games

"Que Mala!" means "How Bad!" 

Then they tried to translate the MALA to "Make America Love Again," which is basically trying to rip off former President Donald Trump's MAGA structure.

Syntax diagrams - Backus Normal Form (BNF)
The syntax definitions on this site use a variant of Backus Normal Form (BNF) that includes the following:

What is TightVNC?
TightVNC is a free and Open Source remote desktop software that lets you access and control a computer over the network. With its intuitive interface, you can interact with the remote screen as if you were sitting in front of it. You can open files, launch applications, and perform other actions on the remote desktop almost as if you were physically there.

Lamps made from analog electric meters

Effective July 2025, teacher licensing rules passed last year in Minnesota under Democrat Gov. Tim Walz will ban practicing Christians, Jews, and Muslims from teaching in public schools. Walz is now the presidential running mate of current U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris. His resume includes a stint as a high school social studies teacher who sponsored a student queer sex club in 1999.

Starting next July, Minnesota agencies controlled by Walz appointees will require teacher license applicants to affirm transgenderism and race Marxism. Without a teaching license, individuals cannot work in Minnesota public schools, nor in the private schools that require such licenses.

The latest version of the regulations requires teachers to “affirm” students’ “gender identity” and “sexual orientation” to receive a Minnesota teaching license:

The teacher fosters an environment that ensures student identities such as race/ethnicity, national origin, language, sex and gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, physical/developmental/emotional ability, socioeconomic class, and religious beliefs are historically and socially contextualized, affirmed, and incorporated into a learning environment where students are empowered to learn and contribute as their whole selves.

Basic
Free
10 GB
No credit card required

IDrive® Mini
$2.95 per year One user
100 GB

$9.95 per year
500 GB

IDrive® Personal
$99.50/year$69.65 first year
One user, Multiple computers
5 TB Storage

It's also just not that relevant and ignores the bigger issue at play. Harris couldn't even be bothered to show up for the dignified transfer at Dover Air Force Base despite taking credit for the withdrawal that got the service members in question killed. She was never going to show up for this wreath-laying ceremony and everyone knows it. It's also been established that she won't return the calls of the families anyway so Harris not receiving a formal invite isn't surprising. You'd need to pick up the phone for that.

I have no idea why Harris continues to lean into this. The right move from the beginning was to shut up about the issue and just let it fade. By attacking Trump (and by proxy, the Gold Star families who wanted the pictures taken), the vice president has pumped new life into a story that does not play in her favor. Going after Gold Star families is never a good look, and using the biased press to do it via anonymous sources (in this case, an aide) looks even worse.

Harris has had the opportunity to do the right thing for years. She hasn't done so. She has no moral authority to criticize others over respecting America's war dead when she clearly doesn't do so herself. //

Outerlimitsfan
2 hours ago
Trump is a good guy. Apparently he has been in contact with the families for years, and even hosted them before at a private event. He is actually friends with them now. Which is exactly why they invited him to this.

He didn't just show up to Arlington for 10 minutes either, but was with them for over 4 hours.

Yeah, I'm shocked the Gold Star families support the guy who actually cares about them and the fact their children needlessly died. //

anon-608f Bluepillprofessor
an hour ago
You beat me to it. This is intentional. She and her staff despise, they HATE, these families because they put the lie to the Afghan "success" story...and have been quite vocal about it.

It's just that simple. These families never targeted her for any attacks or lies, and they didn't need to. All they needed to do was tell the truth, show some grief, and Heelz Up let that hatred flow!

Hallen
15 hours ago
Hollywood always had the annoying 'church lady' type. She'd snoop and pry and judge. She'd complain to everyone about how unusual or degenerate others were. It was an overblown caricature and wasn't a true representation, but it's the perspective the left has of the 1950's.

Now we have real live church ladies all over the place except they're obnoxious instead of snooping, and they're all hard-core leftists who only vote for Democrats. They're judgmental, uncompromising, brash, arrogant, condescending, and loud. Very, very loud. They belong to the church of Marx.

