Slashdot Mirror
Data Miners Moving to Offshore Data Havens
schwit1 writes "Washington Post has an article about former TIA personnel moving their data mining operations offshore (Bahamas) to escape
U.S. privacy rules, and to make a buck. I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas. Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?"
Aw, hell. While we are at it, why not privatize all of government? You might be surprised at how much is already privatized. We are well on our way to outsourcing our military to companies such as Haliburton and Computer Sciences Corporation (nee Dyncorp) as well as having our current POTUS wanting to privatize social security, the Dept. of the Interior, the Dept. of Eduation, the Department of Energy, our system of election to corporations like Diebold etc...etc...etc.... So, why are you now complaining about TIA and privacy?
Individuals and organizations that will do anything necessary to accomplish their goals, even if that means skirting the law by going outside the country should not be tolerated. In essence, this approach would violate the law, thus this effort at relocation, so why is he supported by members in the current government?
So, taking this further: Let's say that this company screws up in their data collection......what recourse will you have if the company is an offshore company? By what mechanisms will they be held responsible for errors or violations of the law?
All of this is exactly why you need to vote in this coming election. Get out and vote!
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
c'mon guys, this topic needs more cowbell
I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas.
John Kerry had Botox injections and is married to ketchup queen.
George Bush was a partner in Saudi investment company that's linked to bin Laden family. He also owns a timber company.
Happy now?
okay the poster here is saying that if a foreign country hosts information that violates US laws, we are going to enact more laws???
I think if they did something like that, we'd be more likely to invade, though I'd prefer the stronger laws...
Reminds me of a publicity stunt a newspaper in portland pulled after the local government ruled that trash on the curbside was fair game for the police to seize without a warrant. They went dumpster diving at several high profile government officials curbsides and posted the results of their findings in the paper. I thought it was a very effective piece of journalism.
The US could do the same as the EU, and prohibit export of personal data to jurisdictions which do not have equal or better privacy protections as ours. That would stop a lot of outsourcing in general, and probably be a vote-winner among unemployed geeks.
Sustainability and energy independence essay
Washington Post has an article about former TIA personnel moving their data mining operations offshore (Bahamas) to escape U.S. privacy rules, and to make a buck. I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas. Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?
Does this make any sense to anyone?
These companies are moving offshore to escape US privacy laws. So the solution is for the US to enact tougher privacy laws? Wouldn't that just encourage even more companies to move offshore?
I would think the solution would be one of those worldwide initiatives that people around here seem so fond of. (That's sarcasm, if you couldn't detect it.) If a company's moving offshore to escape one country's laws, the only real solution is for that other country and all the other countries around it to enact the same laws. Right?
As it is forbidden for surveyors to call cell phone numbers, those people who have ditched their landlines and only have cells are not included in the polls... and these are exactly the Slashdot dwelling technophiles which traditionally have been apatic to politics, but are now waking up...
Will we see some surprise support for Kerry on November 2nd? Or even better: for Badnarik or for Nader...
Enact stringent privacy rules? For the US? On Bahamas? Offshore? With the global jurisdiction and universal scope of US law, I presume? How would you want the "federal officials" to do that? Maybe US should "liberate" Bahamas?
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas. Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?"
So, basically, what you're saying is, the ends justift the means? That's a logical fallacy, and is inadmissable as rationale. Try again.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
How about invade the Bahamas?
But seriously, I think the scenero in the original post is probably the only way it's gonna work.
---- You have been programmed by the Illuminati to not see the word ""!
No, what is needed are laws that prevent the collection of such info in the first place. By the time it's published abroad, it's already been collected here.
No, what we need is for someone to show people the kind of information that's been collected on them already, whether by the government or private companies. Say, collect all the info on the staff of the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, Faux News, and members of Congress, then send it to them. Sure, some systems might have to be hacked in the process, which I'd ordinarily be opposed to, but things have gotten so bad that maybe people need a wake-up call.
Trust me, if something originated here and somehow was tranferred somewhere else and the US wasn't pleased with that, it'd quickly be taken care of.
Regards,
Steve
http://www.willametteweek.com/story.php?story=3507
At this point, companies enforce the idea that anything that they can get their hands on is theirs.
Until we recognize that just because I gave you my information it does not mean that it is no longer mine, privacy will always take a second place to corporate interests. And, since corporate interests run America, it follows that it will not change.
What is more important is not what corporate America is doing, but how to get the Federal government back into the hands of and for its citizens; although, I really do not think that is possible. Whether you agree with the politics or not, it is suggestive to say that about 50% of the populace believes that Bush's policies are acceptable, which basically includes allowing businesses to ignore any ethical concerns (Halliburton, Microsoft, etc). You can't change corporate America with only 50% of the vote.
Bel, the mostly sane.. "Of course I can't see anything! I'm standing on the shoulders of idiots." -- Me
I agree with your premise, I just don't think it would work. everyone needs to keep some private information about a person, its combining it that makes it dangerous and annoying. Credit agencies for example have SO MUCH information about you, and the amount of info on Lexus-Nexus is amazing, I found out there are professionals out there who work for rich people and try to keep their assets out of these databases... I wonder what would happen if lexus-nexus was taken down
Nop.
