Slashdot Mirror
The Dangers Of Protecting Free Speech
endisnigh writes: "Stephen K. Gielda of www.cotse.com has posted a very interesting article about the trials and tribulations (and attacks, sometimes physical) of running his website, which is mostly dedicated to computer reference and security, but which also gives users the ability to post anonymously to usenet." Considering that litigants can have content pulled (and cause accounts to be yanked) under the DMCA, that organizations can harrass individuals for public opposition, and that anonymity is increasingly hard to find in general, it's sobering to see how much trouble is involved in attempting to provide what Gielda calls "anonymity with accountability."
You are applying modern values on a society that existed 200 years ago. Your statement is therefore invalid and wrong.
200 years ago, the black man was consideren to be a "sub human". If you were born and raised at this time and were told this by your mother, your father, your neighbors, your clergy, the local media, the president, and yes, even by the black men themselves, you would grow up believing it too. Such people are not "evil" for believing what they were taught since infancy. They are the norm for their time. They are the correct upstanding citizens for their time.
But here you sit with an extra 200 years of knowledge that the people you rag on didn't have and proceed to moralize? What arrogannt smugness!
Well, I'm sure that 200 years from now, people will look at you and your belief that criminals should be striped of most of their rights and locked away in a jail, when the causes of their criminal behaviour are, in the future, readily corrected with a $5.00 medical treatment, and they will see you as some barbaric savage who "ought to be ashamed" of his behaviour.
Pot.
Kettle.
Black.
When big corporations are subject to "DoS attacks and hacking attempts" the FBI springs into action and tracks down the crackers. But when it happens to cotse, Steve is on his own.
In case nobody has said it lately, thanks!
I see it everyday, people go about their business, pissing and moaning about their taxes, government, company, HMO, MS, or whatever; but they don't do anything about it. At least Steve has the gonads to do something about it. And what's even better is that YOU could benefit from it! What would you do if one day Slashdot disappeared? Where would you get your news? (AOL-Time-Warner-CNN-Warner Bros.Time-Life Books or ABC-Disney-Buena Vista Dist. or NBC-General Electric-MS-MSNBC) Where would you be able to voice your opinions?
Steve, fight the good fight!
Never Retreat,
Never surrender!
I'm posting AC, because I'm too damned lazy to fill out another form. I'm AC, but I'm not that AC!
On the other hand, all posts may not be available all of the time if a poster is off-line. And people are responsible for their backups.
It is still BETA and experimental, but usable nontheless. Check it out at here and help in its development.
Usually the problem with anonymity is spamming. postnet seems to solve that.
Thanks
Usenet can easily be made useful until you get people like cotse.
I now just filter out everything that is posted from a cotse address because they simply won't stop their users from posting hipcrime floods, binary floods, massive crossposting etc. Their abuse teams simply pass your email address on to the "troll".
I'm in the process of persuading my ISP to drop everything from cotse.com.
Deleted
They have no anti-abuse policies. They simply ignore your complaints and pass your real email address on to the abuser for amusement.
We're talking about hipcrime floods, "snuh" cascades and massive crossposting to *completely* unrelated groups. And then they talk bollocks about freedom of speech. Once their abusers are done with a newsgroup you use, there *is no speech*. Everybody leaves.
Deleted
BTW, fuck privacy - you don't need it if you ain't guilty.
And what happens when someone in power decides you are guilty -- except that you are innocent? Are you going to say that people in government won't abuse their power? How many Russians died under the rule of Stalin? (Answer: 100 million)
Privacy is protection from tyranny. Your attitude is indicative of the belief that powerful governments are the source of compassion and never do wrong. Unfortunately, history is not on your side.
Reason and Evidence.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
Are you intentionally trying to miss the point? For all intents and purposes the posters are anonymous to other readers on Usenet (hence their opinions can't be quelched through physical threats, harrassment, etc.) : anonymous, however the service keeps track of who you are itself in case you use the service for illegal purposes, in which case you will be turned over to the authorities : accountable. Seems pretty damn clear to me. Someone with a "real" account might post under "anonymous coward" and others might not know it's CmdrTaco, but that doesn't mean that Slashdot couldn't put two and two together and figure out that he's agreeing with his own posts.
When I first read this story (and the related article) I was absolutely on the side of cotse.com, and truly believed that there should be Internet Awards of Merit (or something like that...what happen to awards? I used to anticipate the issue of PC Mag with technical awards, shareware awards, etc. Now it seems there's nothing of that sort around) handed to them for fighting the good fight. However then I read several posts on here about cascades, copy paste drowning, etc., all originating from cotse.com with no responsible administration (I'm not concurring with this: Simply saying I've read that), and having come to ignore Usenet for exactly that reason, I can see why a lot of people would be pissed: It's one thing for someone in a political newsgroup to discuss their beliefs about the Taliban or whatever, but when they post their spam to every god damn newsgroup (common. Everyone thinks their issues should be the top issues for everyone) it ruins the entire medium for everyone. If cotse.com doesn't actively seek out and eliminate dirtballs like that then I do have a problem with them.
So my question is this: Is cotse.com an overwhelming source for assholes on Usenet? [I don't know myself: For all I know the claims as such could be from people who hate that they can't harrass someone whose opinion they disagree with, so they attack the deliveryman] I don't want to defend the organization if they are irresponsibly responsible for the decline of Usenet.
Back in the late 90's I abandoned Usenet and IRC because they were flooded with idiots and morons. I had used these communication tools for years and years and now they became the CB radio of today, useless. I have been waiting for the mess to die down, I figure that the people that are wasting the bandwidth and time would fade away or go back to their web_IRC or other places and the technical+scientific would gain our tools back..
This is not the case, I now don't think it will ever come back. Usenet used to be a great place, now the only way it can be fixed is to apply some type of global moderation system, and have positive identification systems (PGP signatures anyone?.. If you dont use them now, I reccomend that you start.. It's damned hard to fake a PGP signature, and you at least can show the fake email wasn't you.)
I guess sticking to private usenet/email lists is the only choice now. and IRC has been replaced with I.M.'s .
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
There are varying degrees of anonymity and accountability. For example, if I were to check off "Post Anonymously" on this post, I would be increase my anonymity and decrease my accountability, but I have no illusions that this would be to the absolute extremes. Slashdot may very well store my UID with the post, for all I know.
Ideally, you want to be anonymous to people who you can't trust to behave responsibly (e.g. the seething mob horde), and be accountable to those who you do trust to be responsible (e.g. a server admin with a reputation for ethical behavior and trustworthiness).
Thus, you can have some amount of both, without there being contradiction.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
FWIW, this was an economic hack job based on social engineering. Not a technical problem in need of a tech fix.
... oligarchs is the only term I can think of ... made enormous profits during that period of time.
The power shortage was caused when a small number of companies which owned the entire thing took down power plants "for maintenance" at the same time all over the place. And then neglected to bring them back on-line for a long time. (I didn't follow that part, so I don't know if they brought them back up before or after the lawsuits started.) And these
My guess is that the point of this is to prove the folly of governments saving money. I can't think why else the government has been letting them get away with it. The entire sorry mess has caused be to consider the Republicans totally corrupt, and the Democrats nearly the same.
I wish there were some decent reporters around, but since the corporations bought out the news that species seems to have disappeared (well, they were always rare).
OTOH, it probably isn't a matter of no decent reporters. If one paid careful attention to the news stories then what was going on was actually spelled out quite clearly. Usually just one or two paragraphs toward the end of the story, but it was there. It just wasn't the new that they wanted to emphasize. Or, perhaps, corrupt economic practices are just seen as so expected, that it wasn't even seen as news.
But don't take the headlines for the story.
