Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Wednesday, March 21. 2018

Wednesday morning links



Pic above from  Computer-generated 'Rembrandt' painting unveiled, but not everyone is impressed


High-tech forgery. Very cool. Anyway, Rembrandt himself had a whole factory of people painting his pictures. He would have used this technique, had it been available.


Gladiator Fights Stopped in Rome 16 Centuries Ago Because of This Saint


Party-pooper 


Empty Half The Earth Of Its Humans. It’s The Only Way To Save The Planet.


Or why not just kill all the men? Men are toxic, and men acting masculine are retro



  As a straitjacket of onerous roles and impossible expectations, masculinity has become a source of great suffering – for men as much as women. To understand this is not only to grasp its global crisis today. It is also to sight one possibility of resolving the crisis: a release from the absurd but crippling fear that one has not been man enough.


Boo-hoo. "Crippling"? Or challenging? 

 Northern white rhino: Last male dies in Kenya


 UK’s Favorite “Foods” At Risk From ‘Climate Change” Or Something


Facebook Under Federal Investigation For Use of Personal Data


What do people expect when they open their lives to the internet? 


Funny, When Obama Harvested Facebook Data On Millions Of Users To Win In 2012, Everyone Cheered


Tempe Police Say "No Fault By Uber" In Fatal Crash


Armed Resource Officer Stops Maryland High School Gunman


 Hillary's Insulting Middle America Comments Already Turned Into Brutal Political Ad


Dershowitz: Mueller Should’ve Never Been Appointed


 DOJ Deputy Bruce Ohr Interviewed 12 Times By FBI Investigators…


Iraq:  Fifteen Years Ago, America Destroyed My Country


He's got a point 

Posted by Bird Dog in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 07:19 | Comments (37) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Perfect juxtaposition of:
"Or why not just kill all the men? Men are toxic, and men acting masculine are retro"
-and-
"Northern white rhino: Last male dies in Kenya"

Them feminists must be celebrating today!
#1 Mark Matis on 2018-03-21 09:00 (Reply)
"America destroyed my country"

Interesting spin. He left out the fact that Iraq invaded Kuwait and killed tens of thousands of civilians. Or that Iraq contributed to and encouraged terrorism. And that Saddam killed thousands of his own people every month. After Iraq invaded Kuwait and was pushed back in a humiliating defeat they were given a gift by the American president with the opportunity to leave the rest of the world alone and just take care of their own country. Saddam couldn't even accept that and proceeded to kill more of his people and threaten countries around him. Saddam continued to ignore the treaty and he built up his military force and continued to aid terrorists. When at last Iraq was invaded after more than a decade of his ignoring the treaty again Iraq was given the opportunity to rule themselves and recover from their self induced plight. But they screwed that up too and internal fighting between competing sects of Islam caused them to accept and even encourage ISIS. I think Iraq destroyed Iraq.
#2 GoneWithTheWind on 2018-03-21 09:33 (Reply)
Can't believe there is still debate whether Saddam needed to be taken out:

http://iraq911.tripod.com/images/__3rd-infantry-saddam-911c_2.jpg

http://iraq911.tripod.com/
#2.1 Jim on 2018-03-21 16:57 (Reply)
Or why not just kill all the men? Bu...bu...but who'll take out the garbage?
#3 BillH on 2018-03-21 10:14 (Reply)
And deal with the lizard or mouse in the house.
#3.1 Jim on 2018-03-21 18:50 (Reply)
Or lift heavy stuff.
#3.1.1 drowningpuppies on 2018-03-21 20:02 (Reply)
Anyway, Rembrandt himself had a whole factory of people painting his pictures. He would have used this technique, had it been available.

Hey, Picasso and Warhol, primary among others, were
one-man "art(?)" factories; more concerned with marketing and brand, than real art!

Their works were so primitive in technique and so lacking in artistic skill that they could flail away for hours churning out junk for sale to the rubes, who were guided by gallery owners and flacks into making purchases of their derivative crap!

The key to their success was: their signatures on each over-hyped piece!
#4 B48 on 2018-03-21 10:14 (Reply)
And Warhol used a rubber stamp for his signature. Added to the "Pop-Y-ness of the "Statement"
#4.1 Oldblood on 2018-03-21 16:21 (Reply)
Fifteen Years Ago, America Destroyed My Country

This should more correctly read:

"George W. Bush defrauded and goaded America into destroying my country; because we Iraqis lacked the moral courage to remove Saddam and his family!"

There, fixed it for him!
#5 B48 on 2018-03-21 10:25 (Reply)
ahhh! It was Bush's fault...
#5.1 TheRiver on 2018-03-21 13:01 (Reply)
It was Bush's fault. Is that meme still around?
#5.2 TheRiver on 2018-03-21 13:02 (Reply)
The culprit was Saddam Hussein.