But its more than enough to send in the Marines to 'extract' the servers and people that publish sensitive information.
Trust me, if something originated here and somehow was tranferred somewhere else and the US wasn't pleased with that, it'd quickly be taken care of.
I wish I could agree with your optimism. We have enough troubles with our physical borders let alone digital ones... I doubt we would have much success in curtailing information transfers...
I don't see how posting so called private medical data really matters. For example, how can it matter if you know that I am a diabetic? For insurance purposes? I imagine that I have to declare this anyhow.. What else? Legal? This is already public knowledge? Financial? Largely public as well. I really don't see the reason for all the uproar.. of course.. my mind is open as to why I should care...
No, thats what it will take to have the site covertly shut down and its creators shot down.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
The guy who designed the system is going offshore, because the government couldn't get the greenlight and hoping to find private backers.
Bell said he did not become involved with Global until after he left government in March.
"Is this what it will take...?"
:-o
Is that a challenge?
Any takers?
We control the property that leaves and enters these shores. Shouldn't we also do this with personal data? I'm not talking about a big firewall like China has, but I am required to give out personal information all the time in the course of living my daily life. I would like assurances that when I entrust personal info with, say, my insurance company that the data will stay where the laws protect me. What good are privacy laws otherwise?
"So, basically, what you're saying is, the ends justift the means? That's a logical fallacy, and is inadmissable as rationale. Try again."
You haven't been reading Slashdot long, have you? Ever hear of the "Robin Hood" defense every time the copyright issue come up?*
Of course this is "/." were people believe in the "You're an AC, so you must be wrong" fallacy too. So what do you expect?
...Unless enough of them are 'outed' in this fashion -- then there will be decisive action on this matter.
The average citizen doesn't matter in the scheme of things unless enough of us band together to do something about this.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas. Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?"
Um, no because the federal officials don't write the rules. Congress does.
Or even better: for Badnarik [badnarik.org] or for Nader [votenader.org]...
EVEN BETTER?!? Come on people, voting for either of those canidates is a vote for Satin (AKA: George W. Bush) himself! Please, please, please, please, please. If you dont like the way things are going, vote Kerry, not Bush, or Bush 2 (Badnarik) or Bush 3 (Nader)
i'd rather have spyware (including, but not limited to, dataminers) than a totalitarian gov't. spyware is easy to remove. more laws = less freedom.
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
Can anyone say Data Protection Act? Heres a clue, its not next to the PATRIOT isle or the CAN-SPAM section.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
I always wondered why that got accepted. Maybe it is not infringing the EU laws after all? Or maybe another case of "we make laws but we ignore them as we want"? Or "ignore them to avoid an international problem"?
Data mining and espescially subversive data collection is the kind of thing that makes me angry because it pisses me off to an incredible degree and there's absolutely fucking NOTHING I can do about it. I know 1984 and Brave New World references are terribly cliché and oft-abused but man, Big Brother is alive and well and distributing Soma in the form of privacy policies.
o wait getting on the "do not call" list will solve ALL my problems!!!
The really idiotic part was that the class action lawsuite was dismissed because "the class had suffered no damages." One law firm's reaction was the potential value of this ruling as a defense for future privacy theft instances.
There's already a precedence. I don't remember that exact circumstances, but it went something like this: A local newpaper got hold of a list of people who were renting porn from the adult video store. Come to find out, the list included the names of some prominent policitians and judges in washington. The newspaper published the list which caused great embarassment to said politicians. Congress immediately passed an emergency measure which made publishing such embarassing info about politicians illegal.
If these offshore companies try to do the same, you can bet your bottom dollar that Congress will take immediate action to cover their asses. Of course, Joe Citizen will not enjoy the same protection because it's not in the national/corporate interest that his privacy be respected.
When all else fails, run.
you wrote:
"I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas. Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?"/i?"
Yes, that is true, because America is mainly run for and by those at the top of the hierarchy, just like some sort of animal social grouping. And it will continue to be run that way until elite heads roll. Same as it ever was.....
eat shiat and bark at the moon
If you put it on the internet it's public info. Deal with it.
Address:
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
202-456-1111
president@whitehouse.gov
Salary: $400,000
Health Data
And here's his attourney
Translation: For those living "in the public life," there is no expectation of privacy, so to expect those in public life to understand the motivation of those of us who appreciate privacy to keep it is like talking about being poor to someone who has been rich all their life: They just can't understand. Heck, the news media mentiones when the President has a physical. Some congressional districts probably do this for their representatives too. This is probably only one of the reasons privacy advocates have a hard time pleading their cause in the US.
I am, and always will be, an idiot. Karma: Coma (mostly effected by
Data for all federal employees:i tics/fedpage/workers&query=qdb_Results1_Srch_Page/ Search
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?node=pol
Along with half of every pair of socks you own.
