SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Canada's immigration Web site is crashing.
Canada's main immigration web site, www.cic.gc.ca, has been crashing, according to The Globe and Mail and USA Today. The latter published an article called "How to move to Canada" after the problems began to manifest themselves. When I tried to connect, I received the message:
Server Error
500 - Internal server error.
There is a problem with the resource you are looking for, and it cannot be displayed.
Bailed out banks still getting bailed out!!!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/07/taxpayers-are-still-bailing-out-wall-street-eight-years-later/
Banks still getting paid to bail out homeownders are not bailing out some homeowners?!?!?!
Velly intelesting!
Use this as a post if you want.
Depressive Hypersomnia
I've been taking imipramine - an antidepressant - since December. I don't feel depressed anymore, but I sleep excessively. I had some plans for yesterday but instead I slept all day then late into the night.
The only way for me to be up in the morning is to stay up all night.
Once I've been up for a while I don't feel sleepy, I feel just fine. But when I do sleep it's often for twenty hours or more.
My witch doctor prescribed Welbutrin with the aim that it would make me sleep less. It has had a very modest effect, but not enough. He seemed surprised at this, and clearly didn't know what to do about it.
I do know that this won't last. I don't know how long I'll be sleeping like this, but eventually the other phase of my manic-depressive cycle will kick in, and you'll have to peel me off the ceiling with a spatula.
386BSD 2.0 Sources Uploaded
A poster on lobste.rs notes that source code comprising 386BSD version 2.0 was uploaded to Github in August by someone using the name Ben Jolitz.
The operating system, based on the University of California's reimplementation of AT&T UNIX, was created by Lynne and William Jolitz. Previously, version 2.0 had not been released; 386BSD 1.0 was released in 1994. Tags indicate that the 2.0 sources had been checked into a revision control system in January 1995.
NetBSD and FreeBSD
were based upon 386BSD (ASCII version).
It's Not Russia This Time. Blame Canada!
It's not Russia that's trying to impact our elections, it's our evil neighbor to the north!
Those hosers have launched a propaganda campaign designed to confuse and demoralize Americans in advance of the election.
Couched in condescending terms as a "love note" to Americans, Canadians tell lies, make unsubstantiated claims and generally try to blow smoke up our asses.
We suck donkey balls and anyone who says differently is either a Clinton shill or one of her many secret hit squads have abducted family members and threatened them if they don't toe the line.
Okay, maybe that's just a *little* hyperbolic. Actually, I think the ad campaign is kind of sweet.
Syrian terrorist in Germany caught by Syrians
Since the huge wave of refugees started to role into Germany last year, concerned citizens were painting horror scenarios about how thousands of terrorists might be among these refugees and Germany would probably already be doomed. There were some attacks already, although it was hardly possible to link them to islam terror:
The shooting in Munich was performed by a very nationalistic German-Iranian guy (born and raised in Munich) whose parents had Iranian roots, and targeted at mainly Turkish looking youths.
The bombing in Ansbach was perpetrated by a suicidal guy after his asylum was denied and he was about to be deported to Bulgaria.
However, now, finally we found our first Syrian Terrorist.
Well, good work from the German police, yes? One could think so, reading the praise our "Minister of the Interior" twittered. But the facts are more interesting:
He had asked another Syrian man for a bed for the night at Leipzig main station, who didn't know initially who Al-Bakr was and took him to his flat. But Al-Bakr was recognized by the housemates of his host, who tied him up and went to the police.
Thanks to our refugees in Germany, not only the three Syrian individuals who finally captured and delivered him, but also the thousands of Syrians who supported the hunt via Facebook, sending a great signal that we should not give up our humanitarian values just for some deluded jerks (aka terrorists).