If he had not invaded Kuwait, he'd probably still be running the place.
#5.3 JJM on 2018-03-21 21:53 (Reply)
My unscientific observation is that all these women complaining about toxic masculinity and how to eliminate it aren't really interested in engaging or relationships with men. The women that are interested in men actually like their men to be manly men.
#6 steve walsh on 2018-03-21 10:27 (Reply)
Question on another subject
If a private party has internet service in their home, and if that person has a gmail account which uses only their first name, example: "Apple at Gmail", and that person sends an email to a professional person, i.e. an engineer, a dentist, etc., to ask for rate quote, how difficult is it for that professional person (email recipient) to find the location of the party making the enquiry, and more importantly to find the names of the other individuals living in that home and using the same internet? Thank you.
#7 Apple Pie on 2018-03-21 10:44 (Reply)
Oh Man! The answer to that question should REALLY be interesting. I can hardly wait. Where's Doc Mercury when we need him?
#7.1 Charley Hua Chu on 2018-03-21 11:09 (Reply)
Apple Pie: If a private party has internet service in their home, and if that person has a gmail account ...

It depends. If you are using Gmail.com, then Gmail strips the originating IP. However, if you have enabled POP3 for an email client such as Outlook, then the originating IP may be available to the recipient. If you are really concerned, then you might consider using an anonymous proxy service such as Tor.

https://www.torproject.org/
#7.2 Zachriel on 2018-03-21 11:15 (Reply)
It depends on who is looking. It isn't difficult to discover that anything transmitted over the internet came from the same source as another transmission. So if you email or blog more than once to someone even using a different name they could put things together and know more about you.

If it is the FBI or any of the other government three letter organizations they can know much more about you. Just as a techy person with good resources could as well. How much? Hard to know it depends. For example if you ever mention the name of someone than that name would be known. But if that name is never mentioned by you or others talking with you or using your login or your computer then that name could not be known. However if YOUR full nname could be deduced somehow THEN your friends and family can be known. And if you own a home or have a license, vote or do many of the things we do then your address could be known and even your phone number. Then if the person has either legal or clandestine access to your phone records they would know everyone you called and the contents of every text you have sent.

It is all a network of interconnected strings where if you can pull any one of them you can then get to another and another and each string tells you something more. For most people this kind of detective work is simply not possible, they can easily get your IP address but not a lot more.

My advice to everyone using the internet is the same as my mothers advice to me; never do or say anything that you wouldn't want your grandmother to know about.
#7.3 TheRiver on 2018-03-21 13:15 (Reply)
If a private party has internet service in their home, and if that person has a gmail account which uses only their first name, example: "Apple at Gmail", and that person sends an email to a professional person, i.e. an engineer, a dentist, etc., to ask for rate quote, how difficult is it for that professional person (email recipient) to find the location of the party making the enquiry, and more importantly to find the names of the other individuals living in that home and using the same internet? Thank you.

Here's your answer:

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22apple%40gmail.com%22&rlz=1C1CHMO_enUS582US582&oq=%22apple%40gmail.com%22&aqs=chrome..69i57.5519j1j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
#7.4 Jim on 2018-03-21 16:41 (Reply)
QUOTE:
Funny, When Obama Harvested Facebook Data On Millions Of Users To Win In 2012, Everyone Cheered

Unlike the data-sourcing for Cambridge Analytica, the Obama campaign didn't lie that the data was to be used for scientific research while falsely claiming that individual identifiers would be stripped.

Nor was everyone cheering. Many civil libertarians were and are concerned about the reach of social media into private lives. It's a question of scale. What may be innocuous for an individual can be commercialized or even weaponized when aggregated in the millions.
#8 Zachriel on 2018-03-21 11:05 (Reply)
Could it be because Facebook happily gave away, to the lefts Lord and Savior, every piece of data they had? After all, “He’s (Obama) on our side.” Never ceases to amaze me how the Zachbot ties themselves in pretzels to toe the party line. Soro’s must be proud. “It is touching to see how they love big brother.”

When Obama was busy weaponizing many departments of the federal government, those civil “libertarians”, were laughed at and mocked by the pious lefties.
#8.1 B. Hammer on 2018-03-21 11:28 (Reply)
B. Hammer: Could it be because Facebook happily gave away, to the lefts Lord and Savior, every piece of data they had?

There are legitimate questions about the unintended consequences of so many people sharing so much data; however, there's a significant difference between using data freely given consistent with privacy disclosures, and using data given under false pretenses that violate promises made about privacy.
#8.1.1 Zachriel on 2018-03-21 11:32 (Reply)
You really believe Facebook stripped the data, when they gave it all up to Obama? Come on. If you really believe that, then have I got a deal for you!
#8.1.1.1 B. Hammer on 2018-03-21 12:27 (Reply)
B. Hammer: You really believe Facebook stripped the data, when they gave it all up to Obama?

