Slashdot Mirror
Snowden's Big Truth: We Are All Less Free
chicksdaddy writes "In the days since stories based on classified information leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden hit the headlines, a string of reports and editorials claim that he had his facts wrong, accuse him of treason – or both. Others have accused journalists like Glen Greenwald of The Guardian of rushing to print before they had all the facts. All of these criticisms could be valid. Technology firms may not have given intelligence agencies unfettered and unchecked access to their users' data. Edward Snowden may be, as the New York Times's David Brooks suggests, one of those 20-something-men leading a 'life unshaped by the mediating institutions of civil society.' All those critiques may be true without undermining the larger truth of Snowden's revelation: in an age of global, networked communications and interactions, we are all a lot less free than we thought we were. I say this because nobody has seriously challenged the basic truth of Snowden's leak: that many of the world's leading telecommunications and technology firms are regularly divulging information about their users' activities and communications to law enforcement and intelligence agencies based on warrantless requests and court reviews that are hidden from public scrutiny. It hasn't always been so."
Bruce Schneier has published an opinion piece saying that while Snowden did break the law, we need to investigate the government before any prosecution occurs. (Schneier's piece is one in a series on the subject.) Snowden himself said in an interview today that the U.S. government has been pursuing hacking operations against China for years.
Are birds free from the chains of the skyway?
If Snowden keeps calling the government out on its lies and providing evidence that embarrasses those currently in power, he will be made to disappear without any trial at all.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
None of the warrents said something like
"All emails stored on VZ servers (listed below) that mention pressurecookers as bombs from the 723 people (listed below) who visited terrorist training camps (listed below) in 2010-2013."
From the Dictator (2012) - start at 0:28 for the meat.
And as somewhere here on /. said (to paraphrase) "NSA's wiretapping stopped the bombing in Boston. Right?"
We should scream that in every moron's ear who says they "feel safer" with this monitoring.
The thing about "net neutrality" is they don't actually have to do anything. Hell we could get 99% of what is needed for true network neutrality by declaring ISPs to be common carriers.
A few things scare me about this topic so far (and it's mostly about discussion rather than the revelations):
- People aren't doing anything / can't do anything about this issue even if they wanted to :/
- People are actually siding with the government and defending them instead of fighting for privacy & freedom
- Big corporations could help us out but what good would storing every piece of user data in encrypted format do for them (no ad money based on our data = no free site anymore, they would just turn into free service providers for their service)
- American's politicians & lawyers are completely paid off by major corporations and if the root of all evil is not separated from the law of the land, you should not expect any freedom or privacy, and it's scary that the American population is more concered about TV shows like The Voice rather than their freedom...
-- No one's really willing to risk their lives or time because right now it's "just good enough", maybe you guys need to hit rock bottom first completely before any change happens or takes place
I'm not really sure what to say or do either, but I'm Canadian and the NSA is probably seeing this as well. Hi NSA, I love you!
- stoops
We knew that. What is new is some of the details of the mechanisms, there is also a new catchy project name: Prism.
So, what will happen next? Back to apathy - as after Echelon, Swift etc...? Or is it different this time?
Possible outcomes, from more to less probable: 1; nothing, 2. people start fighting back using encryption; 3. governments stop abusing their power.
Given the damage he's done to the US and the West, he will suffer consequences, there's no doubt about that.
While it raises important issues, I'm struggling to find sympathy for him personally, as he has committed an extremely serious act of treason. By doing what he did, he's ended himself as surely as if he'd put a gun to his own head. Except he'll probably have the US government do it for him (or if he's lucky, life in supermax).
You can't do what he did, and not expect consequences.
So you support the government assassinating people for the sake of national pride?
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
This is what happens when a government declares 'War' on an idea, or other abstract.
Crusades
Spanish Inquisition
Prohibition
The War on Drugs
The War on Terrorism
etc.
We don't seem able to learn from history, or past mistakes.
We have allowed the Constitution to be folded, spindled, and mutilated...then used for asswipe.
We are overdue for another Revolution.
