Slashdot Mirror

Yes, that _particular_ card was cloned wholesale due to that implementation. Others are also being cloned. Look at http://www.digitaljournal.com/... .

I'm afraid it's unrealistic to say they're "almost impossible to clone". The Prilex malware seems to be this year's most broadly supported cloning technology, and it may be reparable. But I don't think you can point to a single year since the development of "chip and pin" technology that didn't have a widespread cloning story.

Falcon 9 most definitely will be human rated. It will carry the Crew Dragon spacecraft, the first flight prototype of which has just been delivered to the Cape.

The ocean pollution problem apparently comes from ten rivers located in Asia. North and South America are not killing whales. This is just another pointless feel-good move to show that "they care" in Chile.

That's pretty much my assessment - macro sized plastic from third world countries, and microsphere plastic from developed places.

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/1...

http://www.digitaljournal.com/...

Cites provided because the prominent search results blame countries that already recycle a lot of plastic. Making someone in those countries feel guilty about themselves, while doing nothing about the Pacific Rim countries will accomplish exactly nothing.

This is not to say plastic in the oceans is not a problem. It's that completely eliminating the first world contributions to the problem will stall out at a 10 percent reduction.

Tech workers are fleeing the United States to work on Canada:
https://news.slashdot.org/stor...
http://www.businessinsider.com...
http://www.digitaljournal.com/...
https://www.axios.com/exodus-u...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Come on news people, make up your minds.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/306127

The above is one of many examples of reporters being banned.

Also, it's technically Twitter that bans people you block from posting, if you want to go that route. And only in that person's feed. They can talk to anyone else they want to, just not Trump. Don't get me wrong, I'd be fine with Twitter not allowing anyone to block anyone. If anything, especially with the pre-emptive blocks, it'd be better in general.

Trump can do whatever the hell he wants on his Twitter feed, though. If you don't like it, complain to Twitter. I'd actually be for them making it a truly open platform where people weren't banned from participation arbitrarily, but as long as it's not, I can hardly blame someone for using blocklists to ignore idiots they don't want to talk to.

Except that means exactly jack and shit thanks to trolls, there is even an article on Wikileaks called "confessions of a child pornographer" where he brags about using viruses to infect random guys that go to one of his legit porn sites and filling their PCs with CP and having them connect to known FBI honeypots because he thinks its funny to have the cops chasing their tails and figures the more time they waste going after his fakes the less time they have to go after his legitimate customers.

According to my buddy at the state crime lab the whole charade is just that, a bullshit waste of time, which is why he is trying to get transferred out. He says he can't even remember the last time they actually caught a predator online (those they catch when someone the scumbag molests comes forward) but instead all they ever catch is porn addicts which could easily be treated with a little therapy but instead they have to pretend they are dangerous because...well the prosecutor wants to get a shot at congress or the governors chair in a couple years.

So hundreds of millions are spent, the actual predators get to sit back and laugh about it because they keep their stash on an encrypted server in bumfuckistan and just access it via VPN, and you get to pay millions to keep some losers that haven't left their basements in years in solitary because they couldn't get it up anymore after watching a billion hours of porn without watching the sickest shit they could find, but hey, the prosecutor can say he's "tough on crime" and will get that shot at the big chair where he can clean up off the backroom deals....welcome to reality where its ALL politics..and then folks wonder why guys who take the job spend all of 6 months and then start looking for the exit.

I don't think it would matter as they were a corp with money and you are most likely not. Like it or not according to a friend who works at the state crime lab running something like a Tor exit node or Freenet and you can be charged with child porn distribution whether you ever had access to the offending material or not.

The way it was explained to me was like this.."imagine I give you a safe to carry to the next town. this safe is locked, you have NO way to access this safe or know the contents. Now the cops pull you over, break open the safe and find CP. The ways the laws are currently written you are guilty of distribution even though you had no way of accessing or knowing because you chose to carry the safe no different than how you chose to run Freenet or Tor".

Now is this wrong and fucked up? Sure it is but the way the CP laws are written you WILL be looking at a couple years of court, costing tens to hundreds of thousands, and of course you'll have your reputation destroyed, probably lose your job, and will most likely never see any of your electronic equipment ever again. If you don't believe this just look at guys getting their lives destroyed over a virus infected computer which any Geek Squad could have detected in 5 minutes or less. What is more you can go to Wikileaks and look up "confessions of a child pornographer" and read that he BRAGS about this exact attack, which he does because he thinks its "funny" and leaves cops chasing innocents instead of his customers. What does the prosecutor say when shown the evidence " He infected his PC on purpose as an excuse" showing the cops do not give a single flying fuck whether they get the right person or not, just that they get somebody. The reason why is simple, prosecutors wanna be governor some day and by showing you are "tough on perverts" you can get votes, no reporter ever checks to see if those busts were actually legit or not.