Caution: Now approaching the (technological) singularity.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
The webmaster in question states "ordinary people" are the problem, not governments or coprorations. This may seem a surprise to some.
However, it shouldn't be - because be they ordinary people, government people, or corporate people, the operative word is *people*. The greedy, the oppressive, the self-rigtheous are people too, and they can be found anywhere and their behavior is always the same. Some just have the tools or position to make their pathology into policy.
The oppressor can exist at any level of society. It's up to those of us who don't like the oppressor to not let him gain power - and even more important, to not become like him in the process.
"The Sage treasures Unity and measures all things by it" - Lao Tzu
It's called "gallows humor", and it's a long and distinguished tradition.
People who cannot see the moral difference between actual, physical violence and talking (or joking) about violence are at best poorly adjusted, and at worst sociopathic. I do not mean to imply that you fit either of these categories, but you might consider why one action is intrinsically harmful, and the other is not.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
The english word to describe this would be 'irony'.
It's not clear whether you are serious when you talk about violating the American constitution, and it is particularly 'funny' to Americans that a German citizen would judge Americans to be too restrictive of speach when the situation is far worse for Germans.
Curious. IANA's WHOIS server index doesn't list a WHOIS server for .cx. Logically whois.nic.cx would seem appropriate, but it doesn't exist.
The signal/noise ratio is worse than it is here, The raving loonies are out in force, and I don't have the time to sort through all of the above to find the useful stuff. Yes, the moderated groups are a little better, but even there... Usenet was cool in the late 80's and early 90's, but today it's just overloaded with sludge. Ah well, such is life.
Best Slashdot Co
Get your lamer ass off slashdot and hack some code :P !
In other news, I'll be calling or emailing you today (Tuesday), so watch for it..
<script>alert("I never liked JavaScript, really; it just seemed a bad idea.");</script>
Well, anonymity here means "anonymous, unless there's sufficient evidence to suspect that you're breaking US laws". Meaning that users of cotse.com are subject to US laws. Similarly, if it were hosted in China, it would be anonymous except when in conflict with China's laws.
--
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Certainly it is very sad to see some assholes abusing the site, maybe for his own sanity, and protection, he should make everyone register with an ISP email address before allowing them to post anonymously. That would probably cut down some attacks. He could clarify that no information will be posted, sold, etc., and this is solely for theirs, and his protection
Want Root?
Love,
-Tork
You're fundamentally mistaken. The issues at stake really are timeless. I'm sure that people in the 21st century have taken abuse to new levels and new applications, but harassment by lawyer and fraud are nothing new.
Ben Franklin once said, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." It applies to this situation as well as it did to the US Revolutionary War.
Mr. Gielda did identify the problem correctly -- it is not that Cotse's users expect too much privacy; it is that attackers engage in illegal tactics that are unlikely to be punished, and they have learned that they can get away with this. It's the WWW (Wild Wild West) all over again; fewer people may die, but lives still get ruined, and technology just makes it harder to prosecute the bad guys.
I don't give a rats ass who knows where I surf. And I don't care about spam. Sure, I get lots of emails a day promising my larger breasts and a huge dick, but is it really that harmful?
Maybe you don't care who knows where you surf. Others do, particularly if they live in a country where reading the wrong web sites is a good way to end up in prison.
Maybe you don't care about the time and annoyance of spam. Others do, particularly if they're busy people, have children using the net, etc.
But those are irrelevant to the point that Mr. Gielda and Cotse bring up in the URL posted, and your arguments about the FBI and fundamentalists are specious. In the FBI case, they could presumably get a subpoena, in which case he is obliged to reveal the information. In the fundamentalist case, you seem to almost be sanctioning the fundamentalist coming hunting for blood.
Of course I don't condone violence, but when you allow someone the right to say whatever they want, you're giving them the right to say something that could REALLY piss someone off. Say it, and you're gonna have to put up with the consequences. It's called prior restraint or something, isn't it? (I'm no lawyer - honest).
Part of living in a free society is that sometimes you hear things you don't like, and if those things don't infringe on your freedom, you are obliged to let the speaker say them. You may disagree with that. There are any number of oppressive regimes in this world that do disagree; they do not provide a free society.
As for prior restraint, that's an entire other ballpark -- prior restraint is making something illegal to ever say. It is a label applied to government actions, not those of private citizens.
No one should have to live in fear for speaking an honest opinion, but the cyber-terrorists that Mr. Gielda describes try to instill that fear -- just like any other terrorists.
If I've offended anyone, then I'm sorry. If you're angry at me, that's fine.
I'm not angry, and don't understand why anyone would be. I'm just astounded at your lack of concern for civil liberties and your sanction of illegal response to the exercise of civil liberties.
Their abuse teams simply pass your email address on to the "troll".
The guy manning the abuse desk is serious BOFH material. If you've got a valid complaint, it is taken as such, and accounts do get cancelled. Now, if you're forging posts by someone in order to get them in trouble (an all too common ocurrence), then it's different, though I'm not sure what the policy is then.
-- Bill "Houdini" Weiss
Funny...last definition of recursion I heard was a function that passed a new value to an instance of itself.
---
Linux: The world's best text-adventure game.
Every age is different. True. Every day is a new day. True.
So what? What's your point?
What's that got to do with making someone else do work without getting paid and forcing him/her to live in the quarters you choose for him/her?
You probably think slavery is gone (not true) because it's an age of different values (even if it were gone, this is the wrong reason it's gone in some areas - hint hint revolution).
Poverty will be with us always. So will power tripping and abuse of others and attacks on civil rights.
The values of today are the same they were ages ago. Somebody struck a successful blow and the dominant values changed sides, but the values remain. You can't kill values. Having too many people who support one value system will breed antivalues and cause people change their minds.
Do you really think that when slavery was outlawed in the US it was because there was concensus? Revolutions do not come out from large concensus.
You're saying the times were different. Guess what? That's about as pointless a statement as a child saying that balls bounce. So what?
You left out the logic between your observation and your conclusion. That is if you could even call it an observation.
Go away. Ewwwwwwwwwwwww, relativism. Ptooooooey!
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
check out scripting news today and yesterday ...hmm.
<---[singularity sig]
Interesting post, and one that covers a topic I've thought much about. A couple of minor points, however.
.
.
The phrase "legal tender" does not mean something issued by the Federal Reserve. "Legal tender" means a unit of currency that, by law, must be accepted as payment for a purchase, a debt, etc. The government could make Slashdot karma legal tender, if they wanted . .
Also, it's good to notice that the "Federal Reserve Note" is short for "Federal Reserve Note of Credit". Pointing that out helps to emphasize that our paper currency (and our coined currency, as well) has all been borrowed . .
a) We do not ignore complaints, although, sometimes it does take a few days to reply.
b) We do not pass on your email address.
Feel free to try and prove me wrong here.
Nix - Random Cotse person
It's nice to see that someone is sticking up for people's freedom of speech (a thank you goes out to Slashdot as well). Sometimes it's nice to be anonymous, especially when in political situations where your family and friends can be raped, tortured, and murdered :O
I for one applaud his work. I actually wouldn't mind working for him. I can only begin to fathom the amount of security experience one would gain.
I'm wondering how anonymous posting on Usenet would be handled if it was done from a country which did not have freedom of speech. Given the recent Slashdot story on global conferences for Internet content, it'll be interesting to see how this works out over time.
Trolls make great pets. Adopt one today!
People love freedom but they sure as hell get upset when anybody else actually tries to use it.
Your posting is missing something. A sense of humor, perhaps?
After reading all of the current thread, I agree with those that called your "humor" tasteless and inappropriate. Your "success" in a improv group, and in being moderated up, etc. are not relevant to whether this posting was humorous. Death threats never really are and I didn't see anyone else (so far) call your posting funny.
