Slashdot Mirror

Why can't you have tweets that are much longer - say 2000 words, or a whole magazine article?

You can. It's called posting your article on a pastebin, wiki, blog, or other site, and linking it in a Tweet. TwitLonger is a pastebin specifically for Twitter users. Or if it's your own site, the Twitter Cards feature lets you add <meta> elements to control how the link appears.

Don't post images of text. Use TwitLonger.

It's a pretty withering unpacking of the NYTs crappy agenda journalism: http://www.twitlonger.com/show...

Journalism always tends to include responses or critiques to assertions. Particularly when those responses are from the groups in question. Here is Wikileaks response to this nonsense.

Seems a bit odd to me. to say:

They investigated, verified the times and locations, and asked him about them. When he didn't provide a satisfactory response, or in fact any response,

Citation? You ask others for it constantly, so I'm sure you have several.

I think this provides a counterexample:

I want to be clear: the accusations of criminal sexual misconduct against me are entirely false.

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1soorlp

Flat out denying the accusations is.. a response, right?

I'm inclined to say "meh", let Jacob step out of the project and leave it at that. The project is bigger than him, and he's done some stuff that I don't think belongs in tech conferences. Criminal? Let the courts decide, I'll assume he's innocent until then.

"I personally know some of the people that came forward, they had no agenda other than stopping a serial sexual predator / harrasser."

That sure as fuck isn't what I'm reading STRAIGHT FROM A SUPPOSED VICTIM'S MOUTH.

Tor has the right to terminate their employees pursuant to their contracts. They do not need to go to a court of law. Why do ACs not understand this?

Because they're making a claim of criminal guilt and doing and end run around our legal system to slime this gentleman and ruin his life via a public shaming mob with no evidence, just claims that have been proven to be lies.

What is "sexual mistreatment"? I can't find any info in the article, or the link within that was purported to contain more information.

Given that this kind of accusation can permanently prevent someone from finding work in their field, I find these articles--lacking details, with no formal legal proceedings--troubling.

Well, one of the examples is detailed here. Basically three Social Justice Warriors saw him speaking to a member of the superior gender and she was upset, ergo he must be a monster for speaking out of turn.

Except that's not what happened at all, they were speaking on a woman's behalf without permission and completely (and intentionally) misrepresented the facts.

Reading this highly distorted version of my experience, which is being used as one of the “bulletproof examples” of Jacob’s alleged misbehavior, I can’t help but wonder.

Wonder about all the stories that have been published the last days.
Wonder not only about mob justice on twitter, caused by rumors and speculation, but also about the accounts repeated by those who call themselves journalists.
Wonder about how many other stories have been willingly misinterpreted.
Wonder about the witnesses in all these stories, who coincidentally always seem to consist of the same set of people.
Wonder about their motive to speak on my behalf without my consent.

Oh, and almost every other complaint has the same three SJWs as the "witnesses."

It's a lynch mob, pure and simple.

I had absolutely no idea that Shari Steele and the Tor Project Administration was a court of law!

Oh wait, they're not? Fascinating!

But boy howdy, you gotta admire their moxie. After all they did their own little investigation and found him guilty all by themselves. No pesky evidence or defense lawyers needed -- just enough harpies claiming victimization (but not enough to actually go to the police) and you too can destroy someone's life forever. ... ESPECIALLY interesting since one of the "victims" later pointed out that she wasn't a victim, it was a bunch of SJWs speaking on her behalf without permission to create a lynch mob towards Jacob...

(Although I have it on good authority she's suffering from internalized misogyny and thus you should believe the 3rd party witnesses over her statements, because Third Wave Feminists represent all women, even women who don't want to be represented by them. ESPECIALLY those kinds of women.)

Remember there was an active attempt to frame Linus Torvalds with sexual assault allegations. Around the same time you saw these types trying to push codes of conduct that were backdoors to get editorial control over projects they were targeting.

So everyone needs to be a tiny bit wary when hearing stories like this, especially when you see these SJW style shame lynch mob tactics used. No evidence, mobbing tactics, public shaming, threatening people who question the narrative, and demanding reparations for perceived slights in the form of policy changes and increased decision making power to their political allies. It's a playbook that targets some known exploits in our culture -- namely that everyone's hesitant to demand evidence of an overly emotional woman, and everyone's first response is to beat up whomever she's pointing at and ask questions later.