So I would strongly think twice if you use this software and ask yourself "can I afford a couple years of my life gone in court, and the risk of decades in prison? Is there anybody that counts on me for income?" because thanks to the fucked up red scare vague as fuck laws we have in the US when it comes to CP that is what you are risking by running this software.

Digital face construction from DNA is used to identify people for as simple a crime as throwing a used chewing gum on the street.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/...

R or D doesn't matter if they agree to allow this type of bullshit they are assholes. Seriously how much are we spending on the witch hunt for terrorists? Can they show results of thwarted attacks to merit such spending? If not the assholes should be removed from office. On a side note I'd be interested to find out if there are any ties between these people and those that have the contracts to provide hardware for this project.

What? In Our America?
http://www.wired.com/2013/07/money-nsa-vote/
https://www.techdirt.com/artic...
http://www.digitaljournal.com/...
http://heavy.com/news/2014/01/...

since men are better at standing to pee.

You jest, but in feminist controlled Sweden silly shit like that has seriously been proposed.

The UK is less overran by Social Justice Warriors, but their insane propositions thrive there as well. Canada, being more "sensitive" and thus easier to manipulate through claims of offense is the USA's canary. If you want to see what the SJW politics will look like in the USA in a few years see Canada. If you want to see what it will look like when the SocJus horde is through with their invasion then shudder as you watch this video.

Uhhh because courts HAVE and DO jump to the worst possible conclusion and fuck guy's lives up for nothing? For exhibit A how about men accused of CP thanks to virus which a whole 5 minutes with malwarebytes would have shown the PC was infected, but did the courts even bother to check? Nope in fact on a similar case the prosecutor said he believed it was a "trick" and that "the suspect infected himself" so he would have a fucking excuse! The reason? He had enough technical knowledge to build his own tower....yep, if you can read instructions in the USSA "you be a criminal mastermind yo"!

The problem you and many geeks have with the CP laws is you try to treat the courts as rational actors....they aren't. You try to treat the laws as logical and consistently applied...they aren't. You try to treat the judges and prosecutors as individuals that seek justice and apply the law as fairly as possible....do I really need to point out how wrong you are? THIS IS A WITCH HUNT, and by their very definition Witch. Hunts. Aren't. Rational. and trying to apply rational thought to a witch hunt is just a waste of time!

We have seen time and time again, going all the way back to McMartin Preschool, that sanity and CP are two concepts that just don't go together. Doesn't matter how obvious it is that it isn't your CP, doesn't matter if you don't have the key to the crypto, in fact the laws of many states don't have anything about you personally having access to it, merely that you possess it, so your rational statements? Really do not belong in this discussion.

Up to $5k. For what? One download? Or for overall downloads?

Also, suing many people at once doesn't really make sense and any such action would almost automatically be thrown out and require individual cases instead.

Anyway, this is far cry from the US bullshit

http://www.digitaljournal.com/...

Also, the *up to $5k* means that the $5k is reserved for most extreme cases.

If you use TOR or Freenet and have a family or are not a millionaire who can afford to throw away hundreds of thousands on lawyers you are a fool, simple as that. As my friend in the state crime lab pointed out the ways the laws are written when it comes to distribution and facilitation mean that anybody that runs an exit node or has a Freenet cache can be busted as a child pornographer and what do ya know, some countries are already doing just that.

Thanks to the vague as fuck ways these laws are written it DOES NOT MATTER that you can't see the files you cache on Freenet, that you aren't scanning the TOR traffic coming through your exit node or that you don't even see so much as a single jpg, it doesn't even matter if your PC is obviously hijacked by somebody else because at the end of the day ALL that matters is that CP passed through your router. That is all the court cares about, the cops who get increased federal funding for more CP busts sure has no fucks to give and the prosecutor? look at the virus link, even when shown proof that when the unit is connected to the net it is instantly controlled by another party he comes up with a "I bet he did that on purpose to cover up his crimes!" BS excuse. Why? Because I have no doubt he'll be running for public office and CP busts sell to the soccer mom set.

