--- Log opened Thu Mar 08 00:00:05 2018
06:18 <@Dolemite> mr0ning, be0tches and h0ez!
06:19  * aestetix hugs Dolemite 
07:17 -!- Synx_hm [~Synx_hm@unaffiliated/synx-hm/x-1623004] has joined #se2600
07:18 < Synx_hm> oof
08:15 -!- ezelkow1 [~sasquatch@c-71-56-244-10.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
08:25 -!- ezelkow1 [~sasquatch@2601:282:702:1eb8:381f:9478:2241:bcf0] has joined #se2600
08:25 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o ezelkow1] by ChanServ
09:51 -!- strages [uid11297@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-laqzcdsawjhenxxt] has joined #se2600
09:55 -!- sasquatc4 [~sasquatch@2601:282:702:1eb8:381f:9478:2241:bcf0] has joined #se2600
09:55 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o sasquatc4] by ChanServ
09:59 -!- ezelkow1 [~sasquatch@2601:282:702:1eb8:381f:9478:2241:bcf0] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
10:06 < Synx_hm> slow day eh
10:08 < xray>  thankfully yes
10:09 <@Corydon76> IT related, yes.
10:09 <@_NSAKEY> NVIDIA put GTX 1080s on sale a little under an hour ago. They were all gone in under 15 minutes.
10:10 <@shapr> yeesh
10:10 <@Corydon76> Politics-wise, if you tried to keep up with everything coming out, you'd drown.
10:10 < xray> Like SB 315
10:11 <@Corydon76> Which one, Georgia?
10:11 < xray> yes http://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/en-US/Display/20172018/SB/315
10:11 <@_NSAKEY> Just doubled-checked my notes. 1080s were in stock for ~10 minutes, and 1070s for about ~15.
10:12 < xray> very bad piece of legislation
10:12 < xray> we have been trying to get them to slow down and take a breath but they seem determined to pass "something" rather than the right thing
10:13 < xray> Surprisingly there down'd seem to be much interest in the bill from the infosec community in GA except for the EFFGA and DC404
10:14 <@Corydon76> Sounds like they're trying to outlaw DOS attacks
10:14 < xray> Not exactly
10:15 < xray> It appears to be a reaction to their embarrassment over the Kennesaw  State voting system information incident
10:19 < aestetix> you know
10:19 < aestetix> I would not be surprised if Ben Shapiro ran for office
10:21 < aestetix> It's either that, or he becomes the next Buckley
10:37 <@Corydon76> Shapiro isn't smart enough to be the next Buckley.  He relies too much on verbal tricks, not true intellectualism.
10:38 <@Corydon76> Buckley was a good debater, because he made good arguments, not because he was a good solliloquist
10:38 < Synx_hm> anybody ever done autobody work, specifically drilling of spot welds and replacement of subframe parts with rivets?
10:39 <@Corydon76> Shapiro might become the next great Shakespearean actor, but he will never come close to equalling Buckley.
11:23 < TheDukh> @Dagmar : do you mind a PM?
11:29 <@Evilpig> I've never heard him speak out against any prime minister.  I'd doubt he's start now
11:41 -!- HackMaster_ [uid45710@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ywfddclijhfvwvny] has joined #se2600
12:01 < aestetix> Corydon76: good point
12:02 < aestetix> It does seem like Shapiro tends to cite the same sources over and over, and relies on the fact that his audience likely won't follow up and actually read the sources.
12:03 < aestetix> It's sort of like when you argue with someone about a philosopher, and they cite a part of one book to demonstrate a point, and you cite three parts of the same book to refute them. And it turns out they hadn't actually read the book, just that part.
12:05 < aestetix> Jordan Peterson falls into the same trap. It's clear he's deeply versed in a set of ideas, but hasn't ventured far outside of them. Which could explain why he keeps referring back to Jung over and over again.
12:06 < aestetix> or maybe I should preface with "it seems" because otherwise I'll trip up K`Tetch_ :)
12:09 < aestetix> Corydon76: anyone you *would* identify as complementary?
12:11 < TheDukh> okay, so, it's been about a day.  I can't find this email.  I have officially given up on this puzzle
13:55 -!- NotLarry [~NotLarry@c-68-53-123-92.hsd1.tn.comcast.net] has joined #se2600
13:55 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o NotLarry] by ChanServ
15:05 -!- xray [~xray@c-73-43-4-206.hsd1.ga.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: The Lounge - https://thelounge.github.io]
15:12 -!- xray [~xray@c-73-43-4-206.hsd1.ga.comcast.net] has joined #se2600
15:41 < dasunt> So if you accept $130k in hush money, doesn't that imply that you believe an agreement is in effect?
15:41 <@Corydon76> dasunt: conditionally
15:42 <@Corydon76> But then again, if someone sends me a packet of cash in the mail, and I have no idea who sent it, then I am not bound by any legal measure to return it.