Government Officials Accuse Other Governments of Terrorism
tl;dr: a Syrian politician publicly claimed that the US coordinated attacks with ISIS that targeted the Syrian government, and a US politician (Hilldog) privately claimed that Saudi Arabia and Qatar are providing financial support to ISIL and "other radical Sunni groups in the region." For anybody who somehow missed the memo, ISIS is ISIL. Also, Aleppo is the capital of Syria. Now that Johnson is caught up to speed, this submission was accepted yesterday morning but by some error of man or machine appears to have never actually been posted:
Remember how the US government attacked the Syrian government two weeks ago and claimed that it was an accident, even after Russia publicly called them out on it?
Al Mayadeen reports (and Sputnik International translates) a story about a conspiracy. The Speaker of the People's Council of Syria, Hadiya Khalaf Abbas, has said that "the Syrian Army intercepted a conversation between the Americans and Daesh before the air raid on Deir ez-Zor." Abbas also alleged that the US military directed terrorists to attack the Syrian government after the airstrikes were over. She claimed that details would be made public at a later point, but there is no indication of when that might happen.
The Sputnik International story actually says that "the Syrian intelligence possesses an audio recording of conversation [...]," which would mean that the Syrian government might have audio recordings to leak. However, the direct quotes don't seem to say anything about recordings. This detail could be sloppy or purposefully misleading reporting; the Russian government has a stake in public perception of this event, and they control Sputnik International. The Syrian government could have actually intercepted a conversation without recording it, and that version of events would obviously be an easier lie to maintain.
Buckle on your tin foil hats, SoyLentils. Some of the governments and/or news agencies involved in this submission are telling lies. Do you think you know which ones? Care to enlighten the rest of us?
That was submitted before the Podesta leaks hit. One juicy bit of those not discussed in the comments was Hillary Clinton talking about Saudi Arabia and Qatar providing secret support for ISIL (emphasis added):
>> 4. Armed with proper equipment, and working with U.S. advisors, the
>> Peshmerga can attack the ISIL with a coordinated assault supported from the
>> air. This effort will come as a surprise to the ISIL, whose leaders
>> believe we will always stop with targeted bombing, and weaken them both in
>> Iraq and inside of Syria. At the same time we should return to plans to
>> provide the FSA, or some group of moderate forces, with equipment that will
>> allow them to deal with a weakened ISIL, and stepped up operations against
>> the Syrian regime. This entire effort should be done with a low profile,
>> avoiding the massive traditional military operations that are at best
>> temporary solutions. While this military/para-military operation is moving
>> forward, we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence
>> assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia,
>> which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and
>> other radical Sunni groups in the region. This effort will be enhanced by
>> the stepped up commitment in the KRG. The Qataris and Saudis will be put
>> in a position of balancing policy between their ongoing competition to
>> dominate the Sunni world and the consequences of serious U.S. pressure. By
>> the same token, the threat of similar, realistic U.S. operations will serve
>> to assist moderate forces in Libya, Lebanon, and even Jordan, where
>> insurgents are increasingly fascinated by the ISIL success in Iraq
Back on the topic of the Abbas allegations, the ever trustworthy Wikipedia says this about Al Mayadeen's political slant:
The name of the channel, Al Mayadeen, means "the squares" in English, indicating its objective "to provide coverage for the Arab popular actions on the squares of change in the context of the Arab spring revolutions".[20] The channel argues that it provides journalism, which is “committed to nationalist, pan-Arab and humanitarian issues within the template of professional journalistic objectivity.”[21] In addition, it presents itself as a “free and independent media project” with 500 staff and reporters in Arab and Western capitals.[6] Its slogan is “Reality as it is” and its editorial policy emphasizes that Palestine and resistance movements wherever they are found are its point of reference.[6] It was also stated that the Palestinian cause is the channel's centerpiece.[22] On the other hand, It is also argued by France 24 and Mohammed Al Jazairy of Asharq Alawsat that Al Mayadeen represents the latest expansion of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah in the field of media.[9][13] It is further claimed by Zeina Karam of the Associated Press that the channel's close ally in Lebanon is the powerful Shiite militant group Hezbollah.[23]
Al Mayadeen prefers to refer to the rebels as "terrorists," and to the actions of the Syrian government against the rebels as "cleansing" when reporting the Syrian civil war.[24] Following its first year of broadcast the channel began to be known by Matthew Keys as "anti-Al Jazeera".[25]
On 6 November 2015, the Saudi-controlled Arabsat satellite TV organization suspended and banned Al-Mayadeen from broadcasting on Arabsat's satellite system. The motive was the editorial stances of Al-Mayadeen news programs, including the spirit of Al-Mayadeen's coverage of the Saudi military intervention in the ongoing civil war in Yemen.[26]
[...]
