Slashdot Mirror

"Thomas Gonzales was falsely accused of illegally downloading a movie on BitTorrent"

https://www.vocativ.com/381837...

This is the problem. You want to know why people turn these alerts off? Because they get woken up at 3AM and get told to look out for a gray car that's in the other side of the state. Yeah, sure, I might do that. Or I might turn the alerts off entirely and then miss one I might have been able to help on.

Beyond that, the effectiveness of Amber alerts is highly debatable. According to Engaget, less than 5% of mobile Amber alerts led to a rescued child. Even then, it's unclear that any Amber alert has ever actually saved a child. The majority of Amber alerts are issued in family custody cases, where the child's life was never in any real danger. Vocativ has a good (but broken) set of infographics about how effective they are.

Part of the problem is that the alert is too short (limited to 90 characters) and can't include links to details or images of the child of vehicle they want people to look out for.

There are ways to fix the Amber alert system - let them link to details and include pictures of the child, don't sound them if the phone is silenced because that just gets people to turn them off - but adding them to Netflix and Spotify won't help. (Although it's also unclear this bill includes Amber alerts - it may just be things like hurricane or flash flood warnings. Which seems like things you'd want to deal with at the device level rather than Netflix or Spotify.)

>Oh won't somebody think of the Children...

Well, somebody is

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/india-police-missing-children-facial-recognition-tech-trace-find-reunite-a8320406.html

Indian police trace 3,000 missing children in just four days using facial recognition technology

http://www.vocativ.com/news/427175/facial-recognition-lost-children/index.html

When Fu Gui was six, he was abducted on his way home from school in Chongqing, China. He was then trafficked to Quznahou, about 1,000 miles away, where he was sold to foster parents. Now, 27 years after he was taken from his family, he has been reunited with them. And it’s all thanks to the latest cross-age facial recognition technology from Chinese tech giant Baidu.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/facial-recognition-could-move-beyond-mug-shots-1522855817

When police found a senior citizen apparently suffering from Alzheimer’s missing from her family on Staten Island in 2014, officials took to technology.

I guess there are different types of anti GMO people :D
I'm only against GMO'ed food.

For what purpose? Because honestly, there is no rational reason to be opposed to it. Here's what GMO food can (and already does in many cases) do for us:

- Reduced need for landmass for farming. Increased need for agricultural landmass is the #1 reason this planet is losing forest areas.
- Reduced agricultural waste.
- Reduced need for insecticides.
- Reduced need for resources for farming, especially water.
- Increased nutritional value of food while reducing the toxicity. And yes, there is plenty of that in food already.
- Increased flavor of food without needing to add more of what you can do without (i.e. simple sugars.) Possibly reducing it even.

Apparently, Greenpeace doesn't like these things. They don't like saving lives either:

https://geneticliteracyproject...

So what's your beef with all of the above? Keep in mind, nearly all of the negatives you've heard are either outright lies or scientific fraud. There is zero evidence that GMO causes cancer, or any other negative health effect. All of the claims that GMO will "contaminate" wildlife have already been addressed. The claim that "GMO is dangerous because we don't know what it does, therefore it's probably dangerous and should be avoided" is so stupid it's laughable: With GMO, we know exactly what we're getting, whereas with natural breeding, there are millions of unknowns.

http://www.vocativ.com/272885/...
https://futurism.com/two-decad...

Honestly, there is no reason to be against it. You're basically the same as an anti-vaxxer, only you're targeting something else. Possibly you think natural is better, only it is a fact that natural is NOT better, and you rarely eat anything natural. For example, apples don't grow massively oversized and with much higher amounts of sugar than is needed in order for their seeds to consume and survive. It simply goes against the plant's survival, namely because producing all of that extra sugar consumes energy that wild plants are usually in short supply of. Human intervention is required for them to thrive in all but the most perfect growing conditions (which are rare to find.) The fact is, most plants you eat have been bred to be calorie dense enough for us to thrive on. In fact, they are themselves genetically modified, only the means is different.

