Slashdot Mirror

He said he literally, seriously, non-jokingly believes that people who act against legalization of assisted suicide should be tortured to death. You said he is right.

Let's say 67 percent of the population is against assisted suicide ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/12/physician-assisted-suicide-legal_n_3913400.html )

Are you are literally, seriously, non-jokingly saying that somewhere on the order of 100 million to 200 million people in the united states should be tortured to death?

As bunches have already said here, the real issue is not whether the US prosecutes Assange, but whether the US (or any of its territories or non-annexed lackeys) punishes Assange with (or far more likely without) a Speedy And Public Trial.

Also, given that the US clearly has no respect for privacy or whistleblower protection, that statement by DoJ sounds less like a reassurance and much more like a less-than-implicit threat to other journalists. "What happened to Assange could happen to any of you TrueCrypting notepad-hugging bastards...report on Kimye like the good serfs you are and don't be that guy."

a) Have actually proven that this is not some 'cook something up to to get our ultra conservative readers their daily dose of outrage over their morning coffee' type story made up by a right wing rag.

I can't speak to the specific case, but if you think civil forfeiture is a figment of the right-wing imagination, you're dangerously ignorant about how the government operates.

It's been going on for decades, under both Democratic and Republican leadership. Basically, the state or federal government uses an obscure legal doctrine under which it accuses your property of a crime. Your property doesn't have the same due process and presumption of innocence rights you do, so it usually lose the case. You have to sue the government to get it back. You can guess how well that usually goes.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform/easy-money-civil-asset-forfeiture-abuse-police

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/civil-asset-forfeiture

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2010/02/take_the_money_and_run.html

http://fear.org/victimindex.html

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/08/12/130812fa_fact_stillman

http://www.forbes.com/2011/06/08/property-civil-forfeiture.html

Bullshit. Are the only person on earth who's not read this yet?

Why poor peoples bad decisions make perfect sense

There are (many) people out there who have no fallback, no slack, constantly skating the line between soul-crushing poverty and homelessness. As the article puts it - sure, you can pull yourself up by your bootstraps. If you can afford bootstraps. It's easy to condemn these people for vices like smoking or drinking but really, would you be without your little vices? And would you retain your sanity for long without them?

You're a low-ID slashdotter. It's overwhelmingly likely that you are a middle aged white guy who's worked in tech most of his life. You had the luxury of a youth where you were not struggling to find enough food to eat and had the time to noodle around with computers or whatever you probably make your living at now.

I'm certainly in the same boat - I too have no real conception of what poverty is like. I remember my parents being cautious with money, and my grandfather helping out to buy my first computer, but I've only seen the shadows on the wall cast by this kind of life when dealing with patients in various clinics and hospital wards. I have some inkling of how tired they must feel, having worked 80-hour weeks as a junior doctor, but that was at a time when I was earning a solid wage and living in a rent-free apartment provided by my employer. I have some inkling of how money being tight feels, having lived through a period when I could quadruple my disposable income and afford an extra beer a week by spending £0.50 less per day on lunch, but I was still eating well and sleeping under my own roof.

Even now I know that if my cushy government job is scrapped and I'm out of work, I have enough skills and contacts and smarts to be earning a comfortable living again within a month or two, and enough savings to last until I am. I have a vast amount of "capital" built up in terms of experience and training and knowledge, and robust health nurtured by a lifetime of being able to afford to eat reasonably healthily. And if the worst comes to the worst, I have parents who own their own house and would be happy to put me up, an ex-wife who earns more than me and would probably support me (we don't get on as spouses any more, but the woman is a compassionate saint), etc, etc, etc.

If I believed in God, I'd have someone to thank every day for the vast privilege of being me.

Ranting like this at you is exactly what I needed, by the way. I've been feeling rather down and lonely since my marriage broke up, but this adds a most welcome measure of perspective. So thank you for the stimulus.

Lol.. and you don't see how that fallacy is problematic

If you think those analogies are fallacies, you don't understand either term.

I mean seriously, we have people who oppose liberal policies being declared racists simply because the president is black due to idiots thinking that shit is proper.

No, you don't.

This is why I shake my head with pity when I read your posts, Mr. D, because you come so close yet remain so far. Because you could have gone with what some right wing Democrats actually do: insist that anyone that calls the president "Barry" is racist. See what I did there? That's a valid comparison, based in reality, that has actually happened.

It's faux butthurt, designed to derail a conversation while attempting to put the other person on the defensive through the clever use of flopping: pretending that some grave offense just occurred when anyone with two functioning neurons can see that that's not the case and the person is just faking it. Right wing Republicans pull the same crap when they pretend that anyone who says the word "teabaggers" is using a homophobic insult when it's a well known fact that Teabaggers came up with their own name.