If there are actual allegations, they need to be taken to a court of law. If they won't hold up in a court of law, recognize it for what it is -- bitchy ex girlfriends wanting to slander an ex boyfriend they're mad at. Don't let the Kangaroo Court bullshit that's infested our campuses start leaking out into the real world.

And if you want to implement an "anti-harassment" policy for your project: Don't. It's a stupid fucking idea leading to drama and abuse by lesser minds.

If you are really looking for a nice Code of Conduct, aim for the Code of Merit - because as ESR has so adamantly pointed out, "We must constantly demand merit – performance, intelligence, dedication, and technical excellence – of ourselves and each other."

SJW Codes of Conduct like the Orwellian Contributor Covenant by Coraline Ada Ehmke (who is tied to Model View Culture, which is ran by white supremacist "feminist" Shanley Kane, which is also tied to the Ada Initiative's two founders, which was the group attempting to frame Linus for rape...) are nothing more than a way to backdoor losers like Ehmke and her ilk into projects they don't deserve access to.

Regardless of the he-said/she-said of this whole thing, the part that I think would be of most interest of slashdotter's is Zoe Quinn's use of the DMCA to quash discussion about this situation which she did not like. Regardless of the truth of the matter, the fact that she did this (to me) speaks volumes about her character. Total Biscuit can summarize this better than I can, and also has a very levelheaded take on the situation :

Total Biscuit TwitLonger "What the Hell Just Happened"

What do you mean "the" author, Slick? He cited four. Greenwald also went on to cite how Klamberg was contradicting himself all over the place.

Next excuse for the inexcusable?

A reporter worried that Assange would risk killing Afghans who had co-operated with American forces if he put US secrets online without taking the basic precaution of removing their names. "Well, they're informants," Assange replied. "So, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it."

The reporter that attributed those words to Assange is David Leigh. A well known liar, the type of person that breaks contract then lies about it, David Leigh also has been called out out by an independent third party journalist for fabricating those words:

"However, an independent witness – John Goetz, a journalist with Der Spiegel – states that the events related above are simply not true:"

"“I was at dinner at the Moro restaurant in London, along with Marcel Rosenbach from Der Spiegel, David Leigh and Declan Walsh of the Guardian, and Julian Assange of WikiLeaks. Patrick Forbes asked me specifically if Julian Assange had made the remark “They’re informants, they deserve to die” at the dinner, as has been alleged by David Leigh, and I told him that Julian did not say that at the dinner.”"

David Leigh' s systematic pattern of dishonesty.

But you know all this already, don't you Cold Fjord. By calling out your FUD with some facts and counter examples you will feebly defend as you have done in your last post by accusing any detractors from your message of being "fans" or part of some cult. Anything other than, you know, actually addressing the facts or providing solid counter evidence.

So now you have been informed that David Leighs account is highly questionably including credible independent third party witnesses, and that David Leigh has a long history of dishonesty on other non Assange related areas - yet I can guarantee you will be back here with the same ferver like agenda, the same libel Assange quote on the next Wikileaks story. No matter how many times we demonstrate some of your more crazy ideas to be false, you persist on repeating over and again the same falehoods - damn the facts and eternally ignore any counter evidence presented. One can see this clearly time and again across many topics only by browsing your post history and the subsequent replies. Rinse, repeat. This is the classical modus operandi of a troll, a shill and a astroturfer. Facts do not matter.

via Glenn Greenwald:

Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald)

Posted Tuesday 12th March 2013 from Twitlonger

The Progressive Mind (in some hyper-partisan precients):

(1) Rand Paul holds numerous horrendous positions. Therefore, it is impermissible ever to agree with or support him on any one specific issue. The minute one agrees with him on any one issue, one is infected with all his other views, no matter how much one disagrees with those other views.

(2) Barack Obama not only holds numerous horrendous positions, but actually does numerous heinous things (eg http://is.gd/5tKFC4,http://is.gd/GrHG86, http://is.gd/FpAt7a, http://is.gd/kNa9D0, http://is.gd/CmXP4F). Nonetheless, it is not only permissible - but mandatory - to support him not just on an issue-by-issue basis but for his general empowerment. One is free to support him and cheer for him without being infected by any of his heinous views and actions with which one disagrees.