Pro tip: Your body can't actually digest most natural plant matter, which means most wild plants are inedible for you. Disagree? Then here's a challenge: Go to your nearest wooded area and survive on only plant matter for a month. By the way: All of these little vegetarians and vegans who claim that humans evolved as herbivores are demonstrably false. In fact, there is no one place in the world that vegans can obtain all of the nourishment the human body needs; they can only live on their diet because of the technology available.

And: we want it labeled.

And this is the most ASSHOLE position to have, because it only serves one purpose: To stigmatize the product so that it can't sell. There really is no rational reason to demand to know if it's genetically modified even though this fact is immaterial to the food, while at the same time you don't seem interested in its heavy metal content, which IS a material fact. You're just an asshole for doing your best to make GMO produce unmarketable. Asshole.

Hence we have laws according to it in Europe ...

That's because Europe is stupid. Really, it is. Just as California is stupid for labeling cofee as carcinogenic (It has a ring of truth to it, but this is all relative. Practically everything you eat contains carcinogens, the question is just how much. And by the way, GMO can reduce said content.)

I bet they were considered anyway even if they made no serious legal argument whatsoever

from how Trumpcare (grandiose over a House vote that is Dead in the Senate)

Well, they gotta do something, obamacare is failing under its own weight, and many voted to get rid of the damned thing, this is him trying to keep election promises.

I'm going to put "Pass a pretend law that doesn't even work that merely checks off a list that gets buried in the morass on the Senate" as doing less than nothing.

It's just a pretend act, by a pretentious pompous turnip. If the ACA is failing, Trumpcare will do nothing to ameliorate it.

Muslim Ban (Even aside from the issues in court, the sudden implementation was flawed)

Hmm...he was wanting to restrict travel from a small subset of countries with heavy terrorist activity, that was largely the same list the Obama administration restricted for awhile when he was in office?

Again, seems more common sense than acrimony or racism....it does happen these areas are largely muslim, but hey...if we have an upturn in terrorist Buddhists or Presbyterian activity, I expect to enact similar restrictions

Ah, but Obama didn't make the mistake of saying "HEY, let's revoke these bans as they're flyign into the country" let alone the even more egregious mistake of shouting his "Muslim Ban" to confirm the animus for all to see. Obama made a lot of mistakes, to be sure, but not on that one.

That's where Trump lost out. He should have simply moderated his words as "I will take steps to increase security and prevent terrorism" but instead he went to rallies and called for a Muslim Ban and no matter how many other words and phrases he salts into it, that's still going to haunt him.

And even if not that, he should have simply called for a review WITHOUT immediately cancelling all the existing documents that had been approved.

He might have gotten away with that and looked like he was keeping his promises, but instead, he did what he did, he said what he said, and that'll haunt him.

Websites linger too.

...we know we have another indication that he just wants to tear down Obama.

Well, a lot of people didn't like many of the things Obama did, and hence voted for someone to reign them in vs continue another 4 years of the same policies.

Oh, Trump isn't going to rein anything in, he's rushing off like Mr. Toad on a Phaeton, heading right to the cliff. He's got the crop, not the reins.

See, you leave out the key part: When you do it just because you just want to tear Obama down, rather than actually seek out valid and actual substance on which to base policies and practices, that's where you are making your own self clear. And boy did Trump do that when he revealed the truth on immigration. He drew all the lines himself.

And it ain't a pretty picture. Doesn't help him one bit either. At this rate, the Norwegians are going to give Obama ANOTHER prize just to spite Trump.

Again...keeping election promises...

You keep relying on that. It's going to haunt you too.

Hell, he could have scored more points by simply forwarding it to the Senate as a treaty.

OH just great..then it *would* have made it binding....no thanks.

No, the treaty being forwarded to the Senate wouldn't have made it any more binding, even assuming they'd ratified it. You do know that they can choose to reject a treaty, don't you?

You don't need to be willfully obtuse, it doesn't serve much purpose.