The problem is the comparison is completely out of line with the reality of the situation.

Not in the slightest. It's showing the utter absurdity of the argument by applying the same line of reasoning with a different set of variables. Another case in point: take this article about a mother who kidnapped her daughter after losing custody and spent 19 years on the lam, internationally. Peruse the comments and you'll see plenty of people who are siding with the woman for no other reason than she's the woman. Because you know full well that if the kidnapper was a guy, these same people would want him arrested, castrated, shot, hung, drawn and quartered and then shot a second time.

So, to get back to the original point: nobody is calling anyone a pedo, anymore than anyone is calling someone a slaver when slavery is used to rebut the "this has been done for a long time so it's no big deal" talking point.

Hmm...I wonder if you have something there. The "generation y" (the generation I'm a part of, actually) mostly seems to value "being a badass" (or something to that effect, I don't quite know how to name it.) By that, I mean this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/18/desmond-hatchett-30-kids_n_1528850.html

That is today's "alpha male". A pathetic loser who has done jail a few times, but that is where selective selection is carrying us, so who am I to judge. That and of course, this:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/22/justice/knockout-game-teen-assaults/

I'm not surprise the UN is interested when the president of the United States goes around bragging about how many people he's droned -- including his own people, without trial.

Correction for the first link:

Electron Shape Measurement, Most Precise Yet, Rules Out New Physics Theories

American baristas' cans average around 34DD.

No, you're thinking of a rack. The can is on the other end.

I read somewhere that the first hospital they took him to did refuse. In the article I can find it's claimed that the hospital where the procedure was carried out was, in fact, not in the county specified by their warrant, and that the procedure was not carried out in the timeframe specified by the warrant; both of these, I suspect, are because the first hospital refused and they had to find another one. I have a feeling David Eckert's lawyer is chortling with glee over the failure to get a revised warrant :)

American baristas' cans average around 34DD.

Roger that:

• The Specter of Bankruptcy Haunts California
• Detroit’s Bankrupt. Is California Next?
• California Bankrupt
• Bankrupt San Bernardino in showdown with California pension fund over arrears
• Bankrupt Cities, Municipalities List and Map

As soon as you're done reviewing that information, plus what you can find with a simple Google query, kindly go fuck yourself.

"By your broken logic, a cop should be able to jam a camera up your ass since you might be carrying illegal narcotics up there."

Current cases studies on such:

"Last week, news wires, blogs and pundits lit up with the horrifying story of David Eckert, a New Mexico man who last January was subjected to a series of invasive and degrading drug search procedures after a traffic stop. The procedures, which included x-rays, digital anal penetration, enemas and a colonoscopy, were all performed without Eckert's consent..."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/11/anal-probes-and-the-drug-_n_4254600.html

Police are not part of the military (yet)

Oh, they crossed that line a long time ago. When they're buying armoured vehicles, and tanks for the streets of the U.S., I think we can safely drop the pretense. Just par for the course these days, sadly.

You ask ANY of the guys that are actually in the streets, or people that live in edge neighborhoods... crime is going up and going up rapidly.

Perception of crime may be going up. Fear of crime may be going up. Actual crime is going down.

--this is probably, however, simply a function of the aging of the population rather than the effects of policies. The largest component of crime is teenagers and early twenties.

99% of what you hear from your local,state or federal government is 100% BS to simply calm you down.

Unfortunately, when you dismiss all data that disagrees with what you have already decided to believe, you can never learn anything.

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2012/june/crimes_061112/
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0524/US-crime-rate-is-down-six-key-reasons
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/29/justice/us-violent-crime/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-dimond/crime-reduction_b_2878003.html

If crime rates are going down, then why is my local police getting military grade equipment and gear? Cripes for the last sports event here they had M16 machine guns in the open and wearing full military armor.

The equipment used by police departments has no relationship to the amount of crime.

A quick google search tells me Michelle Obama graduated from Princeton in 1981

Michelle Obama '85 . . . graduated from Princeton in 1985 . . . that is what the '85 behind her name means:
http://dailyprincetonian.com/tag/michelle-obama-85/
https://www.princeton.edu/pr/pwb/volume98/issue10/obama/
http://globalcomment.com/michelle-obama-princeton-do-the-hard-work-yourself/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/27/michelle-obama-skips-mile_n_553125.html

Your link, please . . . ?

"Just the facts, Ma'am . . . just the facts . . . " -- Sgt. Joe Friday

Oh, and as to them not knowing each other . . . they were both very active members of the Third World Center at Princeton, a group for minorities . . . and when they say minority at Princeton . . . they mean it with the full sense of the word. The university let them use an old boathouse for their meetings.