It is stated that the owners of the channel are anonymous Arab businessmen.[6] There are speculations about the funding of the channel. Western media claim that the channel is a propaganda platform for Iran and Hezbollah and is funded by them.[1] Omar Ibhais, a freelance Lebanese TV producer, argued that the channel is a joint venture between the Iranians and Rami Makhlouf, cousin of Syrian President Bashar Assad.[27] However, Ghassan bin Jiddo, director of the channel, denied these claims and stated that the channel is funded by Arab businessmen whose identity he would not disclose.[1]
"In war-time, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies." --Churchill
"Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia." --Orwell
Help me vote in CO! 02: Amendment 69 (universal healthcare)
See the "Blue Book" for more information
Amendment 69 proposes amending the Colorado Constitution to:
establish ColoradoCare, a statewide system to finance health care services for Colorado residents;
create new taxes on most sources of income, redirect existing state and federal health funding to
pay for the services and administration of ColoradoCare, exempt ColoradoCare from constitutional
limits on revenue, and require approval by Colorado residents for future tax increases;
establish a board of trustees, initially appointed and then elected, to oversee the operations of
ColoradoCare; and
allow the board to terminate ColoradoCare if the waivers, exemptions, and agreements from the federal
government are not sufficient for its fiscally sound operation.
Arguments For
1) Amendment 69 creates a more equitable health care payment system that provides coverage for all
Coloradans. All people should have access to affordable health care regardless of their ability to pay. The
current health care system leaves many people uninsured or unable to access care due to insurance denials or
high deductibles. ColoradoCare prohibits deductibles and may reduce financial barriers to needed care. The
measure helps ensure that individuals and families will not face financial ruin when accessing needed health care
services.
2) Amendment 69 offers a means to control health care costs and improve patient outcomes. In the
United States, health care costs are higher than in any other industrialized country. Under Amendment 69, health
care costs could be controlled by lowering administrative costs, adjusting payment rates to health care providers,
and reducing the amount of unpaid care provided by health care providers. By creating a centralized system for
health care records, ColoradoCare may improve the coordination of care and create cost savings by more
efficiently sharing information between providers, monitoring medical conditions, and reducing diagnostic testing.
3) ColoradoCare provides a more transparent system that serves the interests of Coloradans, instead of the
interests of private corporations. The current private health insurance system is profit-motivated, which
contributes to rising health care costs. ColoradoCare offers an alternative that shifts incentives toward improving
patient care by allowing Coloradans to elect health care decision-makers. Under Amendment 69, Coloradans
also have control over tax increases for ColoradoCare, increasing local control over health care costs. Unlike
private insurance companies, ColoradoCare board meetings are subject to open meetings laws, which allows
Coloradans to monitor decisions made by the board.
Arguments Against
1) Amendment 69 imposes new taxes, which may harm the Colorado economy by burdening
taxpayers and eliminating jobs. The tax increases under this measure will nearly double state government
spending, which currently totals $27 billion for the entire state budget. In the initial years, taxpayers will pay
about $2 billion a year into a system without receiving any direct benefits. Many individuals and
businesses will pay more with the new taxes than they currently pay for health care. Additionally,
taxpayers must pay the new taxes even if they do not utilize the services offered through ColoradoCare.
Under Amendment 69, higher taxes and an uncertain economic climate could discourage businesses from
operating in Colorado. Finally, ColoradoCare may cause private health insurance businesses to downsize
or leave the state, leaving many people unemployed.