And your bic pens.
Uhh, exactly how much of this information is private? Usually these systems are merely pulling together public data in an accessible database. Lets keep the strawmen in cornfields.
Also if you were to RTFA (I know, too much to expect from /. story submitters), you would find that there are legitimate reasons for the company to move offshores other than to escape US laws.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Heck, if some pollster was to call me, I'd purposefully LIE and say that I supported Bush to throw their numbers off as far as possible and make the republicans confident and complacent...
Before the rug is jerked out from under them.
But I'm not an American, and I'm not voting in your election. You guys are responsible for whoever wins, and if it happens to be Bush... Well, that will say a few things about people in your country...
N.
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
...what would be kind of neat is some way to store publicly viewable information of your own will somewhere that people can get at it easily... or perhaps something where you're guaranteed anonymity for sharing this information. Imagine walking into a store and instead of having to browse through several minutes of stuff you don't want to get to what you do, the stuff you'd be interested would be at immediate access. Imagine listening to the radio but instead of having to pick a station and live with it, or having to compile your own music, the station'll dynamically pick out the sorts of music you enjoy and play them for you. I guess something like that would be a pay service though.
:)
There are multitudes of ways the idea could be abused, but everything starts out as a dream... right?
----- Wtcher Dragon, UDIC
Too busy fighting piracy to protect privacy
the government is always way way ahead of what most of us know. internet or not. this could just be a front to appease the public for what has already been going on strong. but hey, i hope they catch the bad guys amongst us for what ever reason, cause not all goverment agents are creeps just trying to be nosy. they are also lawmen ready to lock up the creeps.
Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?
I think it's likely to get the country added to the Axis of Evil and atomic-bombed.
I am NOT a number! I am a - oh wait, I'm number 761710. Look! 761710!
...they're USian, but the reality is that the US' privacy rules are nothing compared to the EU's.
But, of course, it'll go over big with the Fortune 1000 types. Now it'll be even harder to get a job.
"I'm sorry. We don't hire jaywalkers."
An important fact that's seldom discussed is that any information about me that might be available via the Internet has already been made public. The act of digitizing that information and making it available in a database increases its potential access, but it does not impact my privacy. The data were already in the public domain.
If some piece of information about me is not legally available to the public, and still appears on the Internet, then someone has broken the law.
So, those who argue for new privacy legislation to curb what they see as violations of their privacy on the Internet are really asking to reclassify as private many types of personal information that have long been accessible to the public.
Suppose, then, that former employees could not verify or deny that we used to work for them. Suppose a bank was not allowed to access the credit history of the guy who wants to buy your house. Suppose your daycare center could not check the criminal record of the kid who wants to be their new driver.
Technology and the Internet certainly ease access to information -- that was the point, after all -- but it is almost always info that was already available to the public.
Legislation that broadens government access to private information is, of course, a different issue.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Yeah, you don't seem to understand Americans. While voting for a good president is important, it is not as important as voting for the winner.
... but you're a diabetic that has had rather high HbA1C levels, your doctor thinks that you're not complying as fully with your treatment as you should be, and your weight has been going up lately too, and although our insurance company insures diabetics (at a slightly higher premium) we are just not interested in insuring YOU...
Dunbal
It seems to me that the data these people are using is/was acquired partly in the United States and about US residents/companies. That would make everything they do with that part of the data subject to US laws, IMHO. Same applies to data they acquired from European Union countries and residents.
Or am I wrong? Sounds like a monumental loophole that should've been blocked.
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
These off-shore data rigs pump thousands of bytes of data into our oceans every day! It's bad enough we have oil drills going, but now we have to go confuse the whales with credit card numbers, passwords, and addresses? I'm sure that with all this clutter, the whales will find themselves halfway to the mall before they realise they've left the water.
Who can I vote for that will give the US complete control over the internet?
"The really idiotic part was that the class action lawsuite was dismissed because "the class had suffered no damages." "
Did they? After all the same justification is used in copyright infringement. Why should anyone be surprised that such thinking didn't stay confined to such a domain?
Easy answer hypothetically. The ones who were doing it before the US military killed them and blew up their buildings, offices, trucks, and etc.
them guys
I mean honestly... Hasn't the PATRIOT ACT cause us to be bent down and rammed up the ass with an anal probecam already?
Nader? Not thanks, I don't vote Republican.
Maybe just to an abandoned oil rig, or farther to an abandoned space station formerly owned by the Tessier-Ashpool family
*Knock Knock*... Hey there is somebody at the door. Let me go see who it is.
What category of fallacy is it?
I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas.
RTFA, they want to make money on this. It won't be posted on any open internet web server. However, for the right price, the information might be viewable on a web server.
---------------
All your Sybase are belong to us.
Pile of socks + washing machine = prime number generator.
Kerry must agree with data being moved offshore as he, being 1 of only 100 US Senators, has not introduced any bills to combat this problem.
If you want to know why look at who funded the DEMS and GOPs national conventions and you will find your answer.