Yeah, like when they represented one of their customers' killers in a lawsuit:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/14/comedian-matt-fishers-tum_n_1775191.html

Guess what they are going to do with all that data they collected on you?

"Your honor and members of the jury, we have proof that so-and-so has a history of being a negligent driver. In November of 2013, they exceeded the speed limit by 20 mph, and drove on the shoulder (you were going around an accident and were directed by a police officer)."

Well, it took me a while to find any link at all, but you apparently missed the fact that Schmuckerberg claims that privacy is no longer a social norm. He testified before either Congress or the Senate, I can't remember which, to tell them exactly that. Did the guy sell out every American? Absolutely. But hey, he's rich, so that is what really matters. I really wish someone would post a shitload of private information about this idiot including a video of him masturbating, because by his own claim, he is fine with that.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/obama-marijuana-raids-rolling-stone_n_1451744.html

He's been making these same promises since before he was elected. And he keeps finding ways to *increase* prosecution while saying "That's not what I promised" whenever questioned.

US prisons are full because it is profitable for the companies that run them. If crime drops enough, then they will find a way to keep them full anyway, and a surveillance/police state is a guarantee that they will succeed at that.

everything that does anything similar is illegal... just look at weed...

Weed's only illegal because you ALLOW it to be.
Washington and Colorado have made it not illegal, Oregon and Alaska likely to to follow soon, with a whole raft of other states after that

So instead of whining about it, start collecting signatures.

Personally, I'd rather drink than smoke.

Maine put in a floating wind turbine this summer. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/04/us-floating-wind-turbine-maine_n_3380208.html but Maine's governor recently wrecked an expansion of offshore wind there as well. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/15/maine-offshore-wind-project_n_4101271.html

Maine put in a floating wind turbine this summer. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/04/us-floating-wind-turbine-maine_n_3380208.html but Maine's governor recently wrecked an expansion of offshore wind there as well. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/15/maine-offshore-wind-project_n_4101271.html

Yeah, crazy how that ends up making the US "....World Giving Index: US Ranked Most Charitable Country On Earth"

...In its second annual study of 153 countries, the Charity Aid Foundation concluded that the U.S. has demonstrated "strong" behavior across all three criteria measured -- volunteering, helping strangers and donating money. The U.S. has increased its charity by 3 percentage points this year, up to $212 billion.

"The point to leave with American leaders is the world really needs America; it needs its generosity, its resource and spirit, and though times are really hard, this is the time we need to keep giving as much as we possibly can," Richard Harrison, director of research at the UK-based Charities Aid Foundation told The NonProfit Times.

Ireland and Australia trailed behind the U.S. in giving, but the study noted that the most affluent countries aren't necessarily the most philanthropic. Only five of the countries featured in the World Bank's top 20 GDP made to the Charity Aid Foundation's top 20 list.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/19/world-giving-index-us-ran_n_1159562.html

Not sure how you get "quite low" or "quite selfish" out of that?

And the Kardashians!

Oh and Honey Boo Boo!

And the schools!

We've become a nation of self-gratifying, illiterate dip-shits who would much rather not be informed and learn about an issue and take the time to vote or to become involved even when your liberty is at stake. Human nature being what it is, It's easier to panic and pray that the leaders we elect can actually lead and take everything they say at face value. Unfortunately for the rest of us, your { congressman | senator | president } is senile or so wrapped up in pandering to big campaign contributors or party interests that they have little stake in protecting your liberty; for them it's all about getting re-elected. That's why when things like the patriot act come along we all say "it's a good thing because it will protect me from all the terrorists out there." "Terrorists are bad mmkay?" and the spin doctors go on all the news talk shows that drone on and on about issues like Benghazi and then suddenly shift to Obamacare because Benghazi is so like last year dude! Because you don't become involved and you keep voting that party line you suddenly realize now that you have to have a virtual strip search just to board a plane or that TSA agents will stop you getting off of a train and search you. Why? Because those terrorists are bad people and they hate us so you have to give up your privacy and your liberty in order to win the war on terror. And all the while you hear "we're winning!" That's right, we're winning and just because every new drone strike creates more hatred and more enemies for us to kill, we'll be able to keep this war up as long as necessary or until we can't sell anymore bonds to pay for it all. Because we're "in a war" we'll then create more government bureaucracy and will give money to your local law enforcement so they can all dress up like jackbooted Nazis with sub-machine guns!

So keep watching the Kardashians and just leave your safety to those folks you elect, who get re-elected over 70% of the time, who you've probably never met, who have staff that create talking points that become sound bites, that play video poker during important hearings, that lie to you about keeping your health insurance, who really were "C" students in college and were drunk all the time, who receive all that money from special interests that feed off of your tax dollars, who hand feed pieces of legislation they never read already written up so they really don't have to work and slap their name on it, who pass legislation because it's so massive "You just have to pass it to see what's in it" and because they go through special lines at the airport and don't get nudeo scans.