So you can believe its a honeypot (which is what I believe, too many "advocates" banging the "TOR is for freedom and privacy!" drum are getting their checks from the likes of Radio Free Asia and other CIA fronts. I seriously doubt any less than 90% of the money going into TOR isn't coming from 3 letter agencies and fronts for the same like RFA) or a bastion of freedom, doesn't matter, all that matters is the current laws as written mean you can spend the rest of your life behind bars for using it. I don't know about anybody else but I have no desire to spend the rest of my life rotting in a cell, especially if it turns out to be a giant honeypot for alphabet agencies to run spook shit overseas while giving them plenty of targets to bust.

I.e. " Do you want to be part of russia, or not part of Ukraine".

Huh? The 1992 constitution of Crimea sees it as an autonomous republic of Ukraine. Maybe You, I or both of us are misunderstanding something here.

Regarding the Russian passports, I guess it has something to do with dual citizenships, i.e.:

[...] if [a Ukrainian] citizen acquired citizenship of (was naturalized by) another country, then in legal relations with Ukraine, the person is recognized as a citizen of Ukraine only. Thus, presently, according to the legislation of Ukraine dual citizenship is not prohibited, but also is not recognized [...]

It's also pretty much plausible and conceivable that the passport was used only for ID purposes and they had lists of eligible voters beforehand (at least that's the way it works in Germany: you just have to present a valid ID and be on the list).

And, re: "beating non russian looking voters", regardless of whether it actually happened (source?), there were not too many of those:

where they now form ~ 12% minority

(Crimean Tatars & ethnic groups in Crimea).

I'm not a jingoist. America (and any major power) is going to have black marks on it's record.

Agreed.
What I'm really trying to achieve here, is to cut through the thick fog of propaganda (from all sides) and get at the core of the issue (i.e. discrimination of a large part of the population by a (then) unelected government).
If I put myself in their shoes, I can totally understand the wish to distance themselves from a seemingly oppressive regime (not everyone welcomes their new overlords as we do here on /.), and being a semi-autonomous region (e.g. unlike Kosovo), they made use of their right to do so.

In addition, there were international observers present during the referendum.
And, as a last one, (internal Russian politics notwithstanding,) this is long but raises some interesting points: http://original.antiwar.com/ju...

Reading is a useful skill:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/... [digitaljournal.com]
"The bill, entitled Senate Bill 828, would require a warrant for any information collected through data mining to be admissible in court. Furthermore, it would impose sanctions on companies that share information with the NSA without warrants, and would target utility companies and universities which did the same. "

Read before you post:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/... [digitaljournal.com]
"The bill, entitled Senate Bill 828, would require a warrant for any information collected through data mining to be admissible in court. Furthermore, it would impose sanctions on companies that share information with the NSA without warrants, and would target utility companies and universities which did the same. "

I know it's against the rules but you should read some more before you go off on a rant:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/... [digitaljournal.com]
"The bill, entitled Senate Bill 828, would require a warrant for any information collected through data mining to be admissible in court. Furthermore, it would impose sanctions on companies that share information with the NSA without warrants, and would target utility companies and universities which did the same. "

I think the problem is that the NSA doesn't get warrants for most of it's data collection. It just sucks up everything without a warrant. That is the basic problem with the NSA... it doesn't get warrants.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/...
"The bill, entitled Senate Bill 828, would require a warrant for any information collected through data mining to be admissible in court. Furthermore, it would impose sanctions on companies that share information with the NSA without warrants, and would target utility companies and universities which did the same. "

Washington State, the proposed waste site was called Gable mountain, while it was shutdown over night - I found out why with this reply "These sensors recorded recent movement in the supposedly sable basalt. One fault had been generated by an earthquake estimated at 5.5 on the Richter scale that had occurred within the last 2000 years. To geologists with nuclear disposal on their minds, that was far too recent, and the Gable Mountain project was abandoned. "
http://www.northcolumbiamonthl...

Not Oak Ridge this area puts it to shame "The most contaminated nuclear waste site in America" http://digitaljournal.com/news... and everybody lives down stream...

Washington state is on the edge of a plate, https://www.windows2universe.o... while Oklahoma is in the center and should be fairly stable, I had thought till I read your PDF.

I can't say every, but almost all of the (U.S.) nuclear reactors store their spent fuel on site. With the closer of Yucca Mountain there is no place is available or planned for nuclear waste. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y... you can see the problem developing.

Except that you have no control over whether that book will remain on your Kindle. You just have to have faith that your books won't be revoked for $SomeRandomReason.

Famous example: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07...
More recent example: http://digitaljournal.com/arti...

It's also my understanding that, when using shades, women see more shades of color than men do.

You may be thinking of tetrachromacy which may be a mostly-female or female-only phenomenon due to genetics, but only one has been found so far.