Actually, this could work out to be kind of an equalizer. Here in this country looking information on public officials could get you an "Ashcrofting." But let some company in another country do the dirty work for you. Hey, what's this charge on Bill O'Reilly's credit card to a place called Vibrator Universe?
Actually, that's nothing compared to what foreign governments are going to do with that treasure trove of information. More likely what will happen is Congress will make it a crime to export data on Congress, and the let the rest of us take up the pooper. Business as usual.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
give me the listing of every cop and sheriff in the county with ssan, home phone and address.
It was nice to call their wives at home and ask if so and so was ok. I'm quite sure it kept a good friend alive.
If lists of sale prices and corporate databases and lists of zip codes can all be copyrighted, why not copyright your personal information and pursue legal action against any unauthorized use of it?
My father is a physician who has greatly opposed government run health-care. The real problems have been government using unfair attempts to charge doctors with medicare fraud in the 1980's under Pres. Reagan, and here in the State of Washington, using statistical measures to determine who has overbilled medicaid without actually doing any line-item auditing (and violating any sort of due process rights of the doctors involved) under Gov. Locke. If Americans are not going to be willing to pay for the government health care that is currently offered and so they resort to unconstitutional cost-cutting measures, then what would happen in a single-payer system?
I also don't see this as a partisan issue.
However, I think that a number of things could be done to reduce the cost of health care.
1) Provide a shared malpractice insurance system. The doctor's plan would cover a portion of the payout, and the patient would be able to buy coverage as well-- sort of like disability insurance. The state would keep records of claims both by individuals and against doctors. The idea here is to remove court costs as much as possible therefore reducing the malpractice surcharge.
2) Require all pharmaceutical manufacturers to publish recommended retail prices, allowing doctors and consumers to look at the comparitive cost easily. This would halp restore some market pressure to the pharmaceutical drug market
3) Allow insurance agencies to collectively bargain for pharmaceuticals.
4) Take a close look at patent policy and pharmaceutical drugs.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
This is due to a well known quirk of human nature. What makes you think this is specific to Americans? Or do you think that there is some country whose people do not follow this principle? Which is it?
Much of this as i understand is also due to canadas legal system not having "punitive damages" which also reduces insurance costs massively.
Nice idea, but we all know in the US as soon as the government gets involved in the health care there are going to be lawsuits.
You just wait until a white guy and a black guy are in need of the same liver transplant. The doctors decide the white guy is a better candidate. Solution, the black guy will sue under the Equal Protection Clause and demand that giving the liver to the white guy isn't fair. Ideally they would get an injunction preventing the liver from being transplanted until the judge can hold a trial on the fairness of whether or not the liver is being allocated based on medical need or racial bias.
Then you have the politics of what morally should be covered. Contraception? Abortions? Sex changes? Where does an elective survey end and a "human right" begin? I can make a case for damn near anything being a "human right," (especially in Canada but that is another story).
Also, just wait till I sue the government because of the wrongful death of my loved one. You thought the lawyers were hungry when we had easy malpractice cases from insurance companies? Ain't nobody got deep pockets like the government! "Because you mean to tell me with all the resources of the Federal Government, we aren't able to beat death?" To quote The Onion "World Death Rate Holding Steady At 100 Percent" despite doctors efforts and centuries of trying.
We are all going to want to live forever, and anytime we don't the government is going to be sued.
And shouldn't I be able to pay just a little bit more and get better health care than the basic government service? How much longer till the "little bit more" is deemed something that should be in the general health care, and we're back to the same belly aching over coverage we have now? Or, how quickly until everyone has that "extra" coverage that we can't do without plus the tax paid coverage and we're paying twice.
Lets take that a bit further. Right now we have a horribly F'ed up public school system. (I know "your" school is great but the people in the next county are F'ed.) What do you think a government run health care is going to look like? They can't even keep teachers, reasonable class sizes, and a full school year. How long till you think the government is going to run health care into the ground too? Our "elite" are currently paying BOTH public school taxes and tuition to send their kids to private school. That is exactly what will happen with government health care. You'll have the upper level (or those willing to sacrifice other things) paying to go to a private system where they get better coverage and lower lines.
Also, right now companies pay MOST of the health care, and they get a business deduction for it. If the government runs health care, it'll be the average citizen who pays. Want to guess if the companies are suddenly going to up your salary now that they don't have to pay health care? While The Left is usually a big champion of public health care, it only works to enrich the companies and screw the little guy. Something The Left claims it doesn't want. You never hear them suggest a Corporate tax to pay for government health care, do you? Nope, always the working middle class that The Left wants to pay for the social program of the week.
Universal health care sounds nice, but I just don't think it'll work here in the US.
Actually, I don't know if it is true right now that jobs that are awarded to government contractors must stay in the US. Even if Bush has signed this bill, it still doesn't take effect "until the Commerce Department proves the ban wouldn't hurt the economy or lead to more job losses." So, the India quote stands for now. Quit making assumptions and prove me wrong that jobs cannot go overseas once awarded to government contractors!