And the Kardashians!

Oh and Honey Boo Boo!

And the schools!

We've become a nation of self-gratifying, illiterate dip-shits who would much rather not be informed and learn about an issue and take the time to vote or to become involved even when your liberty is at stake. Human nature being what it is, It's easier to panic and pray that the leaders we elect can actually lead and take everything they say at face value. Unfortunately for the rest of us, your { congressman | senator | president } is senile or so wrapped up in pandering to big campaign contributors or party interests that they have little stake in protecting your liberty; for them it's all about getting re-elected. That's why when things like the patriot act come along we all say "it's a good thing because it will protect me from all the terrorists out there." "Terrorists are bad mmkay?" and the spin doctors go on all the news talk shows that drone on and on about issues like Benghazi and then suddenly shift to Obamacare because Benghazi is so like last year dude! Because you don't become involved and you keep voting that party line you suddenly realize now that you have to have a virtual strip search just to board a plane or that TSA agents will stop you getting off of a train and search you. Why? Because those terrorists are bad people and they hate us so you have to give up your privacy and your liberty in order to win the war on terror. And all the while you hear "we're winning!" That's right, we're winning and just because every new drone strike creates more hatred and more enemies for us to kill, we'll be able to keep this war up as long as necessary or until we can't sell anymore bonds to pay for it all. Because we're "in a war" we'll then create more government bureaucracy and will give money to your local law enforcement so they can all dress up like jackbooted Nazis with sub-machine guns!

So keep watching the Kardashians and just leave your safety to those folks you elect, who get re-elected over 70% of the time, who you've probably never met, who have staff that create talking points that become sound bites, that play video poker during important hearings, that lie to you about keeping your health insurance, who really were "C" students in college and were drunk all the time, who receive all that money from special interests that feed off of your tax dollars, who hand feed pieces of legislation they never read already written up so they really don't have to work and slap their name on it, who pass legislation because it's so massive "You just have to pass it to see what's in it" and because they go through special lines at the airport and don't get nudeo scans.

Just wait until it starts working and healthy working people realize how much they're going to have to spend to subsidize all the lower-income and non-workers.

Uh, realize this first - before this they were ALREADY subsidized. Just in stupidly inefficient and terrible ways.

They go to ER and wait till they are sick enough for ER to treat them. Guess who pays[1] for that? Not them, they don't have money. Guess how expensive that is compared to treating them earlier at a GP or not at ER stage at least?

Or they commit a crime to go to prison and get healthcare treatment or just to get food and shelter. Yes people actually do that. Go google it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/02/on-purposely-getting-arrested-to-get-life-saving-surgery/273282/
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/nc-man-allegedly-robs-bank-health-care-jail/story?id=13887040
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/27/timothy-alsip-robs-bank-healthcare_n_3825492.html
Think about how expensive that is - getting the bank, cops, courts, prisons, hospitals and who knows who else involved.

Whether you like it or not if you pay taxes or insurance premiums you have already been paying for it. It's just been done in a very very inefficient and stupid way. Unless you wish to do mass euthanizations you are going to have to pay for it one way or another.

This "Frankenstein Monster" of Obamacare is not that efficient either but you can thank stupid selfish citizens like you and equally self-serving politicians for that who give voters like you what they want (which given rather polarized and conflicting wants creates mutated monsters like ObamaCare).

Careful - maybe one day 3rd world people like me who are smarter and cheaper than you will take YOUR jobs. Then you may realize you might need those subsidies after all. Or maybe you're one of the rich elites who don't have to worry about such "small problems".

The sad thing is the corrupt greedy politicians in my 3rd world country are trying to make our healthcare crappier- they've siphoned out billions of money so have to make up by cutting out stuff elsewhere.

[1] if you ever need ER treatment you also pay in ERs being less efficient, or even being closed down because of $$$. Google for: ERs closed down.

There are some more recent numbers than those.

Try this list of what is in McNuggets:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/24/chicken-nugget-ingredients_n_4153520.html

If you honestly read that and still order McNuggets, then your brain isn't working right. They are garbage and shouldn't be sold as "food".