2) Amendment 69 offers no guarantee that ColoradoCare will improve patient care, expand access, or
reduce health care costs. Coloradans may never receive the benefits promised under ColoradoCare if
federal approval is not granted or revenues are not sufficient. The measure does not specify critical details of
how ColoradoCare will be implemented, and has no required implementation date. The measure concentrates
control for making important decisions and spending billions of taxpayer dollars in a 21-member board with limited
accountability and no required health industry experience. ColoradoCare may not solve fundamental problems of
rising health care costs and limited access. If the state fully transitions to ColoradoCare and it fails, it could take
years to re-establish a private health insurance market and government programs, and taxpayers will have paid
billions of dollars for a failed system.
3) ColoradoCare may limit consumer choice and strain the health care system. Health care providers may
be unwilling to serve ColoradoCare patients if reimbursements are too low, or they may choose to leave Colorado
due to uncertainties in the health care market. This could reduce options for patients and increase wait times to
receive services. Also, the health care system could be further burdened by people coming to the state to receive
health care without adequately contributing to the taxes that pay for their care. If the system fails to control costs,
health services covered by ColoradoCare may be reduced. Additionally, private health insurance may not be
available or affordable if Amendment 69 passes. This could leave people with limited options for accessing
alternative coverage or needed care, forcing some people to leave the state.
Personal take
Tentatively planning Yes on this one. Despite the costs we really need to move away from for-profit health insurance.
What say you Soylent?
The most influential work of literature?
When that happens, their mere existence will skew what is perceived as the greatest and most influential works of literature on Earth. For it won't be the great religious works of the major religions by which our descendants in space will be able to trace their mere existence. The Bible, Koran, I Ching, or the Vedas won't get us there. It won't be the great works of philosophy from Plato's many works through to modern times. Or almost anything we consider great literature today. One doesn't get into space by the unsteady hand of Hamlet, for example.
Works of economics are similarly disfranchised. This future might be enabled by Das Kapital or Wealth of Nations, but it's not going to be able to trace its lineage to these. Nor most great works of science such as Origin of Species (though Newton's Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica will have a prominent role in the foundation leading up to this great work).
There is a peculiar aspect to early space engineering (basically everything before the Second World War). Namely, that it was very insular, even from its closest neighbor, astronomy which would reasonably be thought to share common interests. There are very few notable researchers in the field until one gets to the late 1920s. There was little official interest in space development until the Nazis got involved in the mid-30s. But they all share common inspiration. And everything that involves putting anything in space or doing anything in space comes from this inspiration.
So when humanity has gone beyond Earth, there will be one work of literature which will stand out from all the rest. I, of course, speak of From the Earth to the Moon, by Jules Verne, published in 1865.
Help me vote in CO! 01: Amendment T (involuntary servitude)
A real-life swing-state voter checking in. I've got the 2016 State Ballot Information Booklet in front of me. Let's do this thing! (aka the "Blue Book," located here)
There's some pretty crazy stuff in here so I plan to go initiative by initiative and hit them all.
Amendment T proposes amending the Colorado Constitution to:
remove language that currently allows slavery and involuntary servitude to be used as punishment
for the conviction of a crime.
Argument For
1) The section of the Colorado Constitution that allows slavery and involuntary servitude as punishment for a
crime should be updated because it represents a time in the United States when not all people were seen as
human beings or treated with dignity. Removing the language reflects fundamental values of freedom and
equality, and makes an important symbolic statement. There are 25 other states that do not have any language
related to slavery and involuntary servitude in their constitutions, and both prison work and community service
programs are able to operate within those states.
Argument Against
1) Amendment T may result in legal uncertainty around current offender work practices in the state. Prison
work requirements provide structure and purpose for offenders, while enabling skill building and helping to reduce
recidivism. Community service programs allow offenders to engage with the community and make amends for
their crimes.
Personal take: Definitely the least controversial item on the list, so, perhaps a bit boring to start off with. Since our state constitution is so easy to amend currently (more to come on that issue) we might as well make forced labor camps illegal while we can. Planning to vote Yes.
Your thoughts, SN?