The only remaining question is whether your response is going to be "Fuck you, asshole" or "Hmmm. Maybe jokes about death threats are really not funny."
So you do ignore complaints.
f.
Get your facts straight.
No, I won't engage in debate on wheter the idea of legislating truth -- or distinguishing 'pure' from 'political' research in a court -- makes any sense. It is quite obviously utter bull.
But that's the reality. We just live with it.
f.
The only majority Mr Bush had some claim to is the majority of electors in the electoral college. And even there is more and more evidence coming up that he obtained these votes
He certainly never had or even claimed having whatever majority of voters on his side.
f.
I for one wouldn't know jack about the way my own government works if I hadn't have been the sort of iconoclast troublemaker that school admins are scared of these days. My government class in HS was spectacularly bad and was taught by a rabid Jon Bircher. However, I actually sent away for a copy of the consitution and read just so I could piss my teacher off. I learned a fair amount that way too. One of the problems with America's speech laws is that its citizens have not been educated in the way their own government works, and they have even less of an interest in finding it out for themselves. All we as Americans tend to do is panic every time there's a bit of shocking news. The politicans gives us quick fixes to placate us, and the rest of the time they feel confident ripping the constitution to shreds because the citizens just don't care and are too ignorant to care. Like I said, a big part of it is the educational system we're stuck with. Growing up we're taught largely by people who are frankly too incompetent to do anything else, working for salaries that don't even amount to the cost of living in a lot of places. And, the textbooks. Yeesh! The number of factual errors I found even as a high schooler were astounding. Recently I looked at a science text book for the Detroit school and was appalled. The authors got every single concept they were trying to teach wrong. And, given that classes like government are considered "extra" they get shorted even worse than the rest.
Read the article you linked to. The only Freedom of speech/press issue discussed was media reporting of election results before the polls had closed. Censorship was not even mentioned.
They should say after every swearing in: Sold to the Highest Bidder!
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
Isn't the whole point of being anonymous to decrease you accountability?
Erm, no. He clearly states that his purpose is to promote open discussion, and that if you try to exploit his services by making death threats and such, then you will be held accountable. How else can you protect yourself against the idiots on Usenet?
--
--
#nohup cat
URL???
Is it that black and white?
What about that recent COTS case where there were "death threats" using a "Tom Cruise Missile"?
And for reference, that guy fled to Canada under Terrorism charges
Yet you don't have an e-mail address and you have an invalid home page. Try practicing what you preach.
Notice I said "death threats" not death threats.
If one party thinks (or more accurately in the case of COTS, willing to say so under oath / in a court of law) that it is a threat, is it? Should it be limited?
That's what I mean it's not as black and white as it sounds. When there is more than one person involved, since interperetation is involved, there is very little that is black and white.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The newsgroups are totally flooded with crap. It's pointless to even try to initiate any meaningful dialogue. The only good newsgroups out there are the binaries with free mp3's :) And even they're getting overrun with porn messages.
Its much as saying.. This person killed someone.. lets kill him. In computer terms this is called a recursion ;)
-- Dont let the evil win, but defeat the evil with the good --
Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
Aristotele
---
Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
Why is it that we the people are no longer represented...the govenment, has become the govenment of concerns, the big guys, the money launders. Get it right you goddamned politicians they should add a new line to the oath of office for every position. And I Insert name Understand completely, that in this country, its we the PEOPLE, and not we the BUSINESS.
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
"OpenBSD has a local root hole."
It does it really now? Got anything to backup your off the wall comments?
OpenBSD claims "Four years without a remote hole in the default install!"
That means your comments about local root holes are bullshit. Unless of course your putting them there; in which case you're the dope.
The Federal Reserve has several duties, which basically consist of acting as an advisory body to the rest of the government, and helping to define fiscal policy. But, more importantly, they are an oversight body for the banking system of the United States, and most of their power comes from their ability to supervise the nation's banks (which is exercised by things such as raising/lowering interest rates).
Furthermore, the Federal Reserve Board does not handle the issuing of Federal Reserve Notes, which is generally left to Congress. The Chairman of the seven person FRB could not, for instance, decide to stop issuing notes, particularly now that they are the only currency in circulation. What the Board does do is to determine how to distribute them through the banking systems of the country: the central Board distributes the notes to its seven regional banks, who then put the notes into circulation, depending on the needs of the public.
And they do not collect your money. The Reserve Board simply helps facilitate the banking system; the nitty gritty details are handled by the Treasury. They have a lot of power over our currency, but its hardly complete power. The seven-member board is appointed by Congress.
BTW, the homepage for the Board of the Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the technical name for the FRB) is http://www.federalreserve.gov/ which is, last time I checked, a government site. I don't know what you're talking about when you say that it isn't.
Sean Daugherty "I have walked in Eternity -- and Eternity weeps."
Saying something unpopular is protected by the Constitution, death threats are not. It really isn't all that complicated from the outside.
Personally, I'd be thrilled if I got enough traffic to warrant the occasional death threat.
Reading some more on this -- yeah, I did get it wrong. I had skimmed headlines like the Slashdot article "Windows 2000 to be banned in Germany?" based on a story with a similar headline at c't. Yes, I know that believing something because a Slashdot editor stated it is not an excuse.
On the other hand, policies (and in the cases of Bavaria and Hamburg, laws) forbidding the government from transacting business with members of a religious group would never fly in the US. And in general, the US provides much more freedom to unpopular religious and political groups than does Germany. Yes, I understand the historical reasons why they're leerier of giving the protection of civil rights to neo-Nazis and hate groups. But I hardly think Germans are in a position to sneer at us for arresting people for making death threats in comp.os.advocacy.idiots, as seems to have been the case here.
Unsettling MOTD at my ISP.
Geez, whose country wants to ban software made by Scientologists?
Maybe if you explained exactly what you think is a violation of the Constitution I could respond in more detail. But I don't see anything in this article that has anything to do with what you're saying. Under US law, Usenet loons are free to flame each other to cinders, but they're not allowed to make death threats or bomb threats. Except for Slashbots, most Americans are perfectly aware that that's how the system works and consider it a perfectly appropriate implementation of "free speech."
Unsettling MOTD at my ISP.
It's interesting to not that Mr. Gielda doesn't cite corporations or the US Government as the biggest problem, but instead cites ordinary people who for one reason or another can't accept the fact the people should be free to say and think what they want.
I'd hate to think that a service like this which helps give a voice to people in countries where freedom of speech doesn't exist could be destroyed by people with thin skins.
Hopefully one day we'll actually show enough responsibility to deserve the rights we have, but I'm not holding my breath.
Beware typoes.
www.nic.cx does not seem to be working. Although its possible that its been slashdotted, the error message (something about Cold Fusion and IP addresses) makes me think it is just misconfigured.
where there's fish, there's cats
I agree with your premise, but not with your example. Try flying through Chicago or JFK next time! I personally have had no trouble in either place, although I haven't been through many times.
Or, better yet, try getting through Customs in Europe in 30 seconds or less WITHOUT that American passport! Believe me, it's worth something in that situation!
It seems that the American reputation as "the land of the free" is worth somethin OUTSIDE our borders...
My thoughts exactly. As an American, I find it disgusting that our reputation as the "land of the free" has basically been whittled down to allowing businesses almost any freedom they desire. Hell, with DMCA, etc, businesses have more rights than I do. I just got back from a month long visit to Europe. I never spent more than 30 seconds in a customs line. When I came back to the US through Philidelphia, I had to wait two hours in line to declare my copy of "Alf: Der Film" - had I been even luckier I may have had a friendly customs agent search my inner cavaties for cocain. Land of the free indeed.