Those particular numbers come from a Pew Environment Group report from January:

http://www.pewenvironment.org/news-room/other-resources/new-scientific-report-shows-pacific-bluefin-tuna-population-down-964-percent-85899441247

Complete with various articles discussing it:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jan/09/overfishing-pacific-bluefin-tuna
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/10/pacific-bluefin-tuna-overfishing_n_2448967.html

Here's a page designed by someone who misses Geocities that talks about the Atlantic stocks which includes several graphs showing the decline since the 60s and 70s:

http://www.bigmarinefish.com/bluefin.html

I would highly recommend that you watch the documentary End Of The Line. The data that they show and the conclusions that they reach are pretty difficult to argue against. The world and its oceans look like a massive, massive place that we cannot possibly influence. But, as they say in the movie, we are fighting a war against fish, and we are winning. If we keep doing what we're doing then there will in fact come a day when we won't have any more fish to eat. The scary thing is that it looks like that day is coming really soon. Things like the jellyfish swarms should be a red alert alarm that we have a major problem on our hands, but there are always going to be people who look at those concerned with the low levels of fish in the ocean and write those peoples and their opinions off as some sort of environmental fanaticism. Unfortunately, this is reality.

You are swallowing a line of bullshit propaganda rather uncritically.

Texas is in fact doing quite well. As Rick Perry bragged, one-third of all jobs created in the whole USA were created in Texas, which doesn't have anywhere near one-third of the population of the whole USA.

http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2013/may/09/rick-perry/rick-perry-says-texas-accounted-33-percent-nations/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carnegie-corporation-of-new-york/texas-immigrants-and-econ_b_3745379.html

So a liberal newspaper might be looking for complaints about Texas ("first in the amount of carbon emissions") but the unemployment rate is significantly below the rate of the USA. Business is doing better and individuals are doing better compared to the rest of the USA.

http://bizbeatblog.dallasnews.com/2013/04/texas-lost-jobs-in-march-unemployment-rate-remains-the-same-at-6-4-percent.html/

how fucking busy could the Governor actually be, except for executing people and fund raising.

Who cares? Texas is doing well as a state. Maybe the USA would do better if the President did less stuff. Let's try it!

Man-made global warming is "promoted" by scientists with hard evidence

Three words: Hide The Decline. However you spin that, the credibility of "hard evidence" is in pieces even if you didn't know, that the most famous promoter of the idea has recently purchased a major piece of real estate on the coast — rather than in, say, Colorado mountains. When he sells that and moves higher in-land, wake me up to reconsider.

Meanwhile, scratching the surface of any remaining promoter of the idea, that "something must be done" — like giving the government ever more control over our lives — is bound to reveal a Che Guevara T-shirt underneath...

Green on the outside, red on the inside — watermelons...

What lawbreaking was revealed?

Your ignorance of infants being shot in the head, among many other crimes, is not our problem.

The NSA had permission to do what they where doing.

You mean when Congress specifically defunded Total Information Awareness only for the executive branch to do it anyway under a different name?

It's congress you need to direct your Ire at, not a legally operating agency.

Garbage. That there is plenty of blame to go around does nothing to change the fact that those who actually commit an act are actually most responsible for it. And how, exactly, is Congress supposed to stop what they don't know about? More than one senator or member of Congress has said they learn about the activities of the NSA from newspapers before being briefed by the administration.

So you argument breaks down to an Ad Hom? you lose.

You wish. Dismissing whistleblowers for arbitrary reasons - in this case the 'leaking indiscriminately' lie, since the information was given to responsible media organizations - is attacking the messenger without addressing the message. And we have a term for that: ad hominem.

The NSA was acting legally.

Bad-faced lie. See above about the defunding of TIA. You might also want to read up on the 4th Amendment.

Snowden and Manning both suffer from over inflated belief that they are important.

Without Snowden or Manning we wouldn't know about any of this. "We" includes members of Congress, since they are left out of the loop.

"And how about that child sex trafficking by American contractors in Afghanistan? "
and how does the pertain to this argument?

Could we get some more intelligent trolls here please? By focusing all your attention on the procedural rules violated by whisteblowers - designed to stifle whisleblowing - and not on the crimes revealed you out yourself as a mindless authoritarian hack. Because anyone who's not a sociopath would demanding that contractors that traded children to war lords to be used as sex slaves would demanding that they be prosecuted before, and for far longer terms, than any whisteblowers.

But you guys don't do that. Which is why you out yourselves as mindless authoritarian hacks.

Then this should be easy, Slick: who'd he spy for?
Apparently every friendly and enemy nation in the world.

Apparently you answered the question: he's even remotely close to being a spy.

In my opinion all the below have been for good, in particular operation Tunisia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Tunisia

http://www.examiner.com/article/anonymous-exposes-pedophile-ring-hacks-lolita-city

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/02/anonymous_vs_scientology_partner/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Payback#Operation_Avenge_Assange

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/westboro-baptist-church-hacked-anonymous-protest-newtown-shooting-victims-funerals_n_2315070.html

There is no such thing as "objective media", but there is a definite and unsubtle difference between media that are influenced by the government in a democratic state, and media that run errands on behalf of a dictator. I'll let you figure out which is which in this case. It ain't very hard.