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
inconveniencing those who have power, without having any power himself
anonymity is the only defense the weak have against the powerful, that is why the powerful are working so hard to destroy it
The western governments did it all by themselves. Snowden just called them out on their hypocrisy.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin
Had to be said.
How is it treason? Is he levying war against the United States? Is he siding with the enemies of the United States?
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
life unshaped by the mediating institutions of civil society
would this be the same civil society whose past mediations have helped perpetuate the institution of slavery and policies of racial discrimination? or is this some other, perfectly enlightened civil society that has at some point between those primeval days and now descended from the heavens to rid us of the need for such crackpots and radicals as might resist its influence?
how many pairs of boxer shorts should you own?
... and petty power corrupts all out of proportion anyways.
We've lost freedom constantly. Freedom to alter things we PURCHASED? Check. All the freedoms associated with actually making a purchase? Gone to shrink-wrap agreements, "End User License Agreements", and other bullshit that makes a purchase not really a purchase.
Onboard computers in cars: now you can't clear the code or find out what's wrong on a new-model car without going to the dealership because they lag behind and won't sell your local mechanic the adapter and the reader software. Friend of mine got his brakes changed on a volkswagen model and an alarm started blaring off; turned out VW stuck a sensor in the brake pads that causes the alarm if it's not found, and the normal size-compatible pads from 3rd party makers didn't have the sensor.
NSA tracking is the tip of the iceberg, the consumer got fucked in the ass long ago.
Given the embarrassment he's caused for the US government, he will suffer consequences, there's no doubt about that.
There, I fixed it for you. I will never begrudge a man like Snowden who exposes constitutional violations by the government.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
This is a high-school dropout who gave up a $200k yr. job, an acrobat girlfriend and was living in Hawaii -- things I would have given my left nut to have.
Yes, he gave that all up because, get this, he is one of the few people in this nation that actually understands the Constitution.
The Constitution is the highest law in the land. It's supposed to control our government so they do not do PRECISELY what they are doing. It's supposed to prevent us from falling into tyranny.
But most of us do not care. He did. He's a hero.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Not necessarily
"Given the damage he's done to the US and the West, he will suffer consequences, there's no doubt about that."
Honest question: are you out of your mind?
He was pointing out damage the government has done , not causing any himself.
Treason is betraying The People of the United States. That's what the government was doing. Treason is NOT betraying the government, it is betraying The People.
A hero, on the other hand, is somebody who says "The public has A Need To Know, damn the torpedoes". That's what Snowden did.
I think you need to get your priorities examined.
If it's genuinely gotten so bad that it takes an expert to understand the plain words of the constitution, we're screwed anyway.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
True, but usually the freedoms that the government encroaches on are incremental and not identical to the abuses of the British that caused the Revolutionary War. Does anybody remember the Townsend Acts? Writs of assistance? General warrants?
I like the idea that our rights and laws can only be understood by specialized lawyers, but they're supposed to apply to us and ignorance is not a defense.
It's a completely irrational state of affairs, and the best part is when people criticize others using it.
Who watches the watchers?
Congress is supposed to watch the watchers. The voters are supposed to watch Congress.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
I disagree with you on this one, while I feel the Bradley Manning case is a clear case of violation of oath, and perhaps even treasonous, the case of Snowden is very different, he did not do a massive records dump that potentially endangered lives. He did not reveal specifics of active operations, etc. What he did was reveal activities that are a clear violation of constitutional rights by any sane reading of the constitution, releasing the minimal amount of details needed to do so.
It seemed to be a statement of fact rather than a statement of desire, at least to me.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
I'm not so sure.
The US government isn't engaging in economic espionage (and they damned well should, since US businesses pay taxes as well). They are doing it to foil terrorist attacks (and they've gone on the record saying that gathered intelligence has foiled "dozens" of terrorists attacks). Western spying is subject to a tremendous amount of oversight by the right people (and if you'll excuse me, Slashdot keyboard warriors aren't "the right people").
The Chinese merely hack to steal IP so that they can make money, to "catch up with the West", as they try and justify it. China is a squalid oligopoly, and their hacking and spying is subject to no oversight whatsoever.