Perhaps this is all a part of the vast right-wing conspiracy against green energy [salon.com]. Can't let the hippies win!

Nice to see someone at least trying to look past the smokescreen.

This was a law pushed on us by the corporate right-wing legislation factory ALEC. Actually, "pushed" is a bit strong. It would probably be more accurate to say the Oklahoma legislature goes to ALEC and asks, "what laws would you like us to pass today"?

Those of you who've been here a few years know the drill with ALEC: their avowed reasons for a law are almost always a cover, so arguing over the validity of their reasoning is pointless. The real reason for this law is that their corporate funders (yes, including the Koch brothers, who make their money in the coal burning business) think it would help them. The only way you'd stop ALEC from pushing stuff like this is to convince the Kochs that it would cost them money somehow.

The question is simply answered: diagnoses are more prevalent because the drugs to treat those patients now exists. It is not mere coincidence that the FDA approved the use of Risperdal in late 2006, and its generic, Risperidone, in late 2008. There were more than a few doctors who have made more than a few dollars from prescribing tis medication. Johnson & Johnson has to pay a $2.2 billion dollar fine for illegally marketing this drug through the use of kickbacks to doctors and pharmacists. So don't tell me the pharmaceutical isn't dirtier than a whore's whose-its. Everyone relax. Autism rates will decline when these drugs get a bad enough name. Then, a more expensive drug will be produced to treat a more common malady, and everyone will freak the fuck out again.

Wrong and wrong. Hunters and fishermen are the first to contribute to river/wetland protection and cleanup efforts. As far as wolves, show me one reference to hunters' hostility to wolves. Ranchers yes, hunters no.

Snort. You obviously don't live in elk country or have ever seen a documentary on wolves, where butthurt hunters compete with ranchers for hating on animals that got there first.

Ranchers in Idaho are asking the state government to help eliminate some of the state's elk population. The state is halfway through the wolf season, which was said to have been introduced to stop the wolves from attacking elk.

Elk hunters have actively encouraged thinning the wolf population. Some have established co-ops to shoulder the cost of trapping wolves that are eating the prized trophy animals. Wolf trappers are paid up to $500 per kill.

Slaughter implies butchering and the headline makes it sound as if the animals were to be butchered in the cove.... Slaughtering in the cove sounds unsanitary.

I suppose I don't know how sanitary it is, but they really do perform the slaughter right there in the cove.

eg:
          http://digitaljournal.com/image/102641

          http://unleashed.org.au/images/blogs/The-cove.jpg

The real revelation was how much of it was going on domestically, before 9/11 the NSA was basically barred from operating domestically

What? No, Cheney's program began at the very latest in early 2001. 9/11 was just used as a fig leaf to cover it up.

It would be no great surprise if voting on this bill went along the same lines as the congressional vote on reining in "the NSA’s phone-spying dragnet. It turns out that those 217 'no' voters received twice as much campaign financing from the defense and intelligence industry as the 205 'yes' voters."

In particular,

Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, is married to Richard C. Blum, who was substantially invested in URS Corp, which owns EG&G, a leading government technical provider that has been awarded hundreds of millions of dollars in security-related contracts. Feinstein never abstained from voting when it affected her husband’s wallet and Blum made $100 million when he sold his shares, as investigative reporter Peter Byrne exposed in his 2007 series the “Feinstein Files.”

( http://www.indypendent.org/2013/07/16/nsa-follows-you-we-follow-money )

See also:

• NSA Defenders Protecting Their Own Wallets,
• Feinstein: 700k From NSA Affiliates Since 2007 PRISM Launch
• Big campaign donations from contractors doing secret work for NSA,
• .. etc.

Good luck firing them, though.

Ask any big hospital in Seattle, Minneapolis, Chicago.
Phantoms in the Snow was a political ass covering. Maybe you missed this disclaimer:

The authors acknowledge financial support from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (formerly the Medical Research Council of Canada) for this research.

The southward pilgrimage is rampant and shows little sign getting any smaller. In spite of the Obama administration trying to hide these facts, they become more clear every year.

http://digitaljournal.com/article/328561
http://www.medicaltourismmag.com/article/canadians-seeking-healthcare-abroad-why-and-how-many-.html
http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/11/report-thousands-fled-canada-for-health-care-in-2011/
http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/08/report-thousands-fled-canadian-health-system-in-2012/

Its proven such an embarrassment to the Canadian Government that in 2012 they undertook a massive campaign to reduce wait times. They actually made some progress. Then they realized how many major procedures they would have to add, they suddenly got very quiet.