Huh? Please reread our original comment. It's the difference between honesty and dishonesty.
#8.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2018-03-21 13:53 (Reply)
I do not expect Facebook to completely disregard their agreement with the FTC and abuse their own privacy rules. To just say, "Well, if you're on Facebook, too bad for you," is ridiculous.

I could say the same thing about credit agencies...well, too bad for you if your information gets stolen b/c you use a credit card and have made loans. That is just a ridiculous notion.

Just because I am on the internet, doesn't mean I give up every right I have to privacy or control of my own data. There are some rules in play here. If Facebook or any other site is going to make fake agreements with their users, they deserve to get in trouble for it. It's not MY fault or any other Facebook user's fault. IT IS 100% FACEBOOK's fault.
#9 MissT on 2018-03-21 11:29 (Reply)
Hear, hear!

Facebook is under a 2011 consent decree for previous violations of privacy, so they have a lot of explaining to do. Regulation will probably be necessary. While a libertarian might say that lawsuits can keep corporations in check, the damage here is dilute, extensive, prolonged, and secret, so lawsuits are a very weak check on behavior.

Oh, and don't feel sorry for the billionaires.
#9.1 Zachriel on 2018-03-21 11:38 (Reply)
Let's be honest about this. The Democrats biggest fear is that facebook refuses to take these accusations lying down and spills the beans about the sharing they did with the DNC, Obama and Hillary. I think laws were broken by the Democrats and faceboook and THAT is the big difference between what the Democrats did and what Cambridge Analytica did.
#9.1.1 TheRiver on 2018-03-21 13:21 (Reply)
TheRiver: I think laws were broken by the Democrats and faceboook and THAT is the big difference between what the Democrats did and what Cambridge Analytica did.

Do you have actual evidence of that?
#9.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2018-03-21 13:57 (Reply)
Obama and his clandestine organizations colluded with the CEOs of social media organizations and bought/acquired a massive amount of data which Zuckerberg and his peers didn't have the right to expose. They broke laws and anyone who conspired with them to break these laws was guilty as well.
#9.1.1.1.1 TheRiver on 2018-03-21 18:13 (Reply)
TheRiver: They broke laws and anyone who conspired with them to break these laws was guilty as well.

Which laws?
#9.1.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2018-03-22 08:56 (Reply)
Linked In ?

What do we know about Linked In?
#10 Another one on 2018-03-21 11:47 (Reply)
The big corporate bully option: It's better to ask for forgiveness than permission. The deed is done. Apologies don't retrieve data.
#11 Kate on 2018-03-21 13:00 (Reply)
re Empty Half The Earth Of Its Humans. It’s The Only Way To Save The Planet.

The premise seems to be to leave half the planet unoccupied and let it all grow up to weeds. The global population would live in the other half.

According to this, over half the planet is already at least half unoccupied.

QUOTE:
3% of land surface is covered by urban areas according to GRUMP datasets combined with satellite images [1]. Satellite images helped land-use researchers at UW-Madison's Center for Sustainability and Global Environment to conclude that over 40% of earth's land is given over to agriculture [2]. So considering human inhabited land to be a combination of agricultural and urban areas, we have around 43% of earth's land surface covered by humans


https://www.quora.com/How-much-land-on-Earth-in-terms-of-percentage-is-populated-by-humans

Since that is the case, I can only infer that they are advocating Buffalo Commons on a global scale.

If they do that, where will our food come from?
#12 feeblemind on 2018-03-21 13:23 (Reply)
From the grocery store! Sheesh! Don't you know that's where food comes from?

/sarc
#12.1 JLawson on 2018-03-21 16:19 (Reply)
rofl

And you wouldn't have needed the sarcasm tag. :-)
#12.1.1 feeblemind on 2018-03-21 20:32 (Reply)
Heh.

New Report Says Burgers Are Officially More Popular Than Baguette Sandwiches in France

http://www.foodandwine.com/news/burgers-baguettes-france
#13 feeblemind on 2018-03-21 16:07 (Reply)
"I never thought that Iraq could ever be worse than it was during Saddam’s reign ..."

Maybe this assclown would be more appreciative of the blood spilled by coalition forces if he was fed - feet first - into one of Saddam's plastic shredders.
#14 jimg on 2018-03-21 17:21 (Reply)
"Tempe Police Say "No Fault By Uber" In Fatal Crash"

Yeah, that isn't going to stand up in court. The video is out and as it would have been hard for a human driver depending on sight only to see the victim, the self-driving cars have LIDAR and radar, and presumably low light/infrared capability on the cameras.

The victim was in the road, but in shadows, fully paintable by radar and LIDAR. Even a human, assuming paying attention, could have possibly braked or turned to lessen impact.

Uber is going to pay big time.
#15 JK Brown on 2018-03-22 00:25 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.