Sort of, but this is a company with a valuation of 80+ billion dollars as opposed to that issue of huge companies relying on open source libraries like they have some sort of guarantee
I used to work in a rigid multinational with an IT department that mandated only approved applications and screened any updates as safe for integration with the standard office suite before release. Wtf happened and why is it now ok to let systems auto update by a third party?
My guess is that cybersecurity zero-day’s are so common that teams are worried that they don’t have the bandwidth to handle them in time which is the reason for using something like crowdstrike to begin with (“why have our own security team, which costs more money, when we can just install this software, which costs less money”)
Wow, thank you! I knew it looked menacing as soon as I saw it, but I didn’t make this connection. You are spot on. Why couldn’t they have made them look like anything other than a gun barrel??
Edit: holy damn. wasnt criticizing or trying to point out ANYONE’s age, I really dgaf whos older or by how much in terms of election. I was just asking a simple question
So, as I understand with all these comments, they’re only candidates if they appear on the ballot on election day? Regardless if they ran and then dropped out?
Someone said in another comment that Biden dropped before he was officially nominated, so technically, he was more like a candidate to be a candidate if I get it right
See If everyone just was able to give a clear and consice, non bullshittery and non-assholish answer like you, the world would be so much better. Thank you, legitimately.
Biden stepped down before getting the official nomination. Trump was nominated by his party last week. That makes Trump officially the oldest candidate nominated by a political party.
For those who struggle with math, that means that Biden is less than 4 years older than trump. The people criticizing Biden’s age and not trump’s as well never actually gave a shit about Biden’s age. Look forward to those same people making up bullshit reasons that Harris is less capable than trump. They know they’re full of shit, but it’s not about making sense, it’s about trying to obfuscate what’s pretty clear so that independents and undecideds give up, get frustrated, get confused, and/or get demotivated so that they either stay home or vote 3rd party. There are only two viable parties in this bullshit first past the post system; one of them wants Project 2025 and one of them doesn’t. Look at bullet points for what that is and then get your ass to the polls. It’s that simple. The only people trying to convince you that it’s not that simple are the ones who don’t want you to look at those bullet points because it’s pretty obvious whether most people are for or against that playbook. It’s damning.
Fun fact: all fascists are authoritarian, but not all who are authoritarian are fascists.
The other commenter rightly called your condescendingly controlling behavior based on adherence to authority authoritarian without calling you a fascist.
Huh? You’re saying that the timing of his reply is somehow germane to whether or not telling people what to do is authoritarian behavior?
Btw, just for the record, I don’t believe in not voting and will hold my nose and vote for the lesser evil when necessary. That’s not my problem with your comments.
My problem is you pretty much ORDERING people to follow the example of you and me rather than advocating for it without authoritarian language.
I didn't tell anyone to do shit. I was simply pointing out that suggesting if people don't like something they should vote against is in no way fascist or authoritarian or any of those things. What the fuck do you think campaigning and canvassing is?
The sheer level of mental gymnastics you'd have to do to think it is is frankly impressive.
I never said to fall in line. I said to look up bullet points on what Project 2025 is, look up who is for and who is against it, and get to the polls. I didn’t even say who to vote for. Everybody voting will result in the will of the people, and as somebody who likes having a democracy, that’s what I’m advocating for. I have my own opinions about which party is more pro democracy, and it’s probably pretty obvious to anybody who is paying attention to politics, but I was intentionally vague so that people can come to their own conclusions based on “doing their own research”.
But I guess for you, telling people to inform themselves and vote based on factual information makes me an authoritarian. Cool.
The people criticizing Biden’s age and not trump’s as well never actually gave a shit about Biden’s age.
You’re right about a lot of us, just not in the way you’re implying: I and a lot of others objected to his diminished capacity rather than his age itself.
Berne’s a little under a year older than Biden and sharper than people two decades younger.
Nancy Pelosi is a year or two older still, and not showing anywhere near as stark signs of decline as Biden is.
Come to think of it, the media harped on and on about Bernie’s age in both the 2016 and 2020 primaries without ever mentioning the health of Hillary or Biden. Did you come to Bernie’s defense in 2020 since he’s in better health than both, heart stent and all, and less than a year older than Biden?
Look forward to those same people making up bullshit reasons that Harris is less capable than trump
Nobody ever said less capable than Trump. There’s several orders of magnitude between “not fit” and “as unfit as Trump”. That Biden was behind in spite of being a much less awful candidate and president was down to Trump’s religious cult as well as media gaslighting.
Personally, I’m no fan of Kamala but I believe that, unlike Biden, she’ll beat Trump if nominated, so you won’t hear me calling for her ouster like I did for the one who was literally incapable of doing the job.
Btw, notice how my comment is much more easily readable than your wall of text in spite of being of similar or greater length?
Breaking up your points into paragraphs takes literally a few seconds and improves the legibility of any long comment immensity.
Yes, Biden clearly showed signs of losing his mental acuity. I didn’t really believe it until I saw it in the past couple of months. But a lot of conservatives weren’t really articulating acuity, they were saying he was too old.
Age in general is a concern to me as well because these old fucks don’t understand how different the world is now compared with 30-50 years ago. Wealth is also a concern to me because wealthy, privileged people haven’t struggled like average Americans have and/or do. Congress needs more people like Katie Porter who understand what it’s like to make difficult home finance decisions and be thankful that there’s even any semblance of choice involved.
Yes, I was fully on board with Sanders in 2016 and 2020. I also liked Warren. One day in the future, maybe Buttigieg or Jeffries. It’s exciting to speculate on all of the rising, younger Democratic stars.