Your naivete is cute.

And that's simply what it boils down to: Techs are really bad at self marketing. We still mostly rely on getting the job done and getting it done well and hoping that people will notice. Bullshit, people don't care. People only listen to the loudmouth who keeps tooting his own horn.

It's like something I keep telling my wife over and over when she complains about workplace gossip:
People believe what they're told.

It doesn't matter what you tell people; if you tell them that the Grim Reaper himself chased you while you were at some park, they'll believe you just as long as they personally know you. They won't ask questions challenging the veracity of your story, they'll just accept that whatever you claim is real. Likewise, if they run around telling people that you're "hostile" towards them, even if you have no interaction with them at all, they'll believe this and rally to that person's side against you. People believe what they're told. And so it goes with management goons: they tell everyone how important they are, and people believe them.

For example: Not one word about the anti-NSA protests in US media. Still.

Your news gathering skills are....poor to say the least.

USA Today: Anti-NSA rally attracts thousands to march in Washington http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/26/nsa-dc-rally/3241417/

Huffington Post: NSA 'Stop Watching Us' Protest Draws Thousands In Washington http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/26/nsa-stop-watching-us_n_4166640.html

US News and Word Report: Edward Snowden Endorses D.C. Protest Against NSA in Rare Public Statement http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/10/24/edward-snowden-endorses-dc-protest-against-nsa-in-rare-public-statement

Christian Science Monitor: NSA Washington: March against surveillance and a call from Edward Snowden http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2013/1026/NSA-Washington-March-against-surveillance-and-a-call-from-Edward-Snowden-photos

CNN: Anti-NSA rally targets Washington http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/26/anti-nsa-rally-targets-washington/

Fox News: Hundreds rally in DC to protest NSA http://video.foxnews.com/v/2772548586001/hundreds-rally-in-dc-to-protest-nsa/

NBC News: Hundreds march at anti-NSA rally in DC http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/53383405

CBS News: Protesters March For Investigation Into Mass NSA Spying http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2013/10/26/protesters-march-for-investigation-into-mass-nsa-spying/

ABC News: NSA Spying Threatens to Hamper US Foreign Policy http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/nsa-spying-threatens-hamper-us-foreign-policy-20689770

Washington Post: Techies concerned over NSA surveillance will march in D.C., proclaiming ‘Stop Watching Us’ http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/techies-concerned-over-nsa-surveillance-will-march-in-dc-proclaiming-stop-watching-us/2013/10/25/5bedb546-3da7-11e3-b7ba-503fb5822c3e_story.html

This is where I get tired of pasting, but I assure you the list goes on and on.

He'd die of old age.

The nearest black hole is 1600 light-years away. If our astronaught started to journey thence, at the beginning of the Bronze age, it would be conceivable that he'd arrive there sometime in the next couple hundred years - using the fastest of feasibly extrapolated propulsion technologies. This of course, supposing those could have existed after the retreat f European ice-sheets.

Any other planned method to acquire more rapid proximity to a black hole, probably wouldn't work out, either...

The US is using its national intelligence agencies to obtain intelligence on terrorists trying to kill people.

Yes, and obtaining intelligence on political movements like Occupy Wall Street.

The intelligence agencies themselves don't have police powers.

Oh? What's that you say? TFA is about warrantless surveillance undertaken by the FBI, which is the federal agency with explicit domestic police powers.

The suspect in this case is accused of assisting a terrorist group.

Under the USA PATRIOT Act, providing "material support" to a terrorist group can be as simple as expressing support for it. And having a terrorism suspect browse your web site is enough to spark a secret investigation of your organization which scares away many of the donors who keep it in operation.

East Germany's secret police had both an intelligence function and police powers.

The FBI, Secret Service, Drug Enforcement Agency, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, at least, are agencies with police powers and intelligence operations. Heck, even the NYPD is in on the deal.

Their primary purpose was to keep the East German Communist party in power.

Given that NSA snooping hasn't indisputably foiled even a single terrorist plot, and the FBI instigated virtually all of the "terrorist" plots they've busted, I have to wonder what is the primary purpose of these agencies. Surely not to intimidate political dissidents!

You could be arrested and imprisoned for such things as making jokes about the nation's leadership, wanting to form a new political party,

Here in the U.S., they've at least figured out that making jokes about the leadership is essentially harmless and does nothing to erode their power. If people started to rise up to challenge them, we might see that change; the architecture of oppression is in place. As for forming a new political party, it does no harm to talk of it, because it's essentially impossible due to the laws in most areas which protect the two incumbent parties.

being a member of an unapproved church,

Like a mosque?

trying to leave the country without permission (could get you shot on the spot)

It won't get you shot, but you apparently can't leave without permission. The U.S. apparently has more finesse than East Germany did.

and many other possible infractions.

