barry9a

Registered bored user

barry9a wrote:
skypirate Bill wasn't impeached. Impeachment was started, but it didn't make it through both houses.

This is why Trump won't get impeached, because the Republicans are too scared to go up against their own monster and any impeachment wouldn't get the numbers. They created that monster with the fearmongering they've done over the last eight years, and if they go up against Trump, then they'll lose a lot of their own support base, and they'll be annihilated at the next election.
barry9a wrote:
Where do these people get all that money from?
barry9a wrote:
bill_watson They were paid for this one, so it's a job :)
barry9a wrote:
daegog It's her channel. I've watched a few of her vids. She's even rented herself some studio space so she can work on dominoes.
barry9a wrote:
faustsshadow Hey, you were the fucker that started throwing around the constitution. Don't whine like a bitch when it's thrown back in your face.
barry9a wrote:
markust123 The webserver that I-A-B runs on will only see the requests coming from that common public IP. It will have zero idea of the network topology behind that residential modem.

We're not talking network setup here, we're talking information that Fancy has access to on the server.
barry9a wrote:
thezigrat They could very well do that (but really, too much work), but that's not what I was addressing. Different IP addresses for users won't help with the original idea, which was assuming everyone on the same IP is a sockpuppet.


All this being said, there's not that many vocal users here, and I'm not aware of any cohabiting users, so a matching IP would be a significant suggestion of sockpuppetry (in I-A-B's particular case)
barry9a wrote:
thething911 how am I "wrong, utterly, entirely wrong" about a typical residential setup?
barry9a wrote:
casaledana Yeah, because we know that current zeitgeist in the US is so anti-gun. That's why regulations keep being wound back, cpls are spreading throughout all the states, and the federal government blocks funding to even study the issue. Yeah, the US public mind on guns is really following that "MSM liberal agenda".
barry9a wrote:
casaledana your constitution is clearly talking about arming a well-regulated militia. They should be armed with longarms, you know, the kind of arms you defend a country with. Concealed-carry licenses do not fit into the second amendment. Nothing in the second amendment talks about personal protection.
barry9a wrote:
Fojos dm2754 you're both fucking idiots who don't understand the difference between "more crime" and "less crime".
barry9a wrote:
Gerry1of1 And so we should follow the conservative path because they don't even hold tolerance as an ideal?
barry9a wrote:
captkangaroo Godwin's Law needs to be updated to include references to antifa.
barry9a wrote:
Gerry1of1 Are you honestly saying that slavery predates our prehistoric hunter-gatherer cultures, who were about as free as you can get?
barry9a wrote:
thezigrat If the device is connected to wifi and is using the same network connection as other devices, it'll have the same IP. If you're using a mobile connection (like 3G) at the time, you'll have a different IP. You can test it yourself just by asking google "what's my IP" on your various thingies.

And then you can also get some ISPs that use a 'transparent proxy', which can make multiple house connections look like they're coming from the same IP.

Matching IPs is a significant datapoint to consider, but it's not proof in itself of multiple accounts run by the one person.
barry9a wrote:
markust123 Whut? In a typical residential setup, all networking comes from the same IP address. Different people on different computers or different devices will all go through the one modem with the one externally-visible IP address. 

Story's a bit different with ip6, but that's not really common.
barry9a wrote:
markust123 What happens if you have two users that live in the same house? They're likely to have similar ideas, and their IP addresses would be the same.
barry9a wrote:
bliznik Blue Jacket moved away from the direction the assailant had been pushed. He didn't have eyes in the back of his head to know Black T-Shirt was firing.

But it's a good example of all this nonsense of "this is what I'd do in that situation!" is largely meaningless. 
barry9a wrote:
Meanwhile here in Australia, we don't have incidents like this in the first place.

This is the problem with pro-gun propaganda; it's all about "what happens in this single event, don't you wish you had a gun!?", and never "hey, these events happen much less often if people aren't so heavily armed".

So yeah, trumpet that Mr Black T-Shirt stopped a robbery by having a concealed permit license, and let's all ignore that his cousin was ALSO shot four times. Mr Black T-Shirt took an incredible risk (and his cousin paid for it), when every self-defence expert says "just hand over your money in that situation".
barry9a wrote:
Gerry1of1 In this case, he should be imprisoned. He knowingly and willingly went against the law and assaulted the nurse, even after he'd been shown the policy that his own police department helped set up.

I agree that too often people are being called on to lose their jobs, but this isn't a case of misunderstanding, this is a case of a guy wilfully going "I am the law" and assaulting someone. 
barry9a wrote:
toetagmodel2 it's a bit difficult to get to for an unwilling person, and too easy to get out if unsupervised. I just don't understand why they went to so much work to 'hide' it, and then put a carpeted walkway to it.

maybe the carpet is because you have to commando-crawl for a  bit to get to it?
barry9a wrote:
spanz once again: left-wing snowflakes cry about people being killed by police in the street; right-wing snowflakes complain about having to see a man take a knee briefly while some music plays.

Fuck right-wing apologists. 
barry9a wrote:
5cats If you're paying someone 250K/year to do nothing but stand for an anthem a dozen times, you're a shithouse negotiator.
barry9a wrote:
5cats You can't hold a straight thought in your head, can you? You told me to "Vote No", and neither of us can vote in the US. I said nothing about your right to hold an opinion.
barry9a wrote:
monkwarrior So, I ask what you would actually do about it, and you decide on misdirection instead. Instead of actually telling me what you think would change, you decide to talk about something else.

You're a coward.