Privacy Policies are not legally binding - so its merely a PR thing. TOS gives Google rights - for e.g. to kick a user out of their service whenever they want - without giving the *user* any rights - other than what the privacy policy states they might do.

I think privacy policies are more meaningful than you imply. I believe they create promissory estoppel.

Well, nothing stops individual employees from leaking/spying on data anyway. And it has happened .. at Google/Facebook/etc, so all the security in the world will only stop external script-kiddies and other low-level information hackers but cant stop anyone who is motivated enough.

Actually, there is a lot that stops individual employees from leaking/spying. The article you mentioned was three years old, and it described things that happened earlier. There is a lot of infrastructure in place today to prevent unauthorized employee access that wasn't there 3-4 years ago. I happen to know that very well, because I design and build a lot of it -- and 95% of all of my effort is devoted to internal threats. Not because we believe that there are a lot of malicious Googlers, but because if you can guarantee that insiders can't get at the data, outsiders have no chance -- and to prevent examples like the one you cited (which AFAIK was the last such case).

Of course, you'll note that the preceding paragraph was just reassurances with no details. Unfortunately, that's because I can't provide details -- which I actually think is a mistake on Google's part, and something I regularly bring up with management. Google has a really excellent security story, and I think we should be telling it. But since we aren't all I can say is: It's awesome, trust me :-)

So, I'd much rather the data stay in house at Google, who does a good job of securing it, is willing to fight back against government intrusion, and even gives me the option of seeing what data they have collected (through the privacy dashboard) and allowing me to opt out and/or have my data deleted. And I'd rather that Yahoo! promise to keep what they collect on me in-house as well, rather than selling it, even if I don't have quite as much confidence in their integrity.

Your statement contains an implicit assumption that data *must* be collected. I am of the opposite view. Personal data should never be automatically collected, even in an anonymous fashion. All data collection must be done through a specific means (e.g. user submitted form) via an explicit opt-in event - not just clicking "I Agree" on some large wall of text that nobody can understand.

We disagree on the need for an explicit opt-in, and I do think that Google's business model is a reasonable one, and one that's good for users. Google can provide the array of great services that it does because of the trade it makes with users: You allow Google to collect data and use it to target ads to you, and in exchange you get all this stuff. You are free to opt out of this deal, but, frankly, Google wants to make it such a great deal that you don't want to -- and being responsible with your data, ensuring that you know that it won't be used for any other purposes and won't leak, is an important part of the deal.

and even gives me the option of seeing what data they have collected (through the privacy dashboard) and allowing me to opt out and/or have my data deleted.

I have never seen any option of permanently deleting data. I assume deleted just means hidden from the user. One reason being google cant guarentee that the data is deleted from all the backups, and another reason is - even deleted data is valuable for targeting ads.

No, deleted means deleted. I don't think Google is goi

No? Perhaps we have different standards of comfort, but it seems pretty good to me. The first clause says that Google may outsource data processing, but that whoever they outsource to must follow the same rules as Google. The second says Google will only sell aggregated, anonymized data.

I wanted to contrast the language difference between TOS and Privacy Policy. A TOS is something "I Agree" to whereas a Privacy Policy is just something Google tells me it might or might not do with my data. A huge difference. It is evident in the language too, TOS allows Google to sell personally identifiable data, while privacy policy states they wont. Privacy Policies are not legally binding - so its merely a PR thing. TOS gives Google rights - for e.g. to kick a user out of their service whenever they want - without giving the *user* any rights - other than what the privacy policy states they might do.

Well, at least as long as Page, Brin and Schmidt are in charge, Wall Street and other MBAs don't have much say. Those three outvote the rest of the shareholders combined. And Google is pretty light on MBAs in general, especially in managerial and executive positions. It's very engineer-heavy all the way up to (and including) the top :-)

Given the amount of personal info Google has, I hope that's true for everyone's sake.

The problem is that once the data has been sold, there's no way to call it back, and no way to keep track of what was done with it. I also don't have a lot of confidence in the security practices of, well, most everyone. I was a security consultant for 15 years, working with all kinds of fortune 500 companies -- mostly financial institutions! -- and security practices are generally appalling.

Well, nothing stops individual employees from leaking/spying on data anyway. And it has happened .. at Google/Facebook/etc, so all the security in the world will only stop external script-kiddies and other low-level information hackers but cant stop anyone who is motivated enough.

So, I'd much rather the data stay in house at Google, who does a good job of securing it, is willing to fight back against government intrusion, and even gives me the option of seeing what data they have collected (through the privacy dashboard) and allowing me to opt out and/or have my data deleted. And I'd rather that Yahoo! promise to keep what they collect on me in-house as well, rather than selling it, even if I don't have quite as much confidence in their integrity.