They are rude and obnoxious. They think they can get away with just about anything without reprisal. They are mostly right because their victims are all conservatives who don't like to make scenes and are unerringly polite. It's very easy to take advantage of civilized people and that's what these barbarian church ladies do. They attack our culture, all the while knowing that they will be protected by our culture.

It's amazingly evil.

Some ideas are like horror movie villains. They’re dangerous, and no matter how many times they’re defeated, they never seem to die.

The misguided idea of taxing unrealized capital gains is back on the scene. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., floated a proposal to tax unrealized capital gains in 2021.

It was widely debated in 2022, when Congress was considering a multitrillion-dollar tax and spending package.

Opposition from Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., to taxing income before it’s earned helped defeat the idea then.

But the idea was far from dead. President Joe Biden included a version of the tax in his latest budget.

Vice President Kamala Harris also has endorsed the idea.

The first step in killing a bad idea is to recognize it for the scourge it is.

A realized capital gain—which we currently tax—is the difference between the price you sold an asset for and the price you paid for it. An unrealized gain, on the other hand, is an estimate of what that difference would be if you had sold an asset that you still hold.

The difference between taxing realized capital gains and unrealized gains is the difference between the government taxing people on income they’ve actually received versus the government taxing them on income they might receive later.

It would give the government the first claim on income, taking a big slice before the supposed owner of the asset ever sees a penny.

In effect, it would turn property owners into property renters, with Uncle Sam as their landlord. //

If you bought a house for $300,000, and the value rose to $500,000 a couple years later, you could be stuck paying tax on the $200,000 of gain even as you’re struggling to make mortgage payments. At a 25% tax rate, it would cost you $50,000 in federal taxes.

It would be like having a second mortgage, but in some ways worse.

At least mortgage payments end after 30 years. But you would never finish paying off your unrealized capital gains tax payments, as long as you owned the asset and its value was increasing—even if that increase was only from inflation.

And unlike mortgages, which give homeowners clearly defined payment terms, unrealized capital gains tax payments would be unpredictable, rising or falling depending on the housing market, inflation, and subjective assessments of a house’s value. //

Those in Washington who propose taxing unrealized capital gains generally include broad exemptions for certain asset classes and based on income or asset thresholds. These exceptions would give investors a path to escape from the tax, which is better than the alternative. The tax would have fewer direct victims as a result.

But the tax-induced capital flows still would wreak economic havoc—and without managing to raise much government revenue. So, the new tax would do little to satiate lawmakers’ appetite for more tax dollars.

And once a horror movie villain—or a bad idea—gets a foot in the door, it quickly can swing the door open wide and claim more victims. When the income tax was first implemented in 1913, it applied to less than 1% of the population, and most of those who paid it paid only a 1% rate. That small initial income tax spawned something far worse and more widespread over time.

Allowing the government to tax income that doesn’t exist sets an even more dangerous precedent.

Holden Culotta @Holden_Culotta
·
Drea de Matteo on Fox News: “I’ll never have another gig. At the moment, all I care about is … trying to wake up a few more of my fellow liberals”

“I support Kennedy all the way, and I’m happy that there’s unity right now.

I don’t think Trump is a lifelong politician, and… Show more
0:16 / 2:45
12:31 PM · Aug 31, 2024

She said that "all of that weaponization on the left is camouflaged":

Any true liberal is anti-war, anti-censorship, pro-health ... They would be anti-mandate. That's totalitarian, that was authoritarian. That was on the left! I know that there's a lot of deep-rooted corruption, and sometimes they capture each party. Right now, that capture is on the Left. //

Photog 1
10 hours ago
The thing is, people conflate leftists with liberals, and that's a deliberate redefining of the word BY the leftists. Here's a little ditty I've been posting for years:

Stop Calling Them “Liberals”
Please, folks, I've said this for years. Please stop calling them “Liberals” - call them out for what they really are: Leftists/Progressives/Socialists/Marxists/Communists. "Leftists," for short, if nothing else.

They stole, and redefined, the term “Liberal” (as is their wont, to redefine words to suit their needs), to cash in on the actual Classical Liberal’s positive points while possessing none of them.