If they rejected it, he could proclaim that the "Senate Spoke, and

The term "White Nationalist" is meant to evoke the term "Nazi" mixed with "KKK".

True enough. Though it's also meant to keep some distance, since they can't quite embrace association.

Still, it is meant to get the right sentiments across. That's also why the Aryan Brothehood, Volksfront and other's exist as White Nationalist movements.

But really it's neither of those things.

False enough that any truth to the statement is minimal. It is very much similar to both entities, and any difference is like claiming Burger King and McDonald's aren't each other, so Krystal's isn't either.

They aren't the Anti-Masonic party either, but they are on the same path.

A nationalist (of any skin color) simply wants government to put the interests of his nation first, above those of other nations generally.

Sorry to have to inform you of your error, but the definition of nationalist is not mere simple identification with a nation, even formation of one, but has acquired the meaning of an association with pretensions of superiority and domination of others groups.

Don't like it? Too bad, the world shapes the meaning of words without your input, and the various white nationalists have created that meaning by their own usage.

When put that way it doesn't sound scary (or even unreasonable) at all.

Yes, if you define something an non-offensive, it doesn't sound scary, we're all aware of the concept of euphemism. And its deceits. So who do you think you're fooling? Your mom? No, she knows you're full of crap.

A nationalist can still want to work with other countries, can still support legal immigration - it simply means they adopt the doctors credo "First do no Harm".

Nope. Nationalists as extant do not want to work with other countries, except so far as expelling their own unwanted to deal with, only support immigration from those who meet their approval, which is based on prejudices, not merit, or any neutral value, but preferential treatment based on notions of superiority ascribed to certain groups by mere character.

This especially includes white nationalists.

That is why the chattering news must paint the term with a racial brush, to frighten children or the weak minded...

Of course, you can't admit to the above, which is why you must disguise it under a brush of respectability, and claim that anybody who doesn't toe your line, is the flawed one.

Note they never call out "black nationalists" even though there are plenty of them... that would be racist after all!

Except when they do.

On the other hand, you aren't calling out any "white nationalists" any at all. You're defending and excusing them.

I bet you can't even denounce Dylann Roof. Wade Michael Page. Frazier Glenn Cross. Buford O. Furrow.

But it's OK to try and evoke hate for people based on color when they are white.

This is the line that White Nationalists use when they want to convince us that they're the persecuted victims.

But can you say these guys are up to no good???

I dare you to try.

Somehow I don't think blocking a few rightwing nutjobs caused Twitter to lose value

So which part makes them "nut jobs" the part where they post things offensive to regressive leftists, or the parts where they post politically compromising things that hurt their feelings and they should be silenced before you have too much to think for yourself?

FYI twitter has dug this hole on it's own. The second you start censoring content because it hurts feelings or it's politically inconvenient to a group of people, that's when investors start to flee. Their links are just scratching the surface, twitter ever since they put their 1984ish sounding "Trust and Safety council" has been suppressing trending hashtags and tweets if it shows leftists or democrats in a bad light. Blocking and censoring journalists from showing up in some countries, helping EU countries suppress citizens who are critical of the influx of illegals. And of course censoring content if it's "offensive."

Wouldn't it be ironic if you found youself a victim in a massacre that succeeded because Snowden's lessons have been taken to heart by the so-called "jihadis"?

Look at who Ed has been teaching
What do they think in the BND and Verfassungsschutz?

Amazing to me people still think Nate Silver is any good. Hell, even a parody account is more accurate.

Wendy's announced that they're replacing their front-line staff at 6,500 stores. Apparently it was rather forgettable, since no one here even seems to recall that Slashdot covered it less than two weeks ago. Given how forgettable that announcement was and that it's far easier to fire your back-of-house employees since no one sees them anyway, I'd wager that the anticipated PR blowback will blow over faster than you'd expect.

Muslims are responsible for the vast majority of terrorism in the world today.

In the Middle East where they mostly kill other Muslims that might be true. In the West however, that is miles away from the truth.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/n...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
http://www.vocativ.com/news/25...