Well, more accurate this time around would be, "while voting for a good candidate is important, if that vote has a good chance of helping the very worst candidate win, you need to reconsider that vote."
Bush said if you're not for him you're against him. Well, I ain't for him.
Can I bum a sig? I left mine at the office.
Who's the sucker, then? Who's stuck with an extremely expensive foreign policy? The US DELIBERATELY CHOSE to have a foreign policy that needs a very big military...
But do not get fooled. If Canada ever gets invaded (who the fuck would be stupid enough to want that barren cold land???) and the US has to kick-out the invader, the price Canada will have to pay to the US will be so high that the original invasion will look much better.I wonder if they've got any internships open?
<irony>That's true. That's the beauty of the U.S. private health sector, there are no malpractice suits, and doctors enjoy free malpractice insurance</irony>.
Surely a doctor's opinion would have more weight in front of the Court than some ambulance-chaser catering to an hysterical redneck chick???
We have the very same debates here. Actually, Québec was funding abortions even though they were illegal and doctors performing them could have been criminally prosecuted (however, since the criminal code prosecutions are under provincial jurisdiction, Québec could damn well chose not to prosecute abortionists)...
Well, it's up to you to decide whether every Tom, Dick & Harry could sue the Government, then you have to pay the price. <irony>And it is so unfortunate that the US governments are crumbling under the weight of all those lawsuits following all those car accidents happenning on all those public roads</irony>... There are plenty of cases for the government to be sued for all sorts of situations, yet it doesn't happen as much as it could. Why would healthcare be any different?
You cannot do that. As soon as you allow paying a little bit more, the system is irremediably doomed. Witness the pityful state of the US public education system... Universal precisely means that everyone is covered equally.
>> An anonymous coward, so sure about the strength of his opinions that he did not dare sign said:
or it could be that he forgot his password... or didn't care to log in... or was on someone else's machine and did't care to post usder their name.
Please don't damn the poor guy for not having a UID.
>>The biggest obstacle to this is the stupid belief americans have that everything that the government does is bad.
Good Point! We must never forget the Louisiana Purchase.
... it would make a great late-night test site for a homemade flux compression device.
What in the fuck are you talking about? Most importantly, Canada is a former British colony. The United States is also a former British colony. The subs in question are diesel subs. Nuclear subs have never been a (reasonable) option, Canada has no nuclear arms at all. In reality, the British subs happened to be for sale about the same time as the existing subs were due for either major refits or replacement. The initial cost for the British was 800,000pounds, and Canada purchesed them for CAD$750,000, less then 1/2 price, ignoring 10 years of inflation. Even spending twice as much on refits and "Canadianization" of the boats then has been spent, they would still be a good deal.
Submarines are inherently dangerous things. It is entirely possible that there was no design flaw, no flaw in workmanship, and no crew error that caused the fires.
"Canada" hasent purchased any trains. CN is a publicly traded comapny, and has significant investements in US rail systems. Via Rail, a crown coporation , which has some new cars, purchased them from Alstrom, which is headquarters in France.
Canada has purchased military hardware from lots of countries, including France. I cant off hand think of any major system from France... But I also cant think of any major French military system at all. Well, thats not true, I know France is part of various european conglomorates building military hardware.
The United States is obligated to assist Canada if it is ever invaded. As is Belgium, Denmark, France, the UK, Italy, Iceland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal... All the NATO nations - amongst others. Even if not so obligated, removing a hostile force from a bordering counrty would actually be a good reason for the US to go to war -- and we are all aware of the flimsy excuses they need to do that.
Why not? Poindexter's crew ran their Iran/Contra operation offshore, in both Iran and Central America (Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador), as well as around the Caribbean for drug/gun transport, Columbia/Bolivia/Peru for getting the drugs, and in America only to get money and weapons for their modern triangular trade. This kind of stuff is business as usual for them, with the Internet replacing CIA-covered small planes for their brand of global "trade".
--
make install -not war
A surprise increase for Badnarik or Nader is going to put Bush back in control of the destruction of America. Vote for Kerry and donate some time or money to Badnarik or Nader. If Bush wins, the two of them will never see a chance to change anything in the new, improved fascist Bush America.
--
make install -not war
The new cars I am referring to are the Renaissance (dubbed Déplaisance - displeasure by employees) cars, which were to be the Nightstar trains that were to run between England and the continent. They might have been built by Alsthom, but they have been built by the old Metro-Cammel works in England, which were bought by Alsthom. Now, what else a colonial attitude would make one buy unsuitable stuff from the mother-land???
Britshit loading-gauge (the size of the trains themselves) is the smallest in the world, so those trains are cramped inside (there is no way they can fit four seats abreast in there) and were designed to run on european manucured tracks. They are a disaster on the poorly-maintained tracks we have here.Their company may be incorporated in the Bahamas, but their servers are in the London Docklands area. They're a customer of "core-isp.net".
The idea of Canada as a seperate country from the U.S. is outddated nonsense. Economically and security-wise the two are inextricably symbiotic.