Even the word "Progressive" has been redefined by the left, because their actions are actually REgressive, but the classic example is the word “liberal” itself, which the far-left co-opted. It was adopted because of its positive connotation, and used as a cover for imposing greater leftist/marxist control under the false guise of liberty.

In reality, there is nothing “liberal” about failing to protect life [or actively taking it under the also redefined lie of “women’s reproductive health care”], releasing multiple-time violent felons back onto the streets with no bond, burdening individuals with regulations and taxes, allowing unlimited illegal aliens into the country with no repercussions, forcing individuals to provide services to others, or “mandating” what health actions that individuals must take, and penalizing them in multiple facets of their life if they do not comply.

This is no accidental misnomer, but a strategic messaging attempt to influence people. Of course, who doesn’t want to support a policy that is “progressive,” “pro-choice,” “common sense,” or “affordable’ (all also chosen for their positive spin, while not meeting their own definitions)?

Today’s Leftists/Socialists/Progressives/Marxists, calling themselves a “Liberal,” have absolutely nothing in common with the Classical Liberal - the Classical Liberal advocated civil liberties under the rule of law with an emphasis on economic freedom - more in tune with today's Libertarians.

I’m neither - I’m so conservative I make Ronald Reagan look like Gorbachev’s even further leftist cousin, but I respect the Classical Liberal, who has more in common with the Libertarian today.

The more we call out the so-called “Liberals” for what they are, the more the mask of their eventual intent (full fledged socialism leading to communism) might become clear to some.

Spread this message far and wide, everywhere and every time you see someone incorrectly referring to a “Liberal” when they mean Leftist/Progressive/Marxist - create a wave of understanding of their true nature.

The Problem with far-left progressives, who are maybe 20% of the population, is they think themselves morally and intellectually superior to you and me, the other 80% (which includes non-progressive Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Non-affiliated, Libertarians, etc.). And because far-left progressives feel that our 80% has created an inferior society, they believe it’s their duty to overrule us by passing laws that will create the “correct society," the society that “should be." Of course, on all counts they are profoundly wrong. Unfortunately, their loud voices currently drown out the sensible portion of society. But being loud does not make you right or superior, either morally OR intellectually..

Most Democrats and actual liberals (not leftists) are quietly aware that it’s their current progressive far-left leadership that has let them down, a leadership that has not represented them properly.

They too, are being held hostage.

Regular non-progressive main-stream Democrats are over-taxed and over-regulated, too. They experience the outfall of illegal immigration, off-shoring, lawlessness, little upward mobility, drug abuse and expensive health care, just like you and me. Obviously, they live in houses and apartments, have children, jobs, hopes, expectations and fears just like anyone else.

Let’s not confuse these Democrats with their current far-left leadership, which is a tiny contingent of leaders…whose incompetence is only exceeded by their hostility and vocality.

# let days=$(date --date=yesterday +%s)/86400 "even = days % 2" && [ $even -gt 0 ] && echo $days
19967

# let days=$(date --date=today +%s)/86400 "even = days % 2" && [ $even -gt 0 ] && echo $days || echo NOT
NOT

Password security and a comparison of Password Managers

There are two general approaches to password generation and management:

Password Managers which store passwords and have the flexibility to apply different complexity rules to each password or to store a pre-existing password - often required when a password needs to be shared between a team of people. The downside of the storage approach is that the password storage (file/database) needs to be managed carefully - secured, backed up and synchronised to all the devices where you will need to use the passwords. If the password store is lost or corrupted you will lose all the passwords! Destructive viruses such as CryptoLocker can also make a password store unreadable.

Password Generators which use a hash function, like the SS64 password generator, are easy to use and will repeatedly regenerate the same password when given the same inputs but they do have some limitations, the only way to change a password is to enter a different main password or a different salt value. All the generated passwords are the same length. //

NIST recommend 80 bits for the most secure passwords to resist a brute force attack. There is no definitive answer to the question of the minimum password strength required to avoid all types of attack; it is a moving target; over time we all need to use longer passwords.