There are plenty of other infractions that'll get you in trouble, like walking while black,

So you are advocating that journalists keep all their data on computer because we all know that if data is encrypted that computers are impregnable fortresses of data security -NOT. When data brokerage services, hundreds of U.S. companies, the Iranian nuclear program, and banks are hacked, botnets run wild, not to mention the NSA spying I would argue that even if you had an IT security department you might be safer keeping only paper records.

I don't doubt the code can be repaired with enough effort. [But] the real code running the show (the legalese in the ACA law) may have a fatal flaw in it

As you recognized, law too is code. Get enough Democrats into state legislatures and they might have a chance of reversing REDMAP, the RSLC's organized redistricting effort that produced the inkblot-shaped districts that turned a Democratic popular vote into a Republican majority in the House of Representatives, which should make it possible to patch this bug in PPACA.

Ad hominem attacks. I'm not a right winger. I'm a Libertarian.

Your butthurt is noted, because Libertarians are right wingers. Whatever you gain in opposing prohibition or drone wars you more than make up for in opposing any attempts to make people more important than corporate profits.

You'll note that in Canada and Mexico people are opting for private insurance precisely because the government run single-payer system is frequently not covering these costs.

What I said the first time: you'd be rattling off how this single payer country doesn't cover cancer treatments, and that one doesn't cover organ transplants. You don't because you can't. Rich people paying more because they can doesn't cut it.

They save your life and then you go bankrupt, precisely as I said. You're the one who is lying.

You're so far off base you're off planet. Emergency care is not continuing care. People, like diabetics, need continuing care to survive. This isn't rocket science. And, there's the triffling fact that the ER is the most expensive medical care you can possibly get.

And they don't harass you forever. Once you declare bankruptcy, the bill is absolved.

Your ignorance of the debt collection industry is not my problem. The hospital doesn't have to be an unscrupulous entity that ignores the law, the agency that buys the debt from said hospital takes care of that.

You mean like the President

Like I said, right wingers.

who repeatedly said he wants a single-payer system

Ignorance or sophistry? He said that a long time ago when he was a state senator. As a presidential candidate he kicked single payer to the curb, with the nonsense about 'designing a system from scratch'. As president, he dishonestly talked about how "any bill I sign must contain a public option" months after he had already traded it away to the hospital lobby.

What he describes exists in Canada and Mexico, where only the rich get the best care.

You're trying to have your own set of facts to go with your opinion, again. Otherwise known as lying, because otherwise you'd be talking about how those people are spending more money for worse care. You aren't because you can't.

Sorry, but you are confused. Progressive lobbyists helped the Democrats write that bill. Republicans had nothing to do with it. (Are you going to call the President of the Center For American Progress* (a fellow "progressive") a liar when she claims credit for her work?

Sorry, repeating Big Lies doesn't make them true, it just makes you a bigger and more pathetic liar. The mandate has been a Republican idea for decades, and that's just a fact you'll have to deal with. As well as Romneycare literally being the inspiration for Obamacare. You'll have to deal with that as well.

Are you going to claim with a straight face that the progressive (not to be confused with Obamabots) position was the mandate? This on some planet where progressives didn't want single payer, and then the public option as a compromise?

That would be difficult for you to do since I'm simply relying on the facts.

A bigger and more pathetic liar. Heritage had no problem with Romneycare, for years. Pretending their about-face has nothing to with partisan politics is as absurd as pretending that Obama's election had nothing to do with anti-war Democrats turning into supporters of drones in January 2009.

Sounds like one of the annual half dozen food recalls for e-coli here in the US, Captain Anecdote.

Really? Cholera reportedly kills 15, sickens hundreds in eastern Cuba [miamiherald.com]

Really, you can't read? Murika: ecoli sickens people in 5 states.

I cannot believe that the Feds would do anything to hurt a whistleblower. After all, this text still appears (despite scurrilous reports to the contrary) on the Obama/Biden campaign website:

• Protect Whistleblowers: Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled. We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance. Barack Obama will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government. Obama will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process.

The politician said it, I believe it, that settles it.

Yes, we've had LED traffic signals here for years, and I've only seen them obstructed by snow once. You need a wet, sticky snow and a swift drop in temperature for it to happen. IINM they put remote-controlled heaters in the newer ones.

And it seldom snows upwards. I don't think I've ever seen it snow upwards.

Check the image in this article from a few years ago...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/16/led-traffic-lights-that-c_n_393769.html

From http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2013/10/us-denies-tapping-merkel-mobile-phone-20131023185133142198.html ---

US President Barack Obama had assured German Chancellor Angela Merkel that the US is not monitoring her communications, according to the White House spokesman.