I think the stumbling blocks until now have been Canadians tendancy for socialised health care, education and the accompanying higher tax rates. Also there is probably some fear in urban areas of the 2nd Amendment, never mind that there are more guns per capita in Canada then the US.
The best solution would be to make Canada a commonwealth of the U.S., like Puerto Rico. That way Canadians could retain their own independant goverment and reduce the red tape that is creating market inefficiencies between the two countries.
q: What's the similarities between the Bermuda Triangle and a sorority girl?
:-P
a: They've both swolloed a lot of semen!
(sorry, couldn't resist)
Here we go again.
"You are not alone. When an intellectual property right holder has something or sells something, they want to treat it as a property."
Copyright wasn't invented yesterday. What copyright owners want is what the social contract promised.
"But, they want to treat the generator or the consumer as a licenser who is subject to a contract."
That may be because copyright is a contract. A social contract embodied in law.
"It's been a very devastating road in U.S. that has been very well used to raise the barrier of entry to competition."
I'll get to this down below.
"As one person noted, it is interesting that I.P. is the only thing that can be of someone else (generated from common activities), be treated as a loss of property even though it was never produced (piracy), kept as private property (trademarked in a sense), patented to prevent people from reproducing something that they are not allowed to see, and sold as a license to which you must agree without opening the product."
Unfortunately you mish-mashed everything together and made no distinctions between what's good and what's bad. Sloppy.
"I have a very, very hard time believing that the founding fathers had in any shape for form intended this nightmare."
Read the federalist papers and the constitution. The founding fathers didn't freeze the constitution into stone for a reason (constitutional amendments).
Now as I mentioned above the problem isn't with the social contract. The problem is that with special interest AND (especially AND) a population shurking their civic duties, the contract has been distorted and broken. BUT the basic premises upon which patents and copyright are built are still valid now as they were then. Human nature hasn't changed from when the founding fathers walked the earth, just the tools to satisfy that nature.
So all the "throw the baby out with the bathwater" talk will only make the situation worse, not better.
...when you can vote multiple times a day?
But, only consumers would stop being "sheeple".
Everyone talks about vote this and vote that. You know something? Every day we are voting when we spend money. But the sad thing is most people don't see it that way, so they end up casting their vote and not even realizing it.
I hate to have this view point, but a plutocracy seems like nothing more then another layer in democracy. But it doesn't have to stay that way as long as people wake up and smell dollar bills on a positive note (pun not intended).
Life is not for the lazy.
Never mod points when I need them.
Troll.
Against my better judgement I'm answering you.
"An anonymous coward, so sure about the strength of his opinions that he did not dare sign said:"
Something to think about. Do your statements (Pig Hogger) need your signature to be correct? If so why(1)?
Now back to the issue at hand. Both of you have good points (a good debater recognizes this). You have a health care system with strengths and weaknesses. Same with the US.
However maybe a better solution lies not in "my system is better than yours", but in going back to basics, and recognizing we're building for the US. Not Canada, not Brazil, not the Bahamas, but the US and it's culture.
Starting with, what are the minimums of any health care system? Can this be for everyone (does it fail the practicality test)? Who will be responsible for it? How will it be funded? What will it cover?
How about branching out from there? And were does preventive medicine fit into this picture (hint, hint)?
None of the above are easy questions, even if we all agree that their should be medicine for everyone.
(1) Opinions don't need this test, for they are opinions, nothing more. Facts on the other hand...
Well, that will say a few things about people in your country...
Uh, you really should not judge our country by the types of people that would vote for Bush. We want to get rid of those people but we can't really ship them anywhere. You want them immigrating to your country, because the Canadians don't want 'em.
"No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad
Why is it that Liberals love to throw the term Fascist at anyone that doesn't support a huge government beaurocracy controlling every aspect of your life, cradle to grave? If you want that kind of government (socialism), there are plenty of countries out there that offer it. Pick one. Go.
The United States was was founded specifically to allow for and to promote self-determination. That means if you want it, you get out there and work for it. If you don't, no one is making you stay. Higher education, medical insurance, and everything else in this life come by hard work. The world doesn't owe you anything, get over it and stop whining.
In a truly Fascist government, negative comments would very quickly land you in a gulag, or much worse. This is also true of your supposedly enlightened Socialist and Communist "workers paradise" nations, for that matter. You seem to still be alive and free to do and say as you please - so drop the transparent rhetoric. No one who does not already share your worldview will take you seriously until you are intellectually honest in the way you communicate. Ditch the emotion-laden buzzwords.
Though none can be perfect, we have the most humane, dignified, and empowering government that the world has ever seen--but with our citizens trying to trade their every freedom for a dependence on feel-good programs and the thinly veiled motivations of foreigners who only stood to profit from human suffering, we are going to lose more than our self-determination. We will lose everything that made this country special and great.
If Canada ever gets invaded (who the fuck would be stupid enough to want that barren cold land???)
I'd keep my eye on Iceland. To those guys, your country would look like some sort of tropical paradise.