Entropy Maximum Time to crack at 350 billion guesses/Sec
59 bits 457.50 Hours
65 bits 3.342 Years
71 bits 213.92 Years
77 bits 13,690 Years
80 bits 109,527.95 Years
89 bits 56078315.93 Years.

GPU computer clusters can cycle through as many as 350 billion guesses per second. [offline guesses against a stolen password database/file]

Kerckhoffs’s principle - A cryptosystem should be secure even if everything about the system, except the key, is public knowledge

“Then you admit confirming not denying you ever said that?"
"NO! ... I mean Yes! WHAT?"
I’ll put 'maybe.' ~ Bloom County

You’ve probably heard someone use the phrase, “We can neither confirm nor deny.” This non-specific saying, known as the “Glomar response,” has a fascinating history behind it, and it originated to answer questions about a dicey CIA operation.

In the late 1960s, the United States and the Soviets were engaged in a dangerous political game, and they were using their nuclear submarines to play. In 1968, the Soviets lost K-129, one of their nuclear submarines, northwest of Hawaii in the Pacific. It sank to the bottom of the ocean under unknown circumstances.

The US knew the Soviet sub had sunk with nuclear missiles on board and knew that it would hold a treasure-trove of intelligence information if they could get to it. The CIA eventually located the vessel three miles beneath the sea and began to come up with plans to get to the submarine.

Because of the depth where the submarine sat, it was decided that the best course of action would be to retrieve it by lifting it from the ocean floor. The CIA ran through several different scenarios before they ultimately settled on using a claw-like device to lift the submarine from the seafloor and raise it into a ship’s hull. The problem was the operation had to be done entirely in secret. //

Things came to a head when the Los Angeles Times was set to publish a story about the operation. The CIA tried to stop it but was unsuccessful, and a request for disclosure about the project was made by the LA Times. The CIA had to find a way to respond.

The task of coming up with an appropriate response fell to an attorney at the CIA named Walt Logan, the Associate General Counsel. Logan was bound by law to tell the truth, but he also had to adhere to the CIA’s policies and not reveal any secrets or intelligence sources that could be detrimental to national security.

He came up with a response to the request that was neither untruthful nor did it compromise national secrets. It became known as the “Glomar response.” In it, Logan said about the existence of the secret operation and the request for disclosure, “We can neither confirm nor deny the existence of the information requested but, hypothetically, if such data were to exist, the subject matter would be classified, and could not be disclosed.”

The response by the CIA stood after being challenged, and the Freedom of Information request was declined. A precedent was then set for any government organization to use the “Glomar response” as they saw fit when there was a Freedom of Information request. The courts have so far supported the response by governmental agencies, but only if they provide enough information to justify using it.

Israel ישראל @Israel
·
He was 𝐦𝐮𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝.

CNN @CNN
Israeli-American hostage Hersh Goldberg-Polin has died, his family says in a statement released by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs https://cnn.it/3z1kyTk
9:06 AM · Sep 1, 2024

Ritchie Torres @RitchieTorres
·
Newsflash for the media:

Hostages like Hersh Goldberg Polin did not just “die.” They were murdered by Hamas.

Hostages like Noa Argamani were not just “released.” They were rescued by Israel.

The rockets did not just “land” on Druze children and civilians. They were fired by Hezbollah.

Words matter because the truth matters.
11:07 AM · Sep 1, 2024 //

Incredibly, CNN didn’t even mention the murders in their entire earlier story:

As Politico put it on Sunday, Kamala Harris' "secret power" is "she is whatever you want her to be." The question is, could Kamala's "secret power" be her key to victory in this whacked-out election season?

I've said it before and I'll undoubtedly say multiple times before November 5: Nothing — and I mean nothing — could surprise me throughout the rest of this crazy campaign. //

As I wrote on August 18, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich admonished voters to "ask yourself two questions whenever you hear one of Kamala Harris' empty questions."

As you hear each new false promise and nice sounding agenda item, you should ask yourself two simple questions:

1. Why haven’t they implemented them over the last four years?

2. And why should we believe they would now?

Those two questions will reveal how phony and staged the entire Democratic National Convention will be. //

Rainy Day Patriot
5 hours ago
The campaign of JOY: Joke's On You.