I would give a big prize to anyone who can come close to reconciling those lines of reasoning.

It's extremely simple: you support politicians in those instances when you agree with their views, and oppose them in those instances when you disagree with those views.

Literally, I could live to be 500 years old and never comprehend how so many progressives, who (by the way) reside in the reality-based community, are unwilling and/or unable to process this very basic proposition.

That is not the policy; G+ suspensions for common name only suspend from G+. This has always been the case.

Telling G+ you're under 13 would suspend your entire account until a parent/guardian confirmed consent and verified their age. Additionally, there was a high-profile case of a site-wide suspension, but that was because the account was flagged for child porn.

Google doesn't suspend Gmail and Picasa when it disables Google+ profile, only Google+ and unfortunately Google Reader gets suspended. And in case of Dylan - well, just don't put anything resembling child porno in Picasa, and you'd be ok.

I know that this goes beyond TFA, but in the TFA the following article is linked: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/bt5akp

Now he certainly got all his google services suspended or removed entirely, all due to an image automatically flagged on picasa. No human oversight, no appeals process or means of proving innocence. He was automatically assumed guilty and data being deleted, services terminated.

That sounds a little bit different from what you're describing.

You get up tomorrow and log into GMail. You can't get in. Your account is locked. Your mail, calendar, documents — all gone. What do you do now?

Remember that Google has no customer service, even for paying customers. If your account is locked for any reason, spurious or not, you're utterly fucked.

I keep a regular backup of my GMail. The official interface is IMAP, but GMail's IMAP implementation is really flaky (e.g. Thunderbird or mail.app won't suck everything down). The way to do this that actually works is with OfflineIMAP. It's command-line and geeky, but by crikey it works.

Using it on Ubuntu or Debian is absurdly simple:

• sudo apt-get install offlineimap
• Set up a ~/.offlineimaprc file cut'n'pasted from this one, with your own username and password.
• offlineimap

This will create a folder with all your mail in it, in mbox format (readable plain text). You will have duplicate messages in different folders. I'm just doing this to get an archive, so zipped the result.

GMail's IMAP interface is subtly broken, to the point where it can crash offlineimap. Just start it running again, repeat as often as necessary. (If you like, get a more current version.)

GMail is still the best email interface I've ever used, and I wish Thunderbird would just get the hint and clone it to the last detail. But this way I also have all my stuff myself, just because I can.

I haven't tried this on a Mac or Windows. Could someone do this and write up instructions?

For other Google services, you can get your data from Google Takeout. While your account's not locked.

Imagine if he'd had an android — all contacts, appointments, etc from his phone, gone.

And he did nothing wrong! (Though even if he did, I think loss of your personal data from your damned phone is too much). Why tempt fate and risk account deletion just to use a social network?

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/a9bdm4

it's been reported (and not disputed) that Julian opened a bank account using fictitious information and he also provided a false address to the British courts

He did not open a bank account using fictitious information. He used his lawyer's address because he did not live in Switzerland yet. And I never heard about him giving a false address to the British courts?

Press coverage today is more favorable to Wikileaks.

• BBC: "Pursuit of Wikileaks founder 'political'"
• The Times (London): "Backlash as Amazon pulls WikiLeaks server"
• The Guardian: "Julian Assange's lawyers say they are being watched"
• The Australian: "WikiLeaks reveals ugly truth"
• San Jose Mercury News: "O'Brien: Why we should applaud Wikileaks"
• The Atlantic: "Must-Read: NYT-Wikileaks on China and Google"
• Vancover Sun: "Wikileaks an indictment of diplomacy"

There's even talk that Assange might be Time's "Man of the Year".

Also, there are now 74 mirrors of Wikileaks.

as various media outlets have reported "the basis for the rape charge" purely seems to constitute a post-facto dispute over consensual, but unprotected sex days after the event. Both women have declared that they had consensual sexual relations with our client and that they continued to instigate friendly contact well after the alleged incidents. Only after the women became aware of each other's relationships with Mr. Assange did they make their allegations against him.

click

Oh @Maria! I #love you more than you will ever know! Together we shall live, watching kings come and go! (cont'd at http://twitlonger.com/)