These articles do a pretty good job of citing sources.

Not that I think this will change your opinion though. Your dumb assumption of 20% of all Muslims being radicalized shows that you don't care about terrorism and just want to demonize Muslims. If 212 million people where crazy terrorist radicals the world would be on fire now as opposed to the safest it's been in god only knows how long.

You can't deny this correlation, because it exists.

There are lots of correlations that exist. But trying to boil it down to one group or religion is just hogwash. You're drinking the Kool Aid, my friend. Hell, the Buddhists are killing people left and right in Burma, but you excuse that as some sort of "one off". So many examples of crazy people doing things in the name of one religion/philosophy or another, but you choose to try to classify it as all being one group?

Please see here for some more information.

A neighboring town had a pumpkin festival last year, and the police had snipers out during the event.

Yup. Most police today look and act like extras straight out of RoboCop, and many of them behave as if they're about to be killed at any moment. They overreact at the slightest thing and rarely use their discretion any more. It's just gone fucking nuts.

Most cops carry 2 guns, a knife, a baton, a Taser, and pepper spray. They wear a bullet-resistant vest, steel-toed boots, and have a radio to call for backup with...and yet they're terrified of a guy in shorts and a t-shirt. WTF?

When I was young the police (most police) were actually friendly and you could count on them for help. Most people liked and respected police officers. Now they mostly seem to be dicks itching for any excuse to make an arrest over the smallest thing. I avoid them at all costs.

The problem is that most cops these days can't tell the difference between a felony and just fucking around.

Since wer're posting anecdotes and vague "feelings", here's what I've noticed.

I've lived in my neighborhood for decades, and haven't had any problem with police... except this year, in which I was stopped and questioned three times. Make that "stopped, handcuffed, searched, ID'd, and questioned" three times. One time I had a prescription in my jacket pocket (antibiotic), and the officer jotted down the drug, my name, and the prescription number in his notebook.

We're supposed to be free to go about our business, and we're not required to interact with police when they call out to us. Police can walk up to someone and try to start a conversation, but I've always been told that they are like any citizen, and you can choose not to interact with them.

In all three cases I *could not* avoid interacting with the police despite trying, and all three situations ended in a confrontation. The officer *began* the encounter visibly irate, and escalated to *enraged* when I wouldn't interact. (Yes, I'm aware of my state's "must identify" law. I don't/didn't lie to them, but I don't show ID when asked.)

One told me he was going to taser me if I didn't show ID, one actually arrested me for not having ID (while hiking on a public trail), but then changed the charge at the last minute. On that last one, the officer stated that not carrying an ID was illegal.

I'm white, elderly, and live in a low-crime bedroom community, and I can't take a walk at night without fear of being randomly intimidated by an angry cop.

A neighboring town had a pumpkin festival last year, and the police had snipers out during the event.

I don't know what it is with America these days, but we're definitely seeing more angry police, and this is reflected in the public's perception.

I think it's counter productive. I won't have anything to do with the police now, and I don't know anyone on my block who will. If they come door-to-door asking if we witnessed some crime, they get nothing from me.

The chance of abuse is too high for me to have any interaction with them. If they come door-to-door, I didn't see anything.

It doesn't hurt anyone to tolerate transgenderism.

My standard explanation is to make the analogy to alien hand syndrome. There are people whose brains are telling them that they have the wrong parts. Logic doesn't really enter into the equation. Plus, as the AC said, gender is mostly a social construct.

There is a minority of transsexuals who also want to say that other transsexuals are not "real" transsexuals. Thing is, it's not really useful to try to make the distinction, there aren't any good criteria, and the only case where it would make a difference is if you're going to try to deny someone medical treatment over it. Imagine that you have this problem, and you have to prove to someone else that you're sufficiently transsexual to be treated. I have a German friend that had to live full-time as the other gender for a year before the medical authorities would do anything. Imagine if you had to do that, starting tomorrow. What would your life be like?