Gibson anyone?
You cant fight in here, its a war room!
I'm Canadian and while I love the fact that a visit to the clinic doesn't become a financial liability, and having a birthing doesn't cost you 3 months wages... you must also consider some other factors:
Many good doctors have left to the US because being paid for private service is more $$$. We're quite shortstaffed on both doctors and at times qualified nurses. While immediate dangers are quickly dealt with and covered, staff are often less competent due to being worked over hours (severely overworked) due to shortages. A new heart/lungs may be free, but surgery may involve very long waits, whilst private involves more $$$ but possibly better care, less wait, and not being discharged prematurely because of a space shortage for new patients.
I'm on a waitlist myself, soon to find out when I might expect to have day surgery for removing metal screws from my ankle. I'm definately glad that it's covered, but I'd hate the wait were it something more severe. I am looking at unpleasant discomfort with winter coming though, cold weather and metal are not the best combination.
I know I speak for all Slashdotters when I say, "Eat a dick."
Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
I'm not saying that this guy is right, but "the ends justify the means" is NOT a logical fallacy by any stretch of the imagination.
It's not even a moral fallacy because sometimes the ends DO justify the means.
The story is that they use Indian Reservations for the same stuff, since the Reservations are supposed to be sovereign nations.
http://www.worldhistory.com/wiki/P/Political-divi
"I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas. Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?"
Although doing unto politicians what they do unto citizens has proven to be a very effective way to get new law passed time and again (although sometimes that new law just says that politicians are exempt), you would have to post the private data where it is already illegal to post it, because your off-shore friends will refuse to host it.
After all, these off-shore companies are in it for the money; hosting data that endangers their business makes no sense.
"Universal health care sounds nice, but I just don't think it'll work here in the US."
Well-reasoned, but I don't think it is necessary that a government provide for all health care, just for the bare minimum. Doesn't that already happen in the US?
Why is it that Liberals love to throw the term Fascist at anyone that doesn't support a huge government beaurocracy controlling every aspect of your life, cradle to grave?
They don't. This country is very quickly approaching Fascism.
In a truly Fascist government, negative comments would very quickly land you in a gulag, or much worse.
Look, just because you don't even know what fascism is doesn't mean you should make shit up in a public forum. You just make yourself look ignorant.
Fascism is the merger of state and corporate power.
When the energy industry meets with the VP secretly to set energy policy, no non-industry voices are heard and the details are kept secret from the citizens that is a perfect example of fascism.
When our military is privatized leading to illegal actions by people outside the chain of command, that is another example of fascism.
When the media is allowed to conglomerate to the point it has leading them to sell us a war rather than ask valid questions, that is fascism.
When Major weapons manufacturers own huge chunks of the media and sell wars to make billions, that is fascism.
No one who does not already share your worldview will take you seriously until you are intellectually honest in the way you communicate. Ditch the emotion-laden buzzwords.
Anybody who actually knows what the words mean and has been paying attention takes it very seriously.
Those aren't buzzwords. Those are the words being used correctly in their proper context.
Though none can be perfect, we have the most humane, dignified, and empowering government that the world has ever seen--but with our citizens trying to trade their every freedom for a dependence on feel-good programs and the thinly veiled motivations of foreigners who only stood to profit from human suffering, we are going to lose more than our self-determination. We will lose everything that made this country special and great.
What a crock of shit.
Our citizens are trading their freedom for cowardice. Oh no, we were attacked. Lets's let the government take away our liberties. You are so far off base here it's insane.
We are losng everything that made this country great, and we're losing it to the fascists in power (dems and repubs).
Please try to actually learn a little bit about the subject before spouting off your ignorant rhetoric.
That is the plain truth. When we look at the history of fascism rooted in Mussolini's invention (he coined the term), it all becomes clear. "Corporations" are an artificial "body", created by the government to protect people from liability (accountability) for their actions. "Fascists" are artificial faces for those bodies, government created by those corporations to protect it from accountability for its actions. That surreal voodoo quality of corporatism/fascism is a perfect complement to media environments, where these representations can interact without any physical limitations. Thats why fascism has boomed when new media have boomed, so long as corporations and government are the primary organizers of their mediation.
This time fascism is rising largely on the strength of cable TV, fanned by a resurrection of radio as rightwing talk - the original fascist format. As Internet use grows more centralized, through technology or mere "Top 40" style habit, it too will become a fascist tool for corporate powermongers. That's why "the powers that be" hate P2P tech, have been slow to roll out mobile networking platforms in the US, and are destroying the "fair use" copyrights that sustain innovation. Decentralization, P2P, DIY - those are the simple, powerful enemies of fascism. In the 2004 election we will have a chance to derail the Republican replay of Hitler's destruction of the German republic in the 1930s, following *his* appointment as Chancellor and legal dismantling of their democracy. But unless we continue to develop communications that connect people directly, without corporate mediation, a corporate Internet will incubate a fascism so powerful that it cannot be opposed. And without counterpowers like the 1940s US and Russia, transnational fascism will triumph, a corporate "boot stepping on a human face - forever".