Actually, I just didn't feel like wasting Slashdot's space by explaining the whole situation. I waited in line for imigration (over an hour) and then moved on to customs. Rather than wait an hour in line for the "no items to declare" officer, I took my form over to the "items to declare" desk because there was no line. Much quicker that way. But yes, you do have to declare if you have under $400 so long as some items are intended to be sold or as gifts. You just don't have to pay a tariff unless it's above $400.
And Alf: Der Film may have cost just 49 shillings (3 bucks), but its priceless in my book.
Admitedly the backup in customs is also a by-product of the problamatic airline situation - my problem was precipitated by a mass arrival of planes into USAir's Philly terminal. It's pretty small as far as internation terminals go. Still, though I don't fly internationally often, I had another long wait coming into Atlanta from Jamaica, and Atlanta has a huge international terminal.
Regarding lacking an American passport, the countries I visited (with the exception of France) all had open borders. Somewhat different from America eh? It was a little dissapointing that I couldn't fill up my passport with stamps though. Just one coming into Amsterdam and another from a confused passport checker in Munich who really wasn't supposed to stamp it anyway. But yeah, your right that being American carries influence internationally. I'd argue, however, that it shouldn't.
My point, which I admit could appear vague, is that if you give people the opportunity to hide behind anonymity, some of them will post utter shit, as I'm sure you are aware.
My post was in response to your complaint that you cannot have anonymity where you have also accountability. I'm sure all those who have a genuine use for the service that cotse.com provide are not bothered.
It keeps out the idiots, thus ensuring the service still has credibility, and does not have to answer the charge of being a free-for-all-anonymous-flame-portal.
Regards,
cmclean
"Any similarity between the hooting of a million eager monkeys and Slashdot is purely coincidental." -THEFLASHMAN
Granted, but the idea here seems to be to make the site as legitimate as possible, so when the government wander in and say "We want to know who this anonymous poster saying bad things about us is.", Gielda can say, "Sorry chum, the government say that anonymity is part of free speech." :-)
The point I see is that at least as a legit site, there's no case of anyone saying "You're a bunch of yahoos who let anyone post anything."
Gotta cut this short, gotta go home
Regards,
cmclean
"Any similarity between the hooting of a million eager monkeys and Slashdot is purely coincidental." -THEFLASHMAN
Try browsing through the posts associated with this (or any other) article at -1, check out all the stuff from "Anonymous Coward", then consider again the anonymity/accountabiliy argument.
I sure as hell would not want to be held responsible for some of the stuff that appears at -1 in the discussions on slashdot, and they are nothing compared to some of the advocacy flamewars available now from an NNTP server near you.
Regards,
cmclean
"Any similarity between the hooting of a million eager monkeys and Slashdot is purely coincidental." -THEFLASHMAN
The previous poster sounds as though he'd like nothing more than moving back to the gold standard for currency. Almost no established country depends on the gold standard. It makes management of funds, particularly difficult, and eliminates a whole class of wealth buildin business enterprises. Perhaps that is good, but it'd certainly negitively impact a significant portion of the population at this point in the history of the financial markets.
The gold standard does buy you some financial security, but the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. It you want to deal exclusively in a gold standard currency, you can use any one of a number of proposed internet currencies but good luck finding merchants that will accept it.
--CTH
--
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
If you're looking to avoid accountability for your actions and statements, yes.
Of course, Mr. Gielda's unenviable position is to protect and maintain the right to anonymity in the face of individuals who use anonymity to threaten to murder the children and spouses of their enemies; who use anonymity to try and crack and DoS the servers of their enemies; who use anonymity to intimidate, slur, slander, spoof, and defame their enemies; who use anonymity as a weapon of intolerance and cowardice instead of as a voice for the oppressed, small, and afraid.
If it weren't for the tireless efforts of individuals like Mr. Gielda, I assure you that our valuable right to anonymous speech would be heavily curtailed today. Without dedicated individuals fighting an endless battle against those who wish only to take anonymity and turn it into immunity from reproach, governments would quickly step in and put an end to the "menace of anonymous attacks," as well as all anonymity online.
Anonymity is the shield that protects those who would be unjustly harmed or persecuted for their actions. There are few greater signs of cowardice and selfishness than one who uses anonymity to evade accountability for their own unjust actions.
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
I, as an atheist, am a bit bothered at being thrown in with those other groups. Atheists are not hate-mongering bigots like the rest of the organizations you named. I have no idea if you were implying that or not, but I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you only meant to list groups that attract violent opposition. Please, be careful of your phrasing in the future.
----------
Technoli
Granted, the original post here on /. sorta gives the impression that this is about corporations, the DMCA, or some such, but it's not. Reading the original article shows it's about the harassment by individuals --- individuals who confused usenet with reality, and got all bent out of shape by something someone else said.
The real point here is not "laws which are krassly [sic (lovely Germanism there, are you sure you're not a troll?)] against the constitution", but rather the immaturity of the technology we call "internet" --- it allows us unimagined new possibilities to communicate, anonymously or otherwise, with or without accountability, but this also opens those who actively provide the service up to a thousand and one variations on "road rage". The real question is how we can protect those brave souls without "krassly" limiting other folks' freedom of speech.
Ron Obvious
P.S. Just out of curiousity, if you're really German and not a Troll, what do you think of verbotene Parteien?
Boy, did you get that one wrong.
First, the Germans never tried to ban the Windows defrag program. The German gov't, and two very large German churches just didn't want to buy it, and if they had to take it with Windows 2K, they at least wanted to disinstall it, which is very very different from banning it.
And, given the CO$'s history of respect for privacy, individuals' rights, and so on and so on (see the links way up at the top of the page just for starters), can you really blame them?
No, you can accuse the Germans of lots of things, but not this one. What I really don't get is why so many folks in the US of A think the Germans are so weird on this point?
I mean, clearly, the best thing to do is to go Linux, but assuming hypothetically you were somehow forced to use W2K, would you really want a CO$ defrag program with rights to read and write to any sector of your hard disk? And if you were a giant customer buying thousands, if not millions of licenses, wouldn't you want M$oft to at least give you a choice about it?
Think about it. This may seem off-topic, but it's not. They did, eventually, by the way, but not until the Germans raised a holy stink about it. Which, frankly, I found quite logical.
Ron Obvious
Well, I'm not sure about anyone else, but I (aka Ron Obvious) only made fun of your misspelling "crassly", that is, with a "k". It's kind of funny because there are a lot of words which differ only in spelling between German and English in that a "k" appears in German where a "c" appears in English, eg "Amerika".
Get it?
No offense intended.
Ron Obvious
P.S. Further, while "krass" is used fairly often in (street-level) German, it's heard less often in English, which also makes it sound a bit... Germanic, if you see what I mean...
Of course, it would be good if I could back up such a claim with some evidence, and in fact, the Bayerische Verfassungschutz (German Constitution Police, very roughly translated), if memory serves, has some very good arguments about this on-line, but I don't have the URL bookmarked here (I'll post it when I've more time) -- but maybe you found it while you were "reading some more on this"?
Ron Obvious
Not enough to give URLs, I want to close by making a valiant attempt to get back on-topic. The Germans' argument (as I understand it) against the CO$ is that they don't play by the rules of a fair or law-abiding society. Having extremely bad experience with people who did not respect basic human rights, the Germans have basically decided (and I'm simplifying radically here) that basic civil rights extend only to those who respect the basic civil rights of others. Now, this may seem too restrictive to many Americans (I myself am not at all comfortable with it), but we see a similar thing going on here with the Church of the Swimming Elephant (cotse.com). They've been doing their best to support freedom of speech for anyone, and now, because of that, they're wide open to attacks from people who don't respect exactly that basic right. Thus, we return to the basic central issue in this story: How do we protect the 'net against net-vandalism of the sort which (allegedly) is costing the cotse.com folks all sorts of time and trouble?
