would be reporting the truth. What prevents this type of behavior?

No concept of organizations within the country that could rival the governments power.

I'm not arguing for government controls. Only that technology limited the power that non-governmental organizations could have and what we have going on couldn't have been anticipated, therefore, no controls exist to balance things.

I disagree. Without an enemy in the Whitehouse I think their ratings will decline greatly. They are being sold because the owners are anticipating this (in my opinion).

Their brand is built on resistance ATM.

That is where RWM will come out ahead I think.

I know. Just agreeing. Much of the LWM have lost credibility with their viewers. There was a massive downturn in ratings for MSNBC and CNN after the whole Russia collusion thing fell through, mostly of liberal viewers.

This is a golden opportunity for both the Rebpulican and Liberian parties. I hope they take advantage of it.

Libertarian

I don't know, maybe Liberians could benefit as well.

Regardless of how everything turns out. I hope this company gets curb stomped into oblivion.

Reputation was more important to media figures back then. There had to be a more compelling reason to lie and the culture was more supportive of that position.

I think we all know of specific instances. News outlets also had the same technological limitations and ability to verify news. I was very close to the events leading up to and starting at OIF and even with modern technology many news outlets were just wrong on what was going on. They were providing false information because they didn't have the resources to report everything correctly.

I'm not saying that there was no propaganda or instances of lying, it is obvious that there was. I guess I would take issue with your assertation that all these were a result of politically biased decision making. I don't think things are normally the clean.

Information is a messy thing.

Are you familiar with the reproducibility crisis? Even scientists have a hard time determining truth using the scientific method in complex environments. I used to be more a conspircay theorist until I worked for the Federal government and realized ineptitude could explain much more than conspiracy. This holds true for the large organizatin's I've worked with.

There are a number of varied reasons for it and it depends on the unique case. From my experience, conspiracy is a real thing and it happens. It is just much rarer than most people think it is. Ineptitude is not and should be the first place people look for explanations.

I would agree with you on that point with modern media, specifically over the last 8-12 years. I don't know if that has been as widespread as it is now. There seemed to be a greater diversity in views in MSM historically speaking.

I would imagine it is close to the ratio of democrats to republicans in sociology. It is upward of 10/1 in that field.

Not yet realz, I've had serious issues with the justice system for years though because I've seen it happen. That what originally brought me here.

I honestly think the justice system needs the most reform out of any of our branches our government. That being said, I have almost as much scorn for BLM as I do for the justice system.

They took something that could have been used for their case and crapped all over it by victimizing other innocent people IMHO.

I have been preaching this for years. I started donating to the innocence project decades ago because of this and predicted this violence over ten years ago because of the abuses.

I was convinced years ago. That is why I stay as far away from courts as possible.

I don't know how well the MSM could cover this to be honest. The format is wrong. You really need to dig in deep to some of the cases to figure out how bad things are. These things require quite a bit digging, reading, watching testimony. I spent probably about 60 hours on the Ahmaud Arbery case before I even felt comfortable coming to a conclusion because it takes that amount of effort to be halfway competent to determining truth. Same with Rittenhouse, though his case was easier because of the better availability of video.

MSM should be a starting point to exploring these issues in more depth.

Again, that's how I ended up here was digging and finding Roberts walkthrough on the Kyle Rittenhouse case.

MSM is the elevator pitch of information. No one can get a good feel for a complex incident/case in that amount of time. To be honest, most people don't really care because they aren't the one's being victimized.

I think it's more that there isn't any money or power in these issues. You get way more return on investment by bashing the President or opposite political party or covering how bad crime, drugs, capitalism, socialism, riots, etc. are. Legal issues are boring to most people who aren't like us.

Epoch times is Chinese but right leaning anti CCP.

I'm good with that.

Yeah, I just always think how is this accomplishing their goals. Truth may align with their goals but you should know that as you evaluate the truth of a matter.

You would need an automated way to audit everything. Separate systems designed by a separate party with full signature matches and matching the printed info to the QR code to voter lists to residency lists, etc. As far as I know that isn't happening but it wouldn't be that hard to design a system that did that for every vote and make all the information open source and anonymous.

Speaking of Mink. Anyone watch the Mink Man?

As somone who worked in government and interacted with many of the most important people in the executive and legislative branch, don't trust anyone. Don't trust anyone on the Democratic side or Republican side. Trust your individual rights and liberties.

All the Trump attacks were a political move to reduce Trump's power. Democrats knew he wasn't guilty of what he was being accused of. It was a tactic used to tie up the energy of Republicans and Trump so they couldn't be as effective in advancing their agenda. Also, as PR for next election.