If you’re on a “.gov” site, it’s safe to expect that it is a legit site of the US government.
If you’re on a “.gov” site, it’s safe to expect that it is a legit site of the US government.
It’s absolutely not enough time. Those are serial killers in the making.
Fuck is wrong with you?
I thought it was because he’s afraid he sounds like he’s saying “lion” instead of “lying”, and he doesn’t want to risk sounding complimentary.
It blows my mind that centuries-old concepts “let’s not jump to hasty conclusions” and “people should be free to protest the government but not break the law” just got called “flaming progressive”.
edit: Sorry, now I see what you’re saying, that those were some points that pull people from across the aisle.
“Incomplete paper and online applications will not be accepted,” Evans said in the statement. (Parker’s [demonstration] cancellation request would have lacked a driver’s license number.) The Secretary of State’s Office did not respond to individual questions about what testing the portal underwent before launch, the system’s security procedures, what happened to Parker’s cancellation request…
Yeah, that tells us we just don’t know if this was a problem after all. Evans’s statement basically claims it wasn’t a vulnerability. If that’s correct, then the worst thing might be if someone’s browser tripped on the validation JS and allowed them down a blind alley execution path. If the claim is correct and if the page’s JS never shits the bed, then in that case the only negative outcome would be someone dicking with the in-browser source could lead themselves down the blind alley, in which case who cares. The only terrible outcome seems like it would be if the claim is incorrect–i.e. if an incomplete application submission would be processed, thus allowing exploit.
Short of an internal audit, there’s no smoking gun here.
This really is the only acceptable comment. Might as well close the thread.
We’re just going to have to also legally classify pregnant people as car seats so they can drive to work.
warships
Ooh, what we got?
The naval group, consisting of a training ship, patrol frigate and refueling tanker,
Oh, *cough* ha, ok.
The arrival of the vessels comes mere weeks after another squadron of Russian warships, including a powerful nuclear-powered submarine, visited Havana as part of planned military exercises last month.
Oh, well, ok, I guess.
enthusiastic but sparse applause
Going off on a tangent, but are vacancies keeping rent high or are they a result of overpriced rent not responding to market pressure? It seems like vacancies should mean low demand at the current price, which, in my little econ 101 view of the world, should push the price down.
Fair point, I actually mainly wore flip flops and preferred Reef and now Ulukai Olukai. Those checked almost all my boxes, though none of those give a firm enough platform compared to good walking shoes, so I shouldn’t hold that point against Crocs.
Edit: I mixed up Olukai shoes with Ukla Uukha archery gear, oops.
Edit 2: I mixed up Uukha with Ookla. /facepalm
I had some and couldn’t stand them. The material would pull my foot hair, and they reminded me of orange peanut candy. And the squishiness didn’t feel foot-shaped, to me. It just felt like mush. I need arch support and a firm platform. So I hate on them because they strike me as foam toys rather than shoes.
Source code escrow is a thing, too. I’ve only seen it in the context of (as I understood it) protection against going out of business, but perhaps it could apply to discontinued products, as well?
We’re two of today’s ten thousand!
One down, one to go. Who Will it be?
I hope this doesn’t just dissolve into hand-waving and general dismissal based on “he said / she said”. Someone call the bluff and let’s see the cards face-up.
Might have just found out about another?