Anonymity is a tool to help permit the freedom of unpopular speech, a person has no obligation to be accountable to the "mob rule" of the general population, only to a fair government, and honest legal systems. In fact it is questionable if there is a moral or ethical obligation to abide by the laws of undemocratic countries.
Limited anonymity is a better balance between unrevokable anonymity and no freedom of speech.
The US Supreme Court has upheld that anonymous speech is important to free speech.
Unfortantly many people want to shoot the messager (Mr. Gielda) when his users send annoying or unpopular messages.
Defending Freedom is dirty work. Ask any Veteren. Or Civil Rights activist. Or Guatamalen Nun.
Where do I send my check?
- Dan I.
While I have no doubt Steve gets a lot of flak, I for one have complained to cotse about some of the posts coming from there. As I recall it was when some 3 or 4 posters were posting 10 cut-and-paste messages a day to a certain newsgroup.
(cut-and-paste meaning that the posts were just cut-and-pasted off of a website).
Was I an evil anti-free speach person? Perhaps. But I felt a complaint was appropriate. Especially if those 3 or 4 posters were really just one person (which appeared to be the case) simply trying to drown out other discussion.
That said, this service is darn useful.
As Nietsche famously said, "If you stare too long into the Abyss, 1d4 Tanar'ri of random type will attack you."
Death threats never really are and I didn't see anyone else (so far) call your posting funny.
I thought that it was hi-freaking-larious. I actually laughed out loud. Of course, my entire family has a hard time keeping a straight face at funerals too...
But regardless of whether or not it was funny, it was certainly protected speech and perfectly legal. Isn't that ironic (for anyone who read the article)? It's not like he was making death threats, he was simply making a joke (or comment for the morbid-humor impaired) about how he thought that it was appropriate for the goatse.cx man to get death threats.
Say "NO!" to tax money for religious groups.
BTW, fuck privacy - you don't need it if you ain't guilty.
True, but sometimes the only crime these users are guilty of is voicing an opinion.
(First off, I know that only the seoncd line is your comment, but they both seemed enough out of whack to quote them together.)
Are you crazy!?!??! We are all entitled to privacy. Do you really want people prying into every minute detail of your life? Trying to find out who you associate with? Trying to videotape you having sexual relations with your spouse/significant other? Trying to find out your credit history and the names of the banks and other businesses that you deal with? Privacy is an important way of protecting yourself. Just because someone isn't a criminal doesn't mean that they want to expose themselves to people who are.
Say "NO!" to tax money for religious groups.
Sean Ellis
Sean Ellis
Follow OfQuack's antics on Twitter.
I'm in the process of persuading my ISP to drop everything from cotse.com.
Isn't this exactly what the author said people try to do? Post trash under a cotse name to try to get the site in trouble? Did you consider that you are being used?
Nope, no sig
It's all well and good to declare that persons should have a right to express their opinions anonymously, but much of what comes out of cotse.com is an explicit attack on newsgroups themselves. I don't regard cascades, intended to swamp a newsgroup with so much crap that it is nearly unreadable, as "speech" that I care to see protected. Usenet should be free, but cascades and the like are attempts to prevent the speech of others.
In this context, I find cotse.com's claim that they can't distinguish between signal and noise a bit disingenuous. While there is plenty of grey between the black and white, there are also plenty of unambiguous cases of abuse of Usenet. Their position on these cases ("Golly, who are we to judge?") is no service to Usenet.
Phiwum's law: anyone that names an obvious law after himself and then puts it in his own sig is just pathetic.
I was reading this story on how americans feels that the 1st amendment goes too far, and it made me sad. It seems that the influence from the facist liberals like Joe Lieberman and Hilory Clinton are having their effect. Now that the public knows that censorship has "bipartisan" support, they've begun to tolerate it more, so know you have the liberal people saying censorship is ok, not just the religious right. It's scary to think that when americans are willing to give up their most basic freedom, what freedom will they be willing to give up next?
Got Freedom?
Thinking?
Quite all right. Sometimes I wish there was a remote control for life where I could pause life so I could get a few extra hours sleep, or rewind an especially dreadful monday so I could fix those faux pas I've made.
To some extent they already do. Hang around the dregs of slashdot long enough and you'll find postings from the -1 crowd with links to forged photos of Malda, etc, engaged in all sorts of lewd acts. And as for the aforementioned crapflood attack, there are mechanics in place for dealing with those idiots. All of the methods put in place, from setting them to a -1 defauld posting level to temporary IP banning if they're a habitual troller, to the lameness filter, are designed to keep the idiots from ruining any hope of rational discussion. This site is also constantly under attack; there have been at least two massive cases of people register flooding - using a script to automatically submit thousands of requests for accounts in the hopes of bogging and/or crashing the site.
God I hate those idjits.
If god had intended you to be naked, you would have been born that way.
Unfortunately, the idiots have already begun attacking. The psychotologists forced the removal of one of their "sacred documents" from this site. Of course, it didn't do much good, if you read a ways down in the comments. People seem to hate free speech if they're the one being attacked.
If god had intended you to be naked, you would have been born that way.
You're a fine one to complain. Yes.. you do have Freedom of Speech in Germany, as long as it's approved speech. You of all people should know what happens when you deny the holocaust in public.
I can deny the holocaust all I want if I feel like it and that wouldn't even be hate speech in the sense that I was asking that a group of people be injured, killed or otherwise treated unpleasantly. There is a big difference between yelling "Kill all niggers!" and saying, "Gee officer, I don't know what happened to that boy. He must have tripped and fallen down a set of stairs. This is so awful, but I honestly don't think that Burt and Ray had anything to do with it."
That makes no sense at all. In case you haven't realised, you're living in the real world. If you want security, you have to relinquish some freedom. That's how it works. Otherwise, everyone would be walking around free and secure, which they're not.
I don't give a rats ass who knows where I surf. And I don't care about spam. Sure, I get lots of emails a day promising my larger breasts and a huge dick, but is it really that harmful?
I think most people on the net should grow up and realise that there's no such thing as a free lunch. You want access to a world-wide network? You're gonna pay.
The purpose of this message is not to incite a flame-war, but just me venting my annoyance at pretentious, conceited people harping on about how they're having their privacy infringed by companies who see where they go. Jesus. Wake up. They're not trying to find out where you catch your bus to blow you up. They're not trying to find out where your children go to school and napalm them, or fit a bomb to your wife's favourite shoe shop.
So this guy makes a service where you can say anything you want to anyone, and remain anonymous, with the only traceable party being this guy. And he didn't expect retribution? So if I post to alt.we.like.dubya and say 'George W Bush is gonna get a nailgun to the head tomorrow' using this anonymous service, of course the CIA/FBI/NSA/NRA/ICI/K-mart is going to go running straight to this guy and break his balls. And the same thing would happen if someone wrote in alt.fanatical.gunmen that some Islamic Fundamentalist with a penchant for semtex-and-busloads-of-Israelis-related hijinx is a silly twat, some gun-totin' camelmastah is gonna come running to the only traceable source of the message - this guy. What did he expect?
Of course I don't condone violence, but when you allow someone the right to say whatever they want, you're giving them the right to say something that could REALLY piss someone off. Say it, and you're gonna have to put up with the consequences. It's called prior restraint or something, isn't it? (I'm no lawyer - honest).
If I've offended anyone, then I'm sorry. If you're angry at me, that's fine. I understood that posting this would possibly cause people to not like my ideas, but I won't be crying when a fatwa is imposed on me.