I get that you don't understand this stuff, and it's nice that your reaction is one of confusion rather than hostility. I'd be happy to try to help you further understand the issue, but it may be one of those things where you just have to shrug and say, "I don't get it." But if you don't understand it, please try to avoid making judgments, especially anything along the lines of "these people are just faking it." That's an idea that kills people.

That would be interesting to get some "real data" on who is informed about the law.

http://www.vocativ.com/underwo...

Babb won't explicitly say he's there for the Silk Road trial. He's cagey because jury nullification activists have a history of being sent to jail for jury tampering. Perhaps the most famous case came in 2011, when an 80-year-old retired chemistry professor named Julien Heicklin was jailed for standing outside a Manhattan court where he distributed jury nullification pamphlets.

Heicklin, whom Babb calls his personal hero, was eventually acquitted, with the judge remarking that it's only jury tampering if someone tries "to influence a juror's decision through a written communication 'made in relation to a specific case pending before that juror.' "

Jury Nullification

http://www.vocativ.com/underwo...

It's already on the InterWebs and just a matter of time before it's everywhere.

Except that it's not on the torrents yet:

http://www.vocativ.com/culture/tvmovies/anyone-finds-legit-torrent-interview-hit-us/

http://news.softpedia.com/news/The-Interview-Torrent-Downloads-Exist-but-They-re-Not-What-You-d-Expect-467819.shtml

The only people we know for sure who have the movie are Sony (who aren't releasing it) and the hackers (who definitely aren't releasing it)

SNC is not a publicly held company, it is privately owned by Erin and Fatih Ozmen, who are originally from Turkey. SNC has does well over $1 billion a year in business with the Federal Government, mostly in the defense sector. They follow a business strategy of acquiring small to medium size companies, which is how they got into the orbital crew capsule business. I worked for a small technology start up that they bought (not their space group).

SNC is a big gun in Nevada, because they are based in Reno. Most of the other defense related work in the state is run by big contractors outside of the state. The Ozmens are very well connected politically, both at the state and federal level. SNC has a PAC and they encourage their employees to make contributions (all perfectly legal).

The Ozmens were close politically and personally to former Nevada Governor Jim Gibbons. Before he was Governor, he was a member of the House from Nevada. Gibbons is a real piece of work. Among his dubious accomplishments in office:

Gibbons' alleged attempted sexual assault of a Las Vegas woman in 2006. This happened in a parking garage in a casino, and somehow the security video disappeared.

Investigations into the allegations that Gibbons secured defense contracts for his friend Warren Trepp in exchange for gifts and money during his time in Congress, 1997–2006.

'A newly available document states that Gov. Jim Gibbons "has admitted" that he urged federal authorities to pursue criminal action against a software developer whose business dispute with a friend of Gibbons has prompted a federal investigation.' according to the Los Vegas Review Journal.

And: A nepotism scandal regarding Sierra Nevada Corporation's hire of Nevada first lady Dawn Gibbons as a consultant. Sierra Nevada paid Dawn Gibbons $35,000 at the same time Jim Gibbons helped the company get a no-bid federal contract.

Before Dawn Gibbons was working as a consultant, to SNC she and her husband went on a luxury trip to Turkey with the Ozmens and Gibbons was never able to produce any receipts showing what he had spent. Since he was in Congress at the time, this appears to be an illegal unreported personal contribution, aka a "bribe". There was never any prosecution over this.

Recently it turns out that SNC has a multi-year no-bid contract with an ultra secret Air Force intelligence program called Big Safari. SNC really likes no-bid contracts, and they also like having a very low public footprint. Remember, since they are not publicly traded they have very minimal corporate reporting requirements.

Frankly, I doubt that the Ozmens and SNC are any worse then their bigger competitors in the military-industrial complex. It's just that with the big places, there are all kinds of ways that the top people are insulated from pervasive quid pro quo industry wide questionable behavior. With SNC it's likely that if there are any sketchy dealings, the people in charge must be aware of what is going on.