I have my issues with Kamala Harris, but I think that she’s probably the best person to run against trump in 2024 especially with only 3.5 months (which sounds like plenty of time to pick anybody to me, but I’m not qualified to assess that). She’s not my favorite, but I’m more excited about her than I would’ve been for Biden.
My only real concerns for Harris running are what the media spoonfeeds to the gullible masses and what the October surprise will be this time. There’s a part of me that wishes Biden would resign just to take away the talking point of “trump has been president and she hasn’t; is she capable of running the country?” Plus we would already have had a couple months of a woman running the country before the election, so people could see that that’s not an actual thing to be concerned about.
one nit to pick: i assure you, a lot of people harping on about biden’s ‘mental decline’ do in fact think trump is more capable, or at the very least are happy to claim to believe so. you’re clearly not one of them, but they exist in droves.
and if bernie had been elected, i suspect they’d make the same claims regardless of evidence to the contrary.
Still says ever, although op points out that he wasn’t officially nominated, but hell I’m a candidate for president if I say so because I have said i was and I meet the minimum requirements
How much must one repent to balance out spreading terror across the globe? No matter how committed he is to changing his legacy, he will never be able to take back the suffering he helped cause.
If I’m correct in that assumption, you’re in for a real fucking treat. Our elections don’t follow simple popular vote or ranked-choice. We have our own system that was designed back when the average citizen was uneducated and therefore couldn’t make an informed decision. It’s quite interesting (and infuriating) to research.
To point out the very biggest flaw, a presidential candidate doesn’t need the popular majority to win the election. Republicans will try to say this is not an important problem to fix, because it’s only happened three times in the nation’s history, but you’ll so find when looking at popular vote numbers that this is loophole is the only thing that gives Republicans a chance in the presidential election these days. Since 2000, we have had 2 Republicans and 2 Democrat presidents. Both of the Republicans lost the popular vote, but still won the election. (The one other time was Andrew Johnson in like the late 1860s I think.
Sound confusing? Of course it does, the whole system is intentionally confusing to keep you from asking questions!
I am American, and the in three elections I’m referring to, the Republican candidate won the popular vote as well. Obviously it’s not like that any more, but I was pointing to the 12 years of Republicans we got right after Nixon specifically.
Well that tends to happen when someone shows up saying “we don’t negotiate with terrorists” then proceeds to not only negotiate with terrorists, but conduct business with them in order to aid another militant group that congress wasn’t fond of,
In other words, giving [the enemy] aid and comfort.
I’m not sure if I understand the points you are trying to make. Could you please elaborate? A) this meme is about records broken, not “wins.” A president winning a second term would not break any records. B) why wouldn’t Americans vote for a black woman? C) why would the thought of Americans electing a black women be “cult like?”
I said Americans will not elect a Black woman as president, not that they will not vote for a Black woman as president. Many Americans will vote for Harris but it’s not going to be enough to win the election. The US is conservative country with a predominately White national identity where non-Black minorities like latinos are moving further to the right and increasingly see themselves as part of the White national construct. Harris was very unpopular as vice president and is polling well behind Trump in every key state. She has just over 100 days to turn all of this around.
why would the thought of Americans electing a black women be “cult like?”
The American left suffers from Trump-induced cognitive dissonance. It is so fixated on defeating Trump that it cannot acknowledge that there is a reality in which Trump can and will win. This steadfast denial of reality resembles the behaviour one would find in a cult.
I see now that you were responding to the title and not the content of the post.
To further round out my knowledge and understanding, could you please point me to additional information about Latinos moving further to the right, Harris’ popularity, and polling data showing her well behind Trump in key states?
I’m also curious to see examples of the American left refusing to acknowledge the potential of a second Trump term.
It is true that the polling of Harris, both as vice president and versus Trump, is likely to be at least somewhat influenced by the unpopularity of Biden. It’s possible that her popularity could rise now as a presidential candidate facing Trump. However, as I noted she only has around 100 days to change an unfavourable perception of her that has existed for years at this point. I doubt that is enough time for a significant shift in her public image, particularly since she is still the current vice president and continues to be directly associated with Biden’s presidency.
I’m also curious to see examples of the American left refusing to acknowledge the potential of a second Trump term.
I can’t really answer this in the same way I have answered your other questions. It’s my personal opinion, based on the narratives and discourse I see in the American media and among left-leaning Americans on social media. After the shock of the 2016 election, people seem to be retreating further into their left-leaning bubbles and refusing to accept that this can and likely will happen a second time, rather than engaging with the other side and trying to make sense of the country they live in. The 2024 campaign has been an absolute disaster for the left so far, yet now that Biden has removed himself from the race there seems to be another wave of delusional celebration from people who think Harris will beat Trump by virtue of being younger and not Biden.
pretty sure other people have been convicted of crimes before. he is fantastically old though. maybe he got sent to juvie back in his childhood hometown of Bedrock and was the first convicted criminal!
Technically, President Grant got pulled over, and taken into custody, in 1872 for “speeding on a horse within the city limits of Washington DC.” It was the third such ticket he was given in his life, the first two being in the early part of the 1860s when he was just a General. The cop tried to let him go, and Grant cited section 1983 of the federal code that had been passed a few months previously in 1871 that stated unequivocally that no one is above the law, not even a sitting president.
It’s still in the congressional record, but in 1874 an unnamed secretary, I believe had Southern Revisionist views, unilaterally revised the law, so it has been improperly copied into the Federal Register ever since.
Police immunity is another interesting angle I hadn’t thought of. I was thinking about whether it was relevant to the recent supreme Court ruling, maybe even some ammo for impeachment if they directly contradicted a law with their ruling.
fedia.io
Oldest