On May 25, 2015 9:38 PM, "Cari Machet" <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Oh so sorry jim here:
>
> http://www.Recode.net/2015/05/24/twitter-suspends-troll-chuck-johnson-are-its-new-guidlines-actually-working/
>
> Specifically he tweeted:
>
> 'Go to gotnews.com/donate if you want to give money to taking out @deray.'
>
> On May 25, 2015 2:34 PM, "John Young" <jya@pipeline.com> wrote:
>>
>> Disks or any electro-mechanical device, may not be the only, or
>> principle, means of storage. So capacity may not be the measure
>> of capability.
>>
>> The need for speed of access to and processing of data requires
>> the data to be in active memory all the time. Arrayed, large CPU-like
>> "chips" or solid state (best is unsolid state) processors make data
>> constantly usable, always up to date, no lag time, no wear and tear.
>>
>> Physical disks use too much energy and require too much architecture
>> to rack, interconnect, house, energize, maintain, repair, replace, update.
>> And are way too slow and clunky.
>>
>> However, this doesn't mean Utah Data Center is not useful as a
>> Potemkin deception. Or that much of it is Potemkin deception.
>> Why else make it so observable during funding, design, construction
>> and afterwards a juicy easily photographed, concentrated target of
>> sneaky weaponry of hardware, software, sneakerware, hey come
>> attack us ware.
>>
>> Somewhere, in Utah, or the planet, there are data handlers about
>> which little is publicly known except as miniaturized examples on
>> personal playthings. Meanwhile we are fed out of date fantasies of
>> capability based on xxx-bytes of increasingly absurd prefixes which
>> are like innumerable angels on pinheads.
>>
>> One way to spot what's what is to look at the generators of facilities.
>> And their fuel tanks. Fully active data require a lot of uninterruptable
>> juice. We traced the power lines for UDC and found they lead far
>> astray, also Potemkin. Could be the generators and fuel tanks are
>> too.
>>
>> This is not to suggest Snowden pushing crypto and dribbling docs
>> are Potemkin. Could be, though, so slow and clunky, so observable,
>> and publishable for those willing to suspend disbelief.
>>
>>
>>
>> At 12:22 AM 5/25/2015, you wrote:
>>>
>>> Is Fox News illegal? You'd say it's illegal to deceive people. The sheer quantity of false information on Fox News, and it's popularity, are a serious harm to America.
>>>
>>> Is it that free markets only perform properly with rational agents?
>>
>>
>>