You can't compare the two. Our reasons are far more noble in intent.
From a previous post, here's the collected list of suggested actions people can take to help change things.
Have more ideas? Please post below.
Links worthy of attention:
http://anticorruptionact.org/
http://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_the_republic_we_must_reclaim.html
http://action.fairelectionsnow.org/fairelections
http://represent.us/
http://www.protectourdemocracy.com/
http://www.wolf-pac.com/
https://www.unpac.org/
http://www.thirty-thousand.org/
Suggestion #1:
(My idea): If people could band together and agree to vote out the incumbent (senator, representative, president) whenever one of these incidents crop up, there would be incentive for politicians to better serve the people in order to continue in office. This would mean giving up party loyalty and the idea of "lessor of two evils", which a lot of people won't do. Some congressional elections are quite close, so 2,000 or so petitioners might be enough to swing a future election.
Someone added: Vote them out AND remove their lifetime, taxpayer-funded, free health care. See how fast the health care system gets fixed.
Someone added:You can start by letting your house and senate rep know how you feel about this issue / patriot act and encourage those you know to do the same.
If enough people let their representivies know how they feel obviously those officials who want to be reelected will tend to take notice. We have seen what happens when wikipedia and google go "dark", congressional switchboards melt and the 180's start to pile up.
I added: Fax is considered the best way to contact a congressperson, especially if it is on corporate letterhead.
Suggestion #2:
Tor, I2dP and the likes. Let's build a new common internet over the internet. Full strong anonymity and integrity. Transform what an eavesdropper would see in a huge cypherpunk clusterfuck.
Taking back what's ours through technology and educated practices.
Let's go back to the 90' where the internet was a place for knowledgeable and cooperative people.
Someone Added: Let's go full scale by deploying small wireless routers across the globe creating a real mesh network as internet was designed to be!
Suggestion #3:
A first step might be understanding the extent towards which the government actually disagrees with the people. Are we talking about a situation where the government is enacting unpopular policies that people oppose? Or are we talking about a situation where people support the policies? Because the solutions to those two situations are very different.
In many cases involving "national security", I think the situation is closer to the second one. "Tough on X" policies are quite popular, and politicians often pander to people by enacting them. The USA Patriot Act, for example, was hugely popular when it was passed. And in general, politicians get voted out of office more often for being not "tough" on crime and terrorism and whatever else, than for being too over-the-top in pursuing those policies.
Suggestion #4:
What I feel is needed is a true 3rd party, not 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th parties, such as Green, Tea Party, Libertarian; we need an agreeable third party that can compete against the two majors without a lot of interference from small parties. We need a consensus third party.
Suggestion #5:
Replace the voting system. Plurality voting will always lead to the mess we have now. The only contribution towards politics I've made in
That is all.
Problem is, you have to *keep* fighting against any and all loss of rights. People are corrupt, greedy, and stupid... this naturally leads to an erosion of individual rights.
Freedom is a high-maintenance thing, but the cost of not doing the maintenance is slavery; if history is any indication, the outcome is all too damned common.
What was the saying again? "A republic, if you can keep it." People keep forgetting that last bit.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
he has committed an extremely serious act of treason
Cunts like you are what has ruined this country. You probably would have voted for Nixon with glee.
The idea that exposing government malfeasance is treason is the most insidious bullshit I have ever heard. If the government does it, it IS illegal, and it SHOULD be exposed. Anything less is the real treason--treason against the people.
I'm struggling to find sympathy for him personally, as he has committed an extremely serious act of treason.
Article 3, section 3 of the US Constitution: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."
He most definitely has not committed treason. He did commit a crime by disclosing classified information, but I think we need to first investigate and determine whether the government was indeed breaking the law. It cannot be illegal to reveal classified information relating to illegal activity. Otherwise, our government would be able to act completely unchecked by simply choosing to classify information on what they are doing, with no justification.
The Constitution specifically restricts treason to two cases: 1) levying war against the United States; 2) "adhering" to its enemies, which is generally taken to require explicitly joining them or allying with them. For example, someone who joined the Wehrmacht during WW2 would be guilty of treason. So would someone who joins Al-Qaeda today. Or someone who raises a private army and invades a U.S. territory.