Your statement contains an implicit assumption that data *must* be collected. I am of the opposite view. Personal data should never be automatically collected, even in an anonymous fashion. All data collection must be done through a specific means (e.g. user submitted form) via an explicit opt-in event - not just clicking "I Agree" on some large wall of text that nobody can understand.

and even gives me the option of seeing what data they have collected (through the privacy dashboard) and allowing me to opt out and/or have my data deleted.

I have never seen any option of permanently deleting data. I assume deleted just means hidden from the user. One reason being google cant guarentee that the data is deleted from all the backups, and another reason is - even deleted data is valuable for targeting ads.

I'm sure we disagree on most of the above since you work for Google :)

NSA letter. Where the hell have you been?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57595202-38/feds-put-heat-on-web-firms-for-master-encryption-keys/
http://it.slashdot.org/story/13/07/24/1812227/anonymous-source-claims-feds-demand-private-ssl-keys-from-web-services
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/355146

Which are we talking about> Saudi Arabia they executed a princess and her lover (1977), Misha'al bint Fahd al Saud, a famous case.
Here's one with 3 men and 1 women being executed in Pakistan. http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/Four-executed-for-adultery-in-Pakistan/2007/06/05/1180809502745.html
A couple executed by Taliban. http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/271594

I found these extremely fast. I've seen nothing at all to suggest that the male participant in adultery is given leniency under strict Islamic societies, and am surprised to hear that someone actually thinks the men are excused in those societies or given lesser sentences. (Actually in Saudi Arabia the sentence is different; beheading for the man, stoning for the woman.)

Well, thank you for educating me on this. I had thought this to lean very much against women, as many things in islam seem to do.

Which are we talking about> Saudi Arabia they executed a princess and her lover (1977), Misha'al bint Fahd al Saud, a famous case.
Here's one with 3 men and 1 women being executed in Pakistan. http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/Four-executed-for-adultery-in-Pakistan/2007/06/05/1180809502745.html
A couple executed by Taliban. http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/271594

I found these extremely fast. I've seen nothing at all to suggest that the male participant in adultery is given leniency under strict Islamic societies, and am surprised to hear that someone actually thinks the men are excused in those societies or given lesser sentences. (Actually in Saudi Arabia the sentence is different; beheading for the man, stoning for the woman.)

> His agenda is he wants to prevent paparazzi and other civilians from being able spy on their targets from above. ,

I think you are right. Google is terrible with our privacy, now suddenly he cares about ours? I call self-interest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Google#Privacy
http://digitaljournal.com/article/318518 "Google faces criticism as it reveals new privacy policy"

Like what exceptions? In Europe just the other day, a guy was sentenced to jail for tearing up a Qur'an. Let me know when that happens in the US. Short of intellectual property and direct, imminent, incitement to violence, there are no significant restrictions. Even defamation is a tort, while in many countries, it's a criminal act.

Truth serum does not fucking work, period, at all. This has been known for many decades now. If it worked, we would've been using it against Bad Guys in Secret Prisons, and we're not. We're not because it doesn't fucking work and everyone knows that.

Except apparently the people in this court room.

Actually, there is one compound that might be considered effective as a "truth serum", and that's scopolamine. Read up on the way it has been used by criminals, for instance this link:

http://digitaljournal.com/article/324779 or this one: http://rense.com/general38/frug.htm or just google it.

I have personal experience with this drug, having been involuntarily dosed with it once, and it's effects were scary indeed, in a way no other substance has ever come close to matching. Essentially it wipes out your short-term memory completely, and I do mean completely. You start to say something but by the end of the sentence you literally can't remember what it was you were trying to say. You have no idea where you are or how you got there, and you tend to believe whatever you're told if there's someone there to "helpfully" fill in the blanks. People empty their bank account to strangers, give up passwords and PIN numbers, it's crazy. The thing is, it's only short-term memory that's affected, everything else is still there. So I don't see any reason why you couldn't be questioned about past criminal behavior as easily as your financial secrets. Having experienced this stuff first hand, I have no doubt it could be used as a truth drug, given the right setting and an experienced interrogator. That said, I'm absolutely against the whole idea and believe this is a treacherous road for the legal system to be going down. Voluntarily or otherwise, chemical interrogation has no place in American courtrooms.

Because it looks like they are regulating advertising.

Advertising and print . That is the characterization that appears in the linked story, anyhow.