I'm pretty sure it is called prior restraint (still not 100% sure) - you have the right to say whatever you want, but if it causes a backlash, it's your problem. The government can't step in and say 'Oh! That's gonna cause problems. You'd better not say that.' I think most people don't just want free-speech, but retribution-free-speech. The children.
"BTW, fuck privacy - you don't need it if you ain't guilty."
Gosh, I suppose you're definitely one I should lean on for advice in this category... 'course, on the topic on online privacy in general, I suppose you've got the *ultimate* solution:
Your website's a dead link bucko.
Now that's security.
High-quality Linux web hosting for geeks and coders.
Yes, but accountable to whom? Accountable to the law, or to anyone who disagrees, and has no better use of sometimes formidable resources to toast you?
(Even better: unjust laws. I predict that in fifty years time, our descendants will look back upon this age with puzzlement: "They outlawed *grass*? Freaky. Now, prohibition, that I can understand. alcohol is a killer, but this? And at the same time tobacco was legal? Freakish, hey?")
n.b.: not posted as AC. Will I regret this?
yes, we have no bananas
I am sooo glad I don't know you. You must be the most boring person in your hemisphere.
.............................................
I'm the one without a soul
---
The combined human population is enough to feed every living tiger for app. 28000 years.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin, 1759
When nuance becomes the only objective we lose the ability to function
I'm curious why you think the owner of goatse.cx is any more worthy of death threats, physical attacks, and people doing everything they can to make his life a living hell (and why you think everyone on Slashdot would agree). Please enlighten us.
Dinivin
He clearly states that his purpose is to promote open discussion, and that if you try to exploit his services by making death threats and such, then you will be held accountable.
Then it's not true anonymity.
Dinivin
Except if you're completely anonymous then you can't be help accountable. Get it?
Dinivin
ure as hell would not want to be held responsible for some of the stuff that appears at -1 in the discussions on slashdot, and they are nothing compared to some of the advocacy flamewars available now from an NNTP server near you.
I agree. But I'm not sure what your point is?
Dinivin
I'm sure all those who have a genuine use for the service that cotse.com provide are not bothered.
I disagree. Obviously Gielda has some way of tracking down a post to the person who posted it. Someone who feels they have a perfectly legitimate complaint against the government of the US might still fear posting knowing that they can be held accountable.
Dinivin
In my view
Which is worthless.
I'm bringing end to my participation in this discussion. If you're so stupid that you find "jokes" about death threats and physical violence humourous then I really don't want to have anything to do with you.
Dinivin
I know I said I was removing myself from this discussion, but I have to respond to this crap:
What I find appauling about the replies to my post is how people try to act self rightous, telling me absolutely what is funny and what isn't. If you don't find it funny, then say _you_ don't find it funny. The fact that this post made someone, somewhere laugh makes it funny.
To that person.
I have never, and will never, repond to someone with "Fuck you, asshole."
No, but you have no problem insulting someone by saying they have no sense of humor or nor clue because they didn't find something you said funny.
With every post you make yourself appear to be an even bigger jackass.
Dinivin
I never attacked you or your character, however you continually attack me. I asked a simple question. You were the one who immediately started in with the attacks in response, moron.
Dinivin
The parent post is rated as Troll, but I feel it makes a very good point. Most of what Steve talks about is pretty ordinary stuff. Words like "Danger" should reserved for things that are really dangerous. Running a web site is a pain in the ass, and some of the stalkers out there might have the potential to be dangerous, but until medical bills or jail is factored in, it's all just words.
In fact, many trolls would be delighted to get the attention that coatse is getting. I mean, there are all the big guys like the WIPO Troll and Feces Thrower, but the vast majority of trolls post their best work, which they have sweated and bled over, into a void of nothingness and get no response. A portscan would be nice, thank you very much, and a personal visit from some FBI agents down to their parent's basement could be inspiration for a lifetime of work.
The current American government was elected by a small majority of voters. Only 30% or so, if I remember correctly, of the Americans voted. Thus, the American government was chosen by approximately 15% of the Americans.
You cannot judge all Americans by the actions of their government. After having lived here for over 5 years, I can tell you that I have met a LOT of sane Americans, in fact the majority of people I have met here are very sane about a lot of the things often discussed here on slashdot for example. Perhaps this is indicative of which people I get in contact with, perhaps it's indicative of the 'Americans' as a whole. I will not make any judgement on that as I do not KNOW the majority of Americans, I can only give you my personal observation.
That said, I would like to elaborate a bit on why I DO think this is one F*CKED up country. Don't get me wrong, I live here still, I make good money still, I contribute through my tax money to upholding everything that's wrong in this country. I'm sure a lot of Americans feel the same. I fortunately have the choice to move back to my own country at some point, most Americans do not have that luxury.
So, why did only 30% of Americans vote, you might ask. I think that's a fair question. Does this indicate fundamental lazyness among 'Americans' ? A fundamental disinterest in politics and what goes on in the rest of the world? I think not. A fundamental despair of political choice, a deep, historically grown distrust of politics seem more likely. It is 70% of the Americans stating that they do NOT support their government or any of the choices they have.
So 70% of Americans (minus some lazy bums) says 'our government, our politics, our choices SUCK'. Half of the 30% that did vote did not vote on the current government. So basically, 85% of Americans SHARE your opinion about the ridicule that's going on in this country. So I hope that addresses your 'wondering' about Americans.
Now about 'tolerating breaches of constitutional law'. No, I won't go into details on how the Nazis got empowered. I'm quite certain though that a MAJORITY (maybe even more than 85%?) of Germans did NOT agree with the Nazis. They got in control anyways. This is what is happening in the USA right now. Just here you don't call them Nazis since they're not in the Nazi party, but elitarian facsists is probably a pretty good description of the current US government. Do you think Americans *want* that? That they've all gone collectively insane? I think not huh. At least 85% did not expressly agree with this government getting in control. I think of the 15% that did, lots are currently quickly changing their mind and thinking 'my god what have I done?' (does that sound remotely familiar to 'Ich habe es nicht gewusst').
My opinion is that excessive situations like the current US politics start forming when some of the fundamental beliefs in a country start clashing. Here in the US I think there's two very basic fundamental things that have always kind of kept each other in check have started growing apart rapidly lately:
- Equality. The fundamental belief that every individual has the same rights, the same power, the same everything at birth.
- Capitalism. The fundamental belief that every individual is allowed to make a living (?)
... a BIG living (?) a PREPOSTEROUS living (?) and... use everything that he/she 'earned' to 'earn/bully' even more earnings and using all that your freedom has ALLOWED you to earn in order to bully other people into giving up some of their equality.
See, I make no judgement about either here, I believe these two fundamental things CAN co-exist. They can, when the 'morale' is right. As you can probably tell, I am biassed somewhat negatively towards capitalism. Putting an artificial cap to how much wealth one can obtain is no solution to avoiding the excesses of the capitalistic structure. Still, I believe that it's THESE EXCESSES that are currently giving the balance between those two fundamental things a really bad swing. The power structures created by these excesses are growing too large for the Equality to have a fair chance. The extremely powerfull are starting to think they're little tin Gods that DO have the power to limit other people's 'freedom' (a direct result of the 'Equality'). God I'm getting longwinded. I should stop here, before I start getting into an infinite loop disagreeing basically with myself.Oops, the link to the whole thread, rather than just the one article, is http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&ic= 1&th=e9b6e9e75ee34377,8&seekm=8o02ps%242no%240%40d osa.alt.net#p My pasting hand was quicker than my masturbating ha--err, my thought process. :-) Hehe. The whole thread is quite informative about the issues involved.
Chasing Amy
(We all chase Amy...)
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"-Tacitus
Most people simply don't know how to access USENET in the most productive way, which is why they dismiss it like you do. Why would you need to sort through the spam and BS? Let your software do it for you.
v iders.html for a list of providers and features, and http://www.newsreaders.com/ for lists of readers, servers, and all sorts of stuff.