--
make install -not war
This reminds me of a recent article I saw about an ad campaign in foreign countries warning U.S. citizens (and others) that if they have sex with a child there, they may be prosecuted in their home country. So if the U.S. can prosecute citizens for having sex with children in other countries, why can't the U.S. prosecute citizens for other criminal acts, such as breaking privacy laws? While the former crime is a far more heinous act, the later has the potential to hurt the civil rights of a great many more people.
While I have a problem with this whole concept, if the government is committed to prosecuting U.S. crimes committed overseas, let's see it act in other areas of the law.
Actually, on a number of occasions through the year, I run into a porter(?) who works on Via Rail. And he says the same thing differently: modern but uncomfortable.
But I dont think the conspiricy theory fits here. If the government of Canada was intersted in getting VIA to purchase rail cars based on some non-business reasons, then they would direct them to Bombardier, or to lesser known domestic rail car manufacturers, such as Trenton Works(?), in Nova Scotia.
The purchase of the cars in question seems a good parallell to the subs. Some reasonable hardware was more-or-less lying around, unused, at the same time a agency was interested in purchasing similar hardware. That does not mean the hardware was unsuitable for the origional owners perspective: The Royal Navy was getting out of the diesel sub business. That doesnt mean that the diesel subs are bad, just that they are diesel. The Alstrom cars have some unusual specs, partially dictated by the safety requirments of the Chunnel. The modifications required to integrate them into a existing fleet is different then the requirments to replace an entire fleet. Passanger rail in Europe and in North America simply have different requirements.
Alstrom is a private company, and the vast majority, if not all, of the cars were alredy produced when Via anounced the purchase of them. The advantage to the UK had already happened: the jobs alredy done and paid for. The advantage was to Alstrom, a multinational, not to the UK.
In these discussions, nobody ever seems to remember to include that the Canadian health care system works because it is operated by Canadians and treats Canadians.
I remember someone in a TV panel discussions drawing a notable distinction: One of the core American political documents mentioned life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (aka pursuit of profit) as core values. A similar Canadian political document stressed peace, order and good government instead.
In America, a Canadian-style health care system (or any other kind of system) will fail to attract any significant advocacy if no one can get wicked rich and powerful off it. I'm not saying that's good or bad, but it is the way American society works. Sorry, folks, even Open Source would fail if the corporations using and selling it didn't see it as an easy way to get something for nothing.
Ugh. I just made myself depressed. (PS: Data that is never permitted to be generated cannot be mined...)
Like it or not, modern (expensive) medical care is rationed: by price in the USA, or by limited availability in Canada. Your Econ 101 textbook tells you why. Neither major party likes to admit it: there is no free lunch!
"voting for either of those canidates is a vote for Satin"
Yeah, I vote for cotton, much better than satin.
There are several top-notch Minnesota hospitals for you to choose from, and if you need an excellent orthapedist, I'd be happy to recommend the one that I used when I lived there and was actually active. Now I sit behind a desk all day. :-\
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
Lots of wealthy Canadians go to Mpls hospitals (and Mayo, of course) to get heart surgery because they don't feel like dying in Canada. I have total sympathy for them, as well. I mean, could you imagine being under Socialized health care and just be left to die while waiting for treatment? Such a sad state of affairs.
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
It's got to take a lot of brains to say more or less what someone else said seven hours before you.
So fascists with flamethrowers are enraged by their mask getting ripped off. That makes my detailed, informational, rational and wholly accurate post "Flamebait"? Then how come there are no flames in reply?
--
make install -not war
Fascism has NOTHING to do with corporations and everything to do with autocratic abuse of authority and power.
Mussolini coined the term which derives from a group of sticks originally used by the Roman emperors to symbolize their power.
Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
In 2003, a financial privacy bill came up in California. Several lawmakers voted against the bill. The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights obtained the SSNs for 8 of these 9 lawmakers (the information was not available for one individual.) The first four digits of each SSN were posted on the Internet with the name of each individual. They also released the first three digits of the SSN for Governor Davis. The affected lawmakers were rather upset as a result.
In another incident, Citigroup supported a bill that would have overturned financial privacy protections in California. The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights acted by publicly releasing the first five digits of the Citigroup CEO's SSN. The digits were written in the sky by a professional skywriter.
A hospital in the U.S. cannot legally turn away someone who requires urgent medical attention. If you are in an accident and unconscious, they TRY to find someone who can show them insurance, but they will operate anyway.
The big problem with healthcare is not catastrophic problems (which we do all pay for because hospitals cannot turn away someone without insurance), it's partly long term health problems (diseases of the liver, heart, etc., that require a transplant). But the worst are the minor issues...
Yes, preventative care is important, but under "free" plan you will promptly see doctors swamped with everything from headaches to sneezing and all sorts of psychosomatic problems inbetween.
The problem with Canada is that I WANT private practices that if my son has the flu TODAY, I want to see a doctor TODAY.
Stupid sexy Flanders.