So when I read that SNC is suing and stopping NASA and it's competitors from working on contracts, I can't help but wonder what is going on behind the scenes. It's hard not to imagine that someone is leveraging political infl

Not only can the West trade with such people, the West is trading with such people, via black-market oil sales.

How about the Center for Disease Control's study where they showed the number of men "made to penetrate" women were almost as high as female victims of rape. http://www.vocativ.com/underwo...

Photographing cops on the street is illegal?

In some states, yes, because the state has a law where it's illegal "wiretapping/surveillance" unless *both* parties give consent.

Here's a (non-cop photographing/video) example:

Special Ed student records other student's bullying him, accused of felony wiretapping

The kid is being bullied in school, he uses his iPad to record them bullying him, and the school calls the cops and he's arrested for "felony wiretapping" because he didn't have the bullies "consent" in a state where both parties have to consent. So the bullies get off with no punishment, and he winds up being found guilty on a reduced charge of "disorderly conduct" (which one might think would be better applied to the bullies?).

This is our "justice" system hard at work.

Except that GP was not talking about copying the US' computer-based espionage operations, but the US' various illegal wars.

The story is about Russian hacking. Naturally the subject won't turn to Russian hacking, or even Russia's invasion of Ukraine, but to false allegations of "illegal" wars by the US. Typical, and a diversion.

So, which "illegal wars" is the US uniquely "guilty" of?

You know, there is a bit of a mess unfolding in Ukraine. There are pro-russian and pro-european factions and the russians are obviously supporting the former -- with a completely illegal show of force.

I've heard.

Less well known is that the pro-european factions supported by the West are largely far-right nationalists. Neonazis, pretty much. See, e.g. this piece by Max Blumenthal.

Yes, I'm familiar with Russian charges that they are going to fight fascists in another smaller neighboring country. That was the excuse to invade Finland. The charge is recycled to invade and take territory from Ukraine.

During the Stalin era, Soviet propaganda painted Finland's leadership as a "vicious and reactionary Fascist clique". Marshal C. G. E. Mannerheim and Väinö Tanner, the leader of the Finnish Social Democratic Party, were targeted for particular scorn.[52] With Joseph Stalin gaining near-absolute power through the Great Purge of 1938, the Soviet Union changed its foreign policy toward Finland in the late 1930s. The Soviet Union began pursuing the reconquest of the provinces of Tsarist Russia lost during the chaos of the October Revolution and the Russian Civil War. The Soviet leadership believed that the old empire had ideal security and territorial possessions, and wanted the newly christened city of Leningrad to enjoy a similar security. -- Winter War

Yes, that is all too familiar.

As for Max Blumenthal, I'm aware of his work. I don't consider his views useful given their crank fringe attributes.

Are Mainstream Liberals Embracing Max Blumenthal’s ‘I Hate Israel Handbook’?

You can see the nonsense in his piece that you link to. As part of the "proof" he mentions "white supremacist banners and Confederate flags," but somehow passes over the British, French, Canadian, and other flags present. Does that mean that the Ukrainians are also secretly French, British, and Canadian too, or just crypto-Confederates? It contains no small bit of rubbish. He is a useful idiot making excuses for Russia's invasion.

Besides, if it the concern that prompted the invasion really was fighting "fascism," why didn't Russia take care of their own neo-Nazi and fascist problems at home first? It isn't a small problem, and they have been letting it bleed into Ukraine.

Russian Neo-Nazis Are Now Beating Up Gays in Ukraine
Russia neo-Nazis jailed for life over 27 race murders
Russia: Far-Right Nationalists And Neo-Nazis March In Moscow
Viral Vigilantism: Russian Neo-Nazis Take Gay Bashing Online
Russian Neo-Nazis Made These Horrifying Videos of Anti-LGBT Attacks

The Russians seem to be good at finding fascism and fighting it in all their neighbors, not

Does USD $150M count a "sensible amount of money"?

http://www.vocativ.com/11-2013/someone-just-made-150-million-bitcoin-transaction/?utm_content=buffer6cfd3&utm_source=buffer&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Buffer

The bitcoin market seems to have weathered the storm.