/. any day. Other communities have wonderful traditions and initiations that are older than most MOOs or MUDs still in operation.
The best newsreader by far is a Windoze program called Gravity by a company named Microplanet. I'm sure there's probably something for Linux which does a comparable job, but at any rate it automatically sorts all similar messages together in a much more effective way than the most popular newsreader, Forte Agent, does. Therefore, with a few clicks, all the spam is gone. If you don't even want to spare a few clicks, then you can easily set up personal spam filters to automatically get rid of almost all spam messages. After all, most spam is crossposted to several groups or displays other signs which can set it apart for filtering.
And if you're too fucking lazy to set up spam filters and then just read the groups, you can always get a feed from a provider who filters the spam for you. There are several, some of which have great spam-filtering capabilities. The interested can try http://www.exit109.com/~jeremy/news/providers/pro
Personally, I much prefer USENET to the Web any day. It's far more free and far easier to maintain privacy. A group for every subject and every subject for a group. Some communities are filled with old hands who can tell you more than the mostly-youngsters here on
And don't even get me started with the art of forging headers on any server willing to let you supply your own values (like Altopia). It's fun and provides a level of privacy that's hard to get on the Web.
But, I digress. My point is, the sludge and loonies are easily taken care of with filters and killfiles, and USENET is as vibrant as ever. The only thing about USENET that's bad is the high traffic in binaries which are easily obtainable on the Web or via protocols more suited to binary transfer. The MP3 groups especially piss me off since 99% of what gets posted was easy to find on Napster and is still easy to find on the Web or via Gnutella, Audiogalaxy, and other sources better suited for binary transfers. But, ah well...
Chasing Amy
(We all chase Amy...)
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"-Tacitus
Mr. Gielda and his Cotse service are really the black sheep of the remailer community. All you have to do to see this is spend some time in the venerable group alt.privacy.anon-server , where remailer operators (remops) and others interested in security and privacy congregate. Gielda has his supporters, but nearly everyone in the community views him with suspicion. After all, he admits to keeping tracking data on his users, which is the opposite of what remailers are for. They were designed to prevent tracking. If I chain a message through good remailers, I know that that message is untraceable, and that my speech, however unpopular, is protected. If I send a message through Gielda's shitty Cotse thing, then the minute my unpopular speech results in the government asking him who I am, with a warrant (all too easy to get today--just recall the Independant Media Center case recently), he'll fold like a cheap suit. That in no way equates to protecting free speech, which is what a real remailer does.
v acy.anon-server&as_uauthors=carbonymous&num=100 I'm the one named "Carbonymous Howard" and unfortunately Google truncates each article in the thread so that you'll have to click on some links to get the rest of the articles.
For a good discussion on the opinions of both sides, I recommend a thread I posted in under another nic some time ago. http://groups.google.com/groups?as_ugroup=alt.pri
At any rate, Gielda isn't exactly a beloved guy in the privacy field, and it's sad to see him get the spotlight when there are plenty of *real* privacy and free speech advocates who deserve it more. To meet them, just hang out in alt.privacy.anon-server for a while.
Chasing Amy
(We all chase Amy...)
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"-Tacitus
They are not complete inverses of each other. More security does not always equal less freedom of speech and less security does not always equal more freedom of speech. Security helps minority groups from getting the shit kicked out of them and from them stepping over the boundaries of the majority and vice versa. Some security is always necessary because the world isn't ideal and people can be harmful to the others, fortunately. America uses security to enhance freedom of speech, not slow it down. Without security, we would have a bunch of people argueing with rifles and shotguns and a state of anarchy. With security, we can stifle the gun opposition and let them argue "peacefully." Too much security is bad because then security might be stifling FOS but we have to do all that we can in our power to prevent this.
----
Just because a bunch of people believe or do something stupid, doesn't make it any less stupid.
I couldn't agree with that more.
----
Just because a bunch of people believe or do something stupid, doesn't make it any less stupid.
No, minorities and those who do not agree with the masses and really don't want to be shot want anonymous forums. Nazis, KKK, White Supremacy, Black Supremacy, Atheist, etc. want anonymous forums because if they don't, people can track them down and literally kill them because they don't have the same opionion as the rest of the world. Versatility keeps the world going and when you stop that, everybody will be the same and we will plummit back into the dark ages.
The government can only protect the minorities from the masses so much.
----
Just because a bunch of people believe or do something stupid, doesn't make it any less stupid.
BTW, fuck privacy - you don't need it if you ain't guilty.
True, but sometimes the only crime these users are guilty of is voicing an opinion.
it's sobering to see how much trouble is involved in attempting to provide what Gielda calls "anonymity with accountability"
Isn't the whole point of being anonymous to decrease you accountability? Using software to mask your IP, or even simply posting anonymously on here are both methods of decreasing accountability.
It's no small wonder why Mr. Gielda's job is so difficult.
I saw that link too, but decided not to reproduce it since it put up by tim at the top of the page.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
I was actually referring to cotse's site being targeted by hackers, terrorists threatening steve himself, people using his email address, etc. Are these people going to be turning their bulleye's onto slashdot in forging emails of rob malda or spamming the /. community with porn ads to the point that moderation is pointless? Just the other day comments to an article on /. was spammed with 30+ consecutive identical messages by the same person, not to mention copycats. The person was logged in, giving a default score of 1, meaning most people would see it before it got modded down, and with 30+ messages to mod down, thats a lot of wasted moderating.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
The system described by here sounds very similar to the slashdot system. And /. too, has been vistited by copyright lawyers in attempting censorship.
Is it just a matter of time before slashdot, being the public forum that it is, becoms the target of the psychotic individuals currently targeting cotse?
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
Just put yourself in Germany's situation and you'll see that they have been internationally stigmatized because of their (admittedly) ugly past. Forbidding swastikas and ultra-right wing parties is a concession to the world showing that we distance ourselves from it.
Problem is, it doesn't help for a healthy feeling of national identity. Some politicians publicly say that they are ashamed to be German because of the past (wackos)
-- sigs are like parking spaces - all the good ones are occupied
can somebody tell me what's funny about what I said?
I meant it seriously (*sniff*)
-- sigs are like parking spaces - all the good ones are occupied
I'll remember these things for the future when posting here:
1) slashdot is as international as America
2) Watch out for spelling! It'll really give you away!
3) Never, never, never compare countries. We're international here, remember?
The rest I'll just keep to myself before I say something inopportune.
-- sigs are like parking spaces - all the good ones are occupied
As a German, I just can't help but wonder about Americans. It seems that the land of the free doesn't know its own rights and continually tolerates breaches of constitutional law.
Not only that, they allow laws to be enforced which are krassly against the constitution. Of course, there will always be a small minority which will profit from these laws.
But remember: Freedom goes as far as the freedom of others is not endangered.
-- sigs are like parking spaces - all the good ones are occupied
its a shame the same rights that allow us to voice our opnions, and say what we think is the same right that protects people who spew nothing then hatred, i would say our forefathers would have been ashamed but they were slave owners
part time dreamer, full time slacker
it was once said "your right to swing your fist ends where another man's nose begins" dont quote me on that, but you get the point. while everyone should have the right to privacy, when they abuse their rights, and cause another person problems, should they not be punished? you can say that the internet is diffrent from anything before it, but simply put we're all human so treat each other as such
part time dreamer, full time slacker
oh ya, so they thought he was sub human so it was ok, since when was ignorance an excuse for evil?
they were not subhuman enough to fight in wars
hell they were good enough to work in plantations and be servants in the houses
thomas jefferson sure thought they looked human enough to have sex with
i dont think i need to contunie, 200 years ago they chose to ignore that the black man was an equal, because they feared that if given rights the plantation owners would have to pay for workers, or gasp! do some damn work themselves
part time dreamer, full time slacker
Here are some important US Court Cases involving Speech, incase you want to read up on this stuff more than just slashdot editorials and newspaper articles.