From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24647268

The White House said President Obama had told Chancellor Merkel the US was not snooping on her communications.

"The United States is not monitoring and will not monitor the communications of the chancellor," White House spokesman Jay Carney said on Wednesday.

From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/merkel-phone-tapped_n_4150812.html

For its part, the White House denied that the U.S. is listening in on Merkel's phone calls now.

"The president assured the chancellor that the United States is not monitoring and will not monitor the communications of the chancellor," White House spokesman Jay Carney said. "The United States greatly values our close cooperation with Germany on a broad range of shared security challenges."

Maybe when he said U.S. he actually meant us, as in him & his wife? Or that will be his next excuse?

From http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2013/10/us-denies-tapping-merkel-mobile-phone-20131023185133142198.html ---

US President Barack Obama had assured German Chancellor Angela Merkel that the US is not monitoring her communications, according to the White House spokesman.

From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24647268

The White House said President Obama had told Chancellor Merkel the US was not snooping on her communications.

"The United States is not monitoring and will not monitor the communications of the chancellor," White House spokesman Jay Carney said on Wednesday.

From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/merkel-phone-tapped_n_4150812.html

For its part, the White House denied that the U.S. is listening in on Merkel's phone calls now.

"The president assured the chancellor that the United States is not monitoring and will not monitor the communications of the chancellor," White House spokesman Jay Carney said. "The United States greatly values our close cooperation with Germany on a broad range of shared security challenges."

Huh? Erosion of Trust? Are you familiar with the Organized Labor movement in most countries? It's fraught with conflict and violence. I will give you an example of how things go.

Let me give you a quick refresher. Jan 29, 1933 Ford employs the use of Strike Breakers. http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1129&dat=19330130&id=z_8MAAAAIBAJ&sjid=YGkDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2487,5787301

in April, 1941 more violence with Ford.. http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=7-RfAAAAIBAJ&sjid=IgMGAAAAIBAJ&pg=4483,1409316&dq=ford+hires+strike&hl=en

PATCO workers in a sick out in 1970.. http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10C14FD3E5A157493C5A9178FD85F448785F9

Organized labor exists because workers aren't happy with their working conditions. Unfortunately over the last 30 years with the decline in US manufacturing and with concerted efforts by companies to keep unions out, we're seeing a reduced influence by Unions in general. With growing wage disparity however, we'll probably see a resurgence in the movement. In fact, recently we've seen it with Walmart and McDonalds workers and it's been openly encouraged by the past few administrations. More and more states are pushing for Right to Work laws, which on the surface may seem good but that also makes workers more of a commodity by driving out unions, rather than a vital part of any organization.

So, when you say erosion of trust, I'd like to know exactly what era, or company you're talking about because when you work for somebody else, you're a cog in the machine and they'll do whatever they want with you within the definition of the law. If you're in a Right to Work state, you can get fired without cause so don't expect any kind of trust to be developed there.

While I don't agree with tracking employees, I think it's a natural problem we have with privacy. Privacy in this country is eroding faster than a sand castle at high tide and unless we start pushing on our elected officials to get legislation that protects us form these kinds of things, well companies will do all kinds of things that by lack of decree, they'll be able to do and you won't be able to stop it. Even in Norway, companies are using such novel ideas like bathroom alarms limiting you to 8 minutes per day.... Think of how that works for your rights and your trust with your employer.

I can only assume the reason the CFAA doesn't apply is that these systems don't "connect" to the vehicles' devices is any meaningful way, but rather merely passively listen to them as they go by.

Naa, even "receiving" passive unencrypted broadcast signals that are intended to be sent to everyone around is illegal. Remember Google doing the exact same thing?

Google, in seeking a dismissal, claimed it is was not illegal to intercept data from unencrypted, or non-password-protected Wi-Fi networks. Google said open Wi-Fi networks are "radio communications" like AM/FM radio, citizens' band and police and fire bands, and are "readily accessible" to the general public and exempt from the Wiretap Act - a position the appeals court rejected. Today's decision means that Google's main defense to wiretapping allegations is out the door.

quote

The only difference is if you work for law enforcement or not. If you don't, the CFAA applies and you committed a felony. If you do however, none of the laws apply and thus it is legal.

Even the crime of out right murder is legal if you work for law enforcement. Of course the CFAA, which covers a lesser crime, won't apply either.

Damn he is looking healthier, has amazing compatibility luck, could there be anyone lower on any recipient list. His ability to buy a heart as needed, wow, I wish all US could get such good affordable medical care. At his age being on the top of a transplant list in the USA is unusual, maybe he went to China to get a transplant. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/24/dick-cheney-heart-transplant_n_1377487.html
Did anyone investigate, or ask during any interview?