If, by print, they include all forms of printed pornography then they've just outlawed pornographic magazines. Do not doubt for one second that busy-body parents won't use this to have any form of even slightly suggestive literature banned from schools as well. That is the mind-set this kind of governance embraces.

It's feminism run amok. "Gender stereotype" is mantra those people chant to each other. Now it's law in Europe.

And if you think this precedent setting victory is going to satisfy them and they'll just go away now you're a fucking idiot. Letting online porn slide was a premeditated legislative feint. They'll be back for internet porn as well.

You Europeans submitted yourselves to the statists in Brussels. Enjoy having your minds set right.

I'm betting Carly can't make a good sandwich ether.

...and I bet when she was three she dreamt she could save Mario from Donkey Kong. Like that could ever happen!... Oh, wait...

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/345409

There's still plenty we don't know, but so much of it is highly specialized that many breakthroughs are understood by only a handful.

Spare a thought for poor Charles Darwin. He published Origin Of The Species in 1859 and, over a century and a half later, only 39% of Americans fully believe it.

At least Samuel Pierpoint Langley, Svante Arrhenius and Arvid Högbom have managed to convince 63% that global climate change is real and they've only been going since the 1890s.

Still, could be worse: Galileo was imprisoned for the remainder of his life and his writing banned in 1618. The establishment (Catholic Church) didn't lift that interdiction on heliocentrism until 1822. Darwin's got another half century before he reaches Galileo's 204 years.

You may not like this becuase it doesn't fit your little world view, but millions of people defend themselves each year with guns. This is a recent example of a mom who saved herself and her children from god knows what - with a gun.

While the woman and her children were definitely in a situation where they would feel threatened there was no mention in the article that the intruder intended to do them bodily harm. Cornered in the attic? I doubt he was hunting them down, remember he had checked the house several times, both by knocking and ringing the bell, to make sure nobody was home. He was robbing them and when he opened the attic closet he was immediately shot. If the intruder had had a weapon or in some way was threatening bodily harm then you can be sure that the digitaljournal (what is digital about guns?) would have included it and probably close to the top as it would have been much more sensational and brought in more readers / clicks. "Cornered" seems to be the best they could get away with but is obviously biased. It's quite the anti-climax to a sensational story, in the end the intruder was sentenced only to burglary. At least you admit that nobody seems to know know what she saved themselves from, "god knows what."

FYI Modern militaries don't "charge at each other". And military guns still have bayonets and soldiers still have combat knives. Most death in combat comes from indirect fire, a.k.a.: not from an assault rifle or pistol. Also, if guns are the cause of so much violence, why hasn't the crime rate in the UK dropped since the banning of guns? Why has the crime rate in the US dropped during the same time period without the use of draconian gun laws? In fact it has dropped since the assault weapons ban expired. All of this seems to contradict the idea that guns cause violence.

You may not like this becuase it doesn't fit your little world view, but millions of people defend themselves each year with guns. This is a recent example of a mom who saved herself and her children from god knows what - with a gun.

The truth of the matter is that people cause violence. It's not a coincidence that all of the recent mass shootings in every country have been the result of mentally unstable people. Banning guns does nothing but put the guns in the hands of criminals and removes them from the hands of people who would otherwise protect themselves from the same criminals who are going to have guns no matter what the law says. People, who want to ban guns in good faith, are ignorant and have the blood of innocents on their hands.

This legislation was prompted by reports that Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza was a gamer.

Lanza was also a vegan, yet you don't see politicians clamoring for investigation on the potential mental health effects of veganism (B12 deficiency which is common among vegans can lead to mental disorders).

Lanza was on Prozac, yet you don't see politicians asking for investigation on the potential mental effects of Ritalin, Zoloft, Prozac and assorted powerful drugs.

Why this fixation on guns ? Why never investigate any other trail of evidence ?

they are responsible for tens of thousands of preventable deaths each year from viruses like influenza.

BS. The flu (influenza) shot has not been proven to be effective, especially in the elderly. In fact there's a large amount of evidence to say that it's ineffective.

And should be prosecuted as such

So If I convince you not to wear your seatbelt, I should be prosecuted if you die in a car accident. Nice argument, but try again please.

Everything aside, the zero tolerance policies that most school administrators (officially or unofficially) adopt is an injustice all its own.

No kidding. How about the other current story about the three year old deaf child that is being expelled for not changing his name because when he says his name in sign language "it looks like a gun," and that is a "threatening gesture."

One of the many news links on that story. http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/331745

Apparently, a bunch of the seed capital for Bain capital came from families that either directly and/or through ARENA, the El Salvador right wing political party, supported the death squads in that country in the 80's. So saying he doesn't care for the little guy is understating it. He was handling the money of people who had the little guys shot and killed in the middle of the night.