Schenk v United States (249 U.S. 47, 39 S.Ct. 247, 63 L.Ed 470) - Debut of Clear and Present Danger Test
Gitlow v New York (268 U.S. 652, 45 S.Ct. 625, 69 L.Ed. 1138) - Overthrow of Government Speech protected
Rice v. Paladin Enterprises, Inc. (940 F.Supp. 836 (D.Md. 1996) - A district court case, that allows for people who publish material advocating criminal activity to be sued for aiding and abetting, never made it to the US Supreme Court.
Forsyth County, Georgia v. Nationalist Movement (Lost my notes on this) - Discusses the Heckler's Veto.
Edwards v. South carolina (327 U.S. 229, 83 S.Ct 680) - Time, Place and Manner restrictions. Discussion of what constitutes a Public Forum.
Adderly v. Florida (385 U.S. 39, 87 S.Ct. 242, 17 L.Ed. 2d 149) - More Time, Place, and Manner. In this case, Prisons aren't a traditional Public Forum.
International Society for Krishna Conciousness, Inc. v Lee (505 U.S. 672, 112 S.Ct. 2701) - Has to do with leafletting at airports. More forum stuff.
Madsen v. Women's Health Center Inc. (512 U.S. 753, 114 S.Ct. 2516, 129 L.Ed.2d 593) - Limiting of speech around abortion clinics.
Cohen v. California (403 U.S. 15, 91 S.Ct. 1780, 29 L.Ed.2d 284) - "Fuck the Draft" case.
That's all I feel like posting right now...maybe later I'll go into the Symbolic speech stuff, and publisher rights, etc. Use this for a good starting point if you really like this stuff.
---
is anyone in a position of authority going to save us?? are you waiting around?
I agree with "when you want security, you have to give up some freedom, that's just how it works." But why should every jane doe know that u smoked some weed when u were 15 or you burnt a flag or something like that, Yes, if u murdered someone then u should expect to be treated like u did. I dont think these "cameras" will be here in Australia because in general we dont have a crime/security problem as big people in America do. Tim
Common law.... Common Sense, Scientific principles. ..... Law of admiralty.... You must obey the captain, State or Master you have surrendered your rights too.
You are a slave and don't even realize it. Can you own property? Stop paying taxes and see how long you keep it. NOW if you really owned it seems like you wouldn't have to pay tribute to keep it. Yes SOME taxes are needed and constitutional and needed for the commons of America. But where do all those tax dollars really go.... Sure as hell isn't for local services. We are paying tribute to a private organization the Federal Reserve. If it's not private why does it NOT have a government internet address.
Admit it you are a slave, and deep down you know its true.
It doesn't matter what the currency is, gold or some other real world material. The FED by controlling money flow is skimming off the GNP of America and the world. They create money out of thin air and as more and more money is put in the system it buys less and less. WHAT ever we use as a currency of exchange need to have something tangible associated with it. It is for the exchange of real world items isn't it? How can you create money without material to back it.
PLEASE tell me how the FED really works I would like to know. Who owns the FED since you seem to have a clue, Or is it best that the public not know how few people control the money supply.
>. But no i'm under the laws of admirility and >i'm a battery for the corporate agents and neo > wake up etc. STFU. How can you be under the laws of admirility WITHOUT the Federal government operating outside the constitution? How can the Federal goverment be operating outside the constitution? The Federal Government doesn't have the authority to place you in there juristiction but they have. is state capitalized on your birth certificate? Why is there a gold border around the flags in court rooms and over the state capital. Check your history books that's NOT a flag of any of the state of the American Republic. When did it change and why? Correct me if I'm wrong but the word state on your birth certificate is capital.... why is this so shouldn't be a little 's'
People mimic what they see and what they see is an oppressive government that takes away freedom at every turn. Instead of hating group A,B or C or bitching about how unfair X,Y and Z is, why not ask why the system is this way and who benefits from it.
You are a slave Neal..... A private corporation owns you and your country Lock, Stock and Barrel. You know there is something not right with the world but can't seem to put your finger on it. All you life you have been told you are a free man made so by the US Constitution but you and your country where lost in a bankrupts settlement back in 1913. You government continues to collect tributes to pay off there debts but an impossible system has been put in place that only creates more debt when you try and pay it back so you can never be free.
The US government prints money that then the Federal Reserve buy for pennies on the sheet for paper of 1000, 100, 20 etc. The government then borrows these notes from the Federal Reserve with the promise that they will pay them back with interest. So that twenty you have in your pocket is actually a promissory note it doesn't actually represent anything other than a debt to the Federal Reserve, that's why it states on it. "This note is legal tender for all debts public and private" What the hell is a NOTE and why is only good for debts. Even if we gave back all these NOTES to the Federal Reserve we would still owe them interest on these NOTES. Real money can be traded for gold or silver they are "Gold or Silver Certificates" not promissory NOTES.
You have no constitutional rights because you are a citizen of United States of America not a united states of America citizen. Same geographic region different government and laws You are under the law of admiralty, NOT common law(constitution is a common law documents), placed there because the government now considers you property of the State with privileges granted by them. In legal terms your corporate alter ego has accepted a service from the government and placed you under their jurisdiction.
Freedom breeds security, only seeking security breeds tyranny. We are not free, that is the true source of the cancer eating at society. A fight more dear to the overall preservation of freedom is at.
www.givemeliberty.org
> want without repercussions,
true and not true. Free speech is just that, free. You must be held accoutable for your actions. Cotse is a privacy shield, not an anonymous remailer. You have the options of filing a civil lawsuit and obtaining the logs through a court of law. Your lawyer may subpoena the logs. You _can_ get to a little more information that MAY OR MAY NOT allow you to find the actual poster. (The same holds true with any ISP or webmail provider)
>it's the possibility to speak the truth aloud. Not possibility. The FACT that you can speak the truth or anything your THINK is the truth, without being held accountable for things that are not within the scope of your knowledge. You cannot be held libel for something you didn't know to be different from the OPINION you submitted. However, if you KNOW FOR A FACT that the information you delivered was false and fraudulent, you may be in jeopardy of a libel suit against you.
>The net has given many cowards the ability to >spread lies without recourse to those slandered >or otherwise defamed. It's libel and not slandered. Slandered is spoken, libel is written.
As for being a coward, how about not wanting KOOKS knocking at your front door tryin to get you to ride Hale/Bopp to the corners of the galaxy? How about keep script kiddies from tormenting you while online? How about keeping the pedophiles from scoping out your children, just because you accidently crossposted to some obscure pedophile's newsgroup without watching what you were doing?
People make mistakes. Privacy Sites help shield them from criminals.
--
Colonel Flagg
http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/1475/
"Big Brother is watching you, Little Brother is too. When Big Brother goes to sleep, Little Brother goes through his stuff." - Unknown Author
"...Pepper spray works nicely, unless your assailant uses it as a condiment." - CF, 2001
> I wish each computer had a traceable code.
> It would help catch and kill those script
> kiddies too. I don't fear being tracked,
> I do nothing wrong. You are an idiot.
What makes you think the stuff that you are doing now will not be outlawed in the future and come back to haunt you? Like posting here? Maybe this will be held against you in 20 years. Who knows? You can't assure me 100% that it *couldn't* happen. Especially with you anti-privacy nuts out there. You allow shit like that to happen.
Freedom. If you don't like it, move to a totalitarian state and see how well YOU LIKE THAT, fucker.