What is this "honk honk"? I've seen it lots of places. Might just be baader meinhoff, but I first encountered it in Chicago where aggressive drivers are constantly honking but its commonplace practice to give two loud honks on your car horn coming out of alleyways letting pedestrians know you don't intend to stop and slowly approach but instead are barrel assing out of the alley and don't give a shit if you kill someone.
I asked and it appears to be a Chicago tradition like dibs. Since then I see it online usually accompanying controversial opinions, but I noticed a trend. Its usually also in connection with politically controversial opinions and insider information regarding politically motivated actions taken by government, military, black ops, or other groups where operation security is a concern.
Does it have some kind of special meaning or is it just random and I'm seeing connections where none exist?
> This meme, like many others, has been effectively used to show that small communities online can trick mainstream media into reporting the idea that benign things (milk, the OK hand sign) are actually a secret racial symbol.
Firstly, this doesn't scrape prices - they pay for a live feed direct from the market.
Secondly, it isn't legal. They are protected by license agreement.
But stock prices is not what the value of SNL Financial and/or Capital IQ is for most people. I know a bunch of people who pay the $30K license fee for these (as well as Bloomberg etc) who barely use the stock price at all.
Its one thing to acknowledge that open source software doesn't get the review it needs. Its another thing entirely to suggest that major platforms in use today are sponsored by state actors willing and able to introduce vulnerabilities without proof.
Turnkey black box solutions may be reviewed more regularly by a dedicated team but you have to admit that they're subject to flimsy and easy manipulation by state actors and the greed and coruptability of their owners.
> Its another thing entirely to suggest that major platforms in use today are sponsored by state actors willing and able to introduce vulnerabilities without proof.
I think the Crypto AG story is sufficient proof of itself to look with suspicion at all related open source projects. In situations where there are known bad actors and we are dependent on security, we should look with suspicion unless we know better. "Insecure until proven secure" is probably a good motto.
Wasn't there a post here about how little review open source software actually gets due to the highly specific knowledge required to identify vulnerabilities?
But it’s been widely accepted since West Wing first aired that corruption in America’s electoral system (and politics generally) can be traced back to campaign finance reform as patient-0.
Representatives are constantly campaigning and raising money for the next election and the rest follows from freeing them to actually do their job.
So your saying that any attempt to reform the election system in America is futile?
Edit: I’m not sure which reforms you are referring to, but I bet that corruption existed in American politics before that, even before election financing was a thing. Corruption is a serious problem in democracies that have serious and strict regulations on campaign financing. A prime example here is Israel.
I will have to educate myself on the specifics of corruption in Israeli politics, but we're dealing with a particularly virulent freewheeling kind of graft in American politics where pretty much any curb would be significant.
Right now it is literally all graft and no progress at all to the point that we can barely pass the same bloated terrible budget we pass every year.
And the "bosses" seem especially dumb. If one person is sick and contagious, you risk to get your entire team sick and then have to shut down operations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzW2ybYFboQ