Sure they are http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/325402#ixzz1vooIlTFd
The Vanguard Shadowhawk will give the Montgomery County Sherriff's Department
"unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) is equipped .... and capable of firing rubber bullets, ejecting tear gas canisters and launching taser projectiles."
If you want you can get some nice grenade lunchers and 12-gauge shotguns upgrades too....
http://www.salon.com/2012/04/24/drones_for_urban_warfare/
Don't worry its just for intelligence, search, reconnaissance ... just like all the new kit was only to be used in Iraq too...
Welcome to the domestic (U.S.) battlefront.

Thats the Jedi trick, the elephant in the room.
The diligent engineer did know what he was doing and did pass on his issues up the ladder. Nothing was done.
http://digitaljournal.com/article/324002
"This private data would then âoebe analyzed offline for use in other initiatives,â like researching how well Googleâ(TM)s other services are used, the document said."
http://www.dailytech.com/FCC+Google+Knowingly+Used+Street+View+Cars+to+Snoop+on+Emails+Texts/article24574.htm has more

Fair enough - and I certainly support your skeptical point of view. One would be remiss to NOT fact check.

That said, I consider my point of view on Monsanto to be informed. You may or may not choose to agree - but there are certain points which are troubling for me.

To answer your quotes, I've tried to use neutral news - but I admit that some of these sources are biased.

That's amazing to me. BP fucks the ocean, and Haliburton makes money disappear for a war, and the guys who sell this [nature.com] are the evil ones.

Corporate evil is nothing new - my first exposure was the Bhopal disaster.
Concerning BT Cotton - well - that rosy success is turning out to be a washout. The Maharashta government has had to bailout the cotton industry, and studies are showing that BT Cotton is depleting the soil of minerals (Roundup chelates minerals, making them metabolically unavailable for some period of time).
http://digitaljournal.com/article/321958

Ah, that explains why they are selling the insecticide reducing Bt crops in the above link.

In fact Monsanto said themselves that BT cotton has failed in India for bollworm protection.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/Bt+cotton+has+failed+admits+Monsanto/1/86939.html

And also the usage of pesticide in Indian BT cotton has returned to normal levels after the initial lowering.
http://indiagminfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Bt-Cotton-False-Hype-and-Failed-Promises-Final.pdf
(see section CONSUMPTION OF PESTICIDES IN VARIOUS STATES DURING THE LAST FIVE YEARS 2005-06 to 2009-10 )
http://ppqs.gov.in/IpmPesticides.htm

How so? Let me guess, 'superweeds' and 'superpests'? Please, resistance breakdown and herbicide resistance are nothing new, are more cultivation issues than crop issues (particularly the resistant pests) and worst case scenario is you lose the benefits already provided.

Yes - those are problems, but problems that are solvable with traditional cultivation. My main concern with Roundup is the reduction in essential and rare minerals in foodcrop, thus requiring remediation and supplements. I'm concerned that there may be long-term effects in human and animal health.
http://www.agweb.com/assets/import/files/58P20-22.pdf

I also think that the most important research performed by Princeton's Dr. Huber deserves scientific evaluation. He is a true expert and has made some striking claims on the danger of Roundup-ready crops. Perhaps this is somewhat biased, but his resume is certainly impeccable.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1161030109000628
And an overview of Dr. Huber's presentation
http://www.greenpasture.org/fermented-cod-liver-oil-butter-oil-vitamin-d-vitamin-a/dr-huber-and-the-impact-of-glyphosate-in-the-food-chain/
And Monsanto's rebuttal:
http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/Pages/huber-pathogen-roundup-ready-crops.aspx

That must be why farmers willingly buy them, why farmers in developing countries wait in lines to get their bag of GE seed.

There are plenty of good GE seeds!! I think there are specific problems with some glyphosate-ready crops and neonicotinoid-treated seeds (which are being linked to CCD in bees). That said

It's perfectly natural for the head of a space agency to want to expand what his agency does.

Follow-up questions:

(1) Has the Russian government actually committed budget to the proposal?

(2) What does Russia expect to accomplish with its moon base?

Note that Russia has been talking about this for a while.

Okay, what was wrong with your scenario? Someone whose business is the study of something would be considered knowledgeable about the subject. Right? I tend to listen to my mechanic, do you?

(side note: The oceans are boiling, the ice caps are melting (ignore the biased article and the biased website, just look at the picture), and the fields are burning! What more do you want?)