DevOps is not a department. Its certainly not someone who "only does Ops but through development".
Yes, there will be a lot of Ops guys automating things. Yes there will be a lot of "developers" doing deployments (using automation). But please don't start labeling people DevOps.
You no more have a DevOps department than you have an Agile department. Its a methodology, not a group.
"so much emphasis on looping in the remote people"
You mean "the team"?
"screwing around with the video camera, trying out this video service, etc, etc."
A team of programmers and you don't have this sorted by day 3? Are you going to tell me you really tried to make it work and failed? Is it possible that, deep down, you didn't really want it to work?
"ended up going with a contracting company"
oh.
And don't say it's too hard to interview remote people. I once got a job at a local company, but they still flew me to their head office to check me out face to face.
"there's no one to have a beer with after work and talk about the latest coding issue, problem, point of interest, socialize"
There's lots of people. They just don't work with me.
Its the only one that does a proper 3-way merge: it has four views. Last time I used Araxis it showed three panes: theirs, base, ours, and you merged back into the center. Hello!!! "base" isn't much use halfway into a complicated merge if I can't tell which lines are "base" and what is "merged", nor can I refer to what was there before. So frustrating.
I sat at one BarCamp next to a security consultant and watched all the wireshark traffic between my Mac and everyone else. Firewall was on and locked down. My Mac responded (i.e. received, processed, replied) to SMB queries for example. Its a joke. Now I use ipfw directly and my Mac is a black hole.
First of all, a hate component is not a component of fascism, per se. Go look it up.[1] Hate, however, is a very useful motivation for an uninformed populace, and hence it shows up all the time during regime change. The Russian Revolution, for example, involved hate, but resulted in communism.
Secondly, are you claiming with a straight face that there is not a systematic demonization of a particular group in this country? We're at the point where its so successful that "concerned citizens" are now pointing the finger [6].
So that elephant of yours.
"Homeland" Security. Privatization of Prisons. Government checkpoints at all airports. Corporations are Persons (except when it comes to taxes). Money is Speech.
From [1]:
Fascists seek to rejuvenate their nation based on commitment to the national community as an organic entity, in which individuals are bound together in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood.
In this case "Homeland" serves the same purpose as "Fatherland".
Fascism promotes political violence and war as actions that create national regeneration
ref: "Mission Accomplished".
Fascists commonly utilize paramilitary organizations for violent attacks on opponents or to overthrow a political system
Mayor Bloomberg: "I have my own army in the NYPD". Of particular interest is that if you google that quote on reuters or CNN [2], you wont find it. And yet, here he is on tape: [3]. Can you justify pepper spraying US Citizens in the face [4]? Likewise the paramilitarization of police in the name of stopping the drug war and gangs.
These things don't happen over night. But so far, the trend is entirely one way. Attempts to justify them are just part of the process. Don't get hung up on "fascism". There are plenty of authoritarian regimes that don't fit that label but are equally unfortunate. But they all start the same way. [5]
The reasoning would be simple: The corrupt members of the government have levied a body of men to overthrow the democratic institution that we call the United States of America.
"Major" Bloomberg: "The NYPD is my Army", Homeland Security trampling on the US Constitution at every opportunity and at the order of congress, warrantless wiretaps, etc etc. Peaceable Protest made impossible by bureaucracy. Establishment of "First Amendment" zones for the press - where they can't see what's going on. Congress/Executive/SCOTUS making a tidy living from bribes^H^H^H Free Speech Expressed As Money.
There are a great many "bodies of men" acting unconstitutionally in this country, so assuming that a revolution took place, I don't think this line of prosecution would have much of a problem, do you? If a revolution doesn't take place, I think its pretty safe to say that the Government will take your side on the matter.
I don't think I mentioned the Nazi's, but since you bring it up.
"From the prosperity of the empire during the Wilhelmine era (1890-1914), Germany plunged into World War I, a war it was to lose and one that spawned many of the economic crises that would destroy the successor Weimar Republic."
"During the Hitler era (1933-45), the economy developed a hothouse prosperity, supported with high government subsidies to those sectors that tended to give Germany military power and economic autarky"
Economic crises inducing a transition from democracy to plutocracy/fascism, and massive military spending, ending in wars on multiple fronts.
I suppose I should also qualify my statement as "dominant states". Since the most common way for small states to be converted to fascism is by the dominant state (i.e. USA) installing fascist/authoritarian governments for them. So I concede that, in general, you may be right.
This is a shake down. If Facebook, Google, reddit, etc have something to gain from this, then they need to step and replace the money our poor senators will lose. This is how america works. You want legal "protection", you pays your "taxes".
If I get pulled over 10 times by 10 different cops, and I offer each one $100 to let me off, and only one of them takes the bribe - the other 9 don't negate the fact that one guy took the bribe.
"No your honor, I just like giving money to police officers whenever I meet them. See, its just random chance that this one guy let me off. Clearly it was on the merits of the situation, not because my money influenced him."
Cops don't make the laws of course. Otherwise you'd be allowed to bribe cops.
This is why, even though he is a nutjob on reproductive-rights, I have to support Ron Paul. All these issues should be decided by the states, not the feds.
You are mistaken. Bribery and corruption are not protected by the first amendment. Try offering a police officer some cash next time you get a speeding ticket. Or setting up a nice deal to put kids in jail [1].
Of course, this only applies to me, you, county judges, etc. Not senators. Not SCOTUS Justices. Not the people who have the most to gain from such corruption. Not the people who actually decide such laws. Fancy.
Power-grabs are the abuse. There need not be any imoral motive behind the desire for this power, nor any plan to use them "for evil". We have already seen (UMG) that, given such power, there will be "accidental" abuse that has a major, negative effect on small players and citizens.
Even if you believe that these were genuine "accidents", do you believe that it is acceptable to allow these interests to have such power? Do you think it is just about "unimportant" things like copying music?
The US is still the worlds largest superpower, but compared to 20 years ago it has vastly less power. Its power has declined and continues to do so. Any student of history will tell you that this is exactly when states transform from free nations to fascist states.
"To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;"
"limited times". Apparently the US Constitution disputes your assertion. Bunch of pirates, those founding fathers.