NANOMACHINE AVATAR “DRANG” MODEL - SERVANT OF ROGUE SUPERCOMPUTER CLUSTER
Manifesting typically only within the bounds of the worst nanomachine hazard zones, the “Drang” Models are one example of neo-organisms gestated in the toxic wombs at the epicentre of each infected area. Prowling near the perimeter the Drang’s primary purpose is to effect long range retaliatory strikes via it’s “Osseous Railcannon” at potential threats to the private fiefdoms of their respective supercomputer originators, whether that means hapless scavengers, Nanomancers attempting to retrieve cultures for use in technoritual practice or even the forces of rival computer clusters. “Drang” units are however, relatively easily compromised by competent Nanomancy and a number of biotech warlocks maintain one or two captives reprogrammed via malware pentacles to conform to their will.
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra sued the Trump administration Tuesday for suspending regulations meant to curb emissions of the greenhouse gas methane, the latest front in the state’s battle with Washington over climate-change rules for the oil and natural gas industries.
The suit, filed in federal court in San Francisco, claims that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management acted irresponsibly this month when it delayed an Obama-era policy capping methane leaks and flaring at oil and gas wells.
Methane, the main component of natural gas, is a potent driver of global warming when it escapes into the atmosphere. The 2016 federal rule called on oil and gas producers on federal and tribal lands, including in Kern County, to upgrade their drilling rigs and procedures to capture the gas and keep it from spewing off.
The Bureau of Land Management’s delay of the rule is the Trump administration’s latest bid to undo the methane policy. In May, Congress failed to pass a repeal effort backed by the president. In October, the courts struck down a unilateral attempt by the administration to halt the program, an effort Becerra challenged in July.
yeah so more information about this woman who leaked important information pertaining russia’s involvement in the election:
Her name is “Reality Leigh Winner” and she was a NSA Contractor. She passed a top secret NSA document to a news source (an article from The Intercept) that contains information about a Russian cyber-attack with one voting machine DAYS before the 2016 presidential election. This is considered the most detailed piece of proof regarding Russia’s interference with the elections to date.
Here’s how the NSA document described how the Russians did the hacking:
“As described by the classified NSA report, the Russian plan was simple: pose as an e-voting vendor and trick local government employees into opening Microsoft Word documents invisibly tainted with potent malware that could give hackers full control over the infected computers.
But in order to dupe the local officials, the hackers needed access to an election software vendor’s internal systems to put together a convincing disguise. So on August 24, 2016, the Russian hackers sent spoofed emails purporting to be from Google to employees of an unnamed U.S. election software company, according to the NSA report. Although the document does not directly identify the company in question, it contains references to a product made by VR Systems, a Florida-based vendor of electronic voting services and equipment whose products are used in eight states.
The spear-phishing email contained a link directing the employees to a malicious, faux-Google website that would request their login credentials and then hand them over to the hackers. The NSA identified seven “potential victims” at the company. While malicious emails targeting three of the potential victims were rejected by an email server, at least one of the employee accounts was likely compromised, the agency concluded. The NSA notes in its report that it is “unknown whether the aforementioned spear-phishing deployment successfully compromised all the intended victims, and what potential data from the victim could have been exfiltrated.”
Nebraska regulators on Tuesday denied TransCanada Corp’s request to amend its route application for the proposed Keystone XL pipeline through the U.S. state, a potential setback for the company as it seeks to head off legal challenges.
The Nebraska Public Service Commission (PSC) issued an approval for the line in late November, removing what appeared to be the last big regulatory obstacle for the long-delayed project, which has been backed by U.S. President Donald Trump.
But the commission’s approval was not for the route TransCanada had singled out in its application. Instead, the commission approved an alternative route that shifts it closer to an existing pipeline right-of-way down the eastern side of the state, a move opponents of the pipeline have said violates state statutes.
TransCanada filed a motion last month with the commission seeking permission to retrospectively amend the route application, a move that a company official said was intended to prevent lawsuits that could delay the project.
The commission on Tuesday voted 5-0 against the motion.
TransCanada said in a statement that it would review the decision to determine next steps for Keystone XL, but added that it believed the project remained economically viable.
“It is important to remember that this project has widespread support within the U.S. and Canadian federal governments, as well as state officials in Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska,” the company said.
Ken Winston, a lawyer for environmental group the Sierra Club, said he saw the ruling as a win for pipeline opponents.
“The fact that they’re having to consider an alternate route and that their motion was denied continues to make it more complicated for TransCanada. And any time it’s more complicated, that’s a victory for us,” he said.
Attorneys for landowners opposing the pipeline also said Tuesday’s ruling represented a setback for the project.
To build the world we want, we must dare to dream big and out loud.
This is an essay by Naomi Klein. If you have a few minutes, I encourage you to read it. She ties in a trip she took with her son to the Great Barrier Reef and another trip she took to North Dakota as part of the Standing Rock/Dakota Access protest to the consequences we will inevitably face as we “pause” in our efforts to control the changing climate as a consequence of the trump election and all that emanated from that. You may not agree with everything (or anything) Naomi Klein says or believes, but she’s a good writer who can make a compelling case supporting her advocacy.
Excerpt:
THE STAKES IN THE 2016 ELECTION were enormously high for a great many reasons, from the millions who stood to lose their health insurance to those targeted by racist attacks as Trump fanned the flames of rising white nationalism; from the families that stood to be torn apart by cruel immigration policies to the prospect of women losing the right to decide whether or not to become mothers, to the reality of sexual assault being normalized and trivialized at the highest reaches of power. With so many lives on the line, there is nothing to be gained by ranking issues by urgency and playing “my crisis is bigger than your crisis.” If it’s happening to you, if it’s your family being torn apart or you who are being singled out for police harassment, or your grandmother who cannot afford a life-saving treatment, or your drinking water that’s laced with lead—it’s all a five-alarm fire.
Climate change isn’t more important than any of these other issues, but it does have a different relationship to time. When the politics of climate change go wrong—and they are very, very wrong right now—we don’t get to try again in four years. Because in four years, Earth will have been radically changed by all the gases emitted in the interim, and our chances of averting an irreversible catastrophe will have shrunk.
This may sound alarmist, but I have interviewed the leading scientists in the world on this question, and their research shows that it’s simply a neutral description of reality. The window during which there is time to lower emissions sufficiently to avoid truly catastrophic warming is closing rapidly. Lots of social movements have adopted Samuel Beckett’s famous line “Try again. Fail again. Fail better” as a lighthearted motto. I’ve always liked the attitude; we can’t be perfect, we won’t always win, but we should strive to improve. The trouble is, Beckett’s dictum doesn’t work for climate—not at this stage in the game. If we keep failing to lower emissions, if we keep failing to kick-start the transition in earnest away from fossil fuels and to an economy based on renewables, if we keep dodging the question of wasteful consumption and the quest for more and more and bigger and bigger, there won’t be more opportunities to fail better. Nearly everything is moving faster than the climate change modeling projected, including Arctic sea-ice loss, ice sheet collapse, ocean warming, sea level rise, and coral bleaching. The next time voters in countries around the world go to the polls, more sea ice will have melted, more coastal land will have been lost, more species will have disappeared for good. The chance for us to keep temperatures below what it would take for island nations such as, say, Tuvalu or the Maldives to be saved from drowning becomes that much slimmer. These are irreversible changes—we don’t get a do-over on a drowned country.
origamiaround
ellievsbear
vaporwave
pixelskylines
theartofmadeline
yousharknotpass
romaincrisis