15:42 < dasunt> But if you know who sent it, then are you?
15:43 <@Corydon76> Depends upon whether we have a preexisting agreement or not
15:43 <@Corydon76> Items sent in the mail without a preexisting agreement are considered gifts.
15:43 < dasunt> Which she's arguing is invalid.
15:43 < dasunt> Corydon76: Pretty sure that's not the case - if so, I could totally start collecting any mail that ends up at my house accidentally.  :)
15:44 <@Corydon76> The point of that was to ensure that companies couldn't just send you random merchandise and then bill you for it.
15:44 < dasunt> Yep.
15:44 <@Corydon76> It is a novel argument that she's making, one that is ripe for adjudication
15:45 <@Corydon76> She is right in one sense:  if an agreement is not signed by one or more parties to the agreement, it is legally unenforceable
15:45 < dasunt> It's kind of an unusual argument the lawyer is making as well - that he, of his own will, apparently drew up and made a NDA concerning the actions between his client and a third party, without telling his client(?) and paid for the hush money himself.
15:46 <@Corydon76> But the next question is whether that was merely an oversight that can be healed by submitting a signature
15:47 <@Corydon76> I've heard of a case where, in a legal dispute over information, an agreement was made for a retraction IF the settlement money was paid within 30 days.  After 30 days of seeing no payment, the agreement became unenforceable
15:48 <@Corydon76> The guy added it to the agreement specifically because he had no faith that he would be paid at all
15:49 <@Corydon76> And if he hadn't put in the expiration, he might have waited forever.
15:49 < dasunt> I'd assume it goes to court - that any agreement needs a "good faith" effort to comply.
15:49 < dasunt> OTOH, I can't say what the law says about a good faith effort.
15:50 <@Corydon76> She waited more than 365 days for a signature.  I'd say there was no good faith agreement at all
15:50 <@Corydon76> But, it's up to a court to decide.
15:51 <@Corydon76> New York law is probably controlling.  I don't know what it says about how long parties have to sign once they come to an agreement
15:51  * dasunt doesn't know.
15:52 <@Corydon76> Her lawyer probably has a good sense of it, which is why he's letting her talk to the press.
15:53 <@Corydon76> Lawyers generally don't allow that openness with the public about a civil case, unless they have an airtight case.
15:53 < dasunt> Maybe the inverse - this case can have enough bad PR for Trump that she's better off fighting it in the court of public opinion.
15:54  * dasunt accidentally ends up on pintrist, wonders how anyone finds that site useful.
16:00 <@Corydon76> Fights in the court of public opinion, especially with $130k on the line, are ill-advised.
16:00 <@Corydon76> That is, unless she socked the money away and has it for return, in case the court rules that way.
16:01 < dasunt> The PR may be worth it.
16:01 < dasunt> I wonder what she could get from a book deal right now.
16:02 <@Corydon76> She may have one already written and waiting to be published until after this agreement is nullified
16:03 <@Corydon76> Because if she publishes, first, and Trump prevails, then all profits from the sale of the book would probably go to him.
16:04 <@Corydon76> Alternatively, she waits, and arranges a private buyer if Trump prevails, and it "leaks" to the public.
16:05 <@Corydon76> Trump loses, even if he prevails in court
16:21 <@_NSAKEY> Are you guys talking about the Trump/Stormy Daniels thing?
16:28 < aestetix> well I expect nothing but Shakespeare caliber writing skill from a porn star
16:29 < aestetix> nothing less than*
16:34 <@sasquatc4> she can just get the same guy who wrote trumps book, its not like you have to be an intelligent human being that can form sentences to write a book
16:45 < aestetix> lol
16:45 < aestetix> "art of the squeal"
16:49 < dasunt> LOL.
16:49 < dasunt> That would be hillarious.
19:17 -!- strages [uid11297@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-laqzcdsawjhenxxt] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
21:03 -!- sasquatc4 [~sasquatch@2601:282:702:1eb8:381f:9478:2241:bcf0] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
21:08 -!- oddball [~oddball@h96-61-175-66.lvrgtn.dsl.dynamic.tds.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:33 -!- oddball [~oddball@h96-61-175-66.lvrgtn.dsl.dynamic.tds.net] has joined #se2600
22:15 -!- sicsscam_ [~sicsscam@24.154.71.208] has joined #se2600
22:16 -!- scam [~sicsscam@24.154.71.208] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
23:41 -!- ezelkow1 [~sasquatch@2601:282:702:1eb8:95ce:2737:6094:c89c] has joined #se2600
23:41 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o ezelkow1] by ChanServ
23:54 -!- Dolemite [~scott@96-38-109-185.dhcp.jcsn.tn.charter.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
--- Log closed Fri Mar 09 00:00:07 2018