Treason cannot be charged just for any act that harms the United States or benefits its enemies, but only the specific acts of levying war against the country or joining someone else who is doing so. The Founding Fathers were worried about the more expansive meaning of "treason" that had been in use in Europe, to mean anyone who is taken to betray their country's interests, so defined it much more narrowly in the Constitution.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Is he siding with the enemies of the United States?
Bradley Manning wasn't siding with the enemy, yet he was charged for it anyway. Snowden is no different.
Do you think that anyone who sees Snowden as a hero considers NSA or CIA to be on their "team"?
Everyone isn't a nationalist, you know.
By doing what he did, he's ended himself as surely as if he'd put a gun to his own head. Except he'll probably have the US government do it for him (or if he's lucky, life in supermax).
I guess that part's right. If the guy who blew the lid off the Stubenville rapes could potentially get 10 years for exposing and embarrassing local authorities and school officials in a little Ohio hamlet, then I don't doubt they try to kill Snowden for this much more serious case of exposing wrongdoing.
The "crime" is not treason. The "crime" is calling out, exposing and embarrassing The Man in Power. The Man doesn't like that, and the bigger the man the more serious the penalty.
I am not a crackpot.
I'm not sure his leak has done any damage at all. It's not like this program wasn't known about. Hell it was suspected of being this bad or worse. All his leak did was verify what people already thought.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
You know who else did that? George Washington. He commanded people to KILL armies of the government and probably killed some himself.
St. Augustine said 'an unjust law is not law at all.' In other words, an unjust law would be a law, that takes away ones freedom, or causes harm, or basically just causes chaos.
Seems to fit this crap to a T.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
"And yet the Tea Party thugs were demanding government "do whatever it takes" post-9/11... "
You knew about the Tea Party in late 2001? What else did you know about that was still in the future? Lemme guess, you knew about Katrina and didn't warn us? You bastard!
He most definitely has not committed treason. He did commit a crime by disclosing classified information, but I think we need to first investigate and determine whether the government was indeed breaking the law. It cannot be illegal to reveal classified information relating to illegal activity. Otherwise, our government would be able to act completely unchecked by simply choosing to classify information on what they are doing, with no justification.
What would be the situation if the information isn't actually true? Something that isn't true can't be classified, or at least I would think it can't?
I can't find a treason charge in the list of charges. The closest is that he's charged with a military-specific count of "aiding the enemy" while serving as a U.S. soldier. That appears to be using the theory that releasing documents publicly constitutes "indirect means" of aiding the enemy, and any U.S. soldier who indirectly aids the enemy has violated military conduct rules. That's rather different from charging and proving a civilian charge of treason, which has a higher bar.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Given the damage he's done to the US and the West
Snowden has done no damage to the US and the West. On the contrary, he has done us all a huge favor by bringing abuses of our rights to light.
Now, the criminals who set up this illegal surveillance program, THEY have done extreme damage to the US.
he has committed an extremely serious act of treason.
No, that would be the criminals responsible for implementing PRISM.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
That is not the same as declaring war on the USofA.
How? Look up ECHELON. The story here is how much the USofA spies on its own citizens.
So China is an "enemy country"?
Where do you think your mobile phone is manufactured? If they're an "enemy" then we certainly do a lot to help their economy and employment.
Taking a stand is not the same as committing suicide.
Our Founding Fathers signed the Declaration of Independence knowing that their signatures would be used to convict them if they lost the war. But it was not a suicide pact. It was them standing up for their beliefs.
Anything else is tyranny.
What you call "the US and the West"? Their government/people on power or the population? I'd say by the numbers that he did a pretty great favor to the 99+% of the people on those regions. How much difference have in practice actual government with an occupation force, after all?
Well, if you want to match wits with veteran lawyers in court, with no training or special expertise in something involving your freedom and livelihood, you've got WAAAY bigger balls than me.
Constitutional law is another branch of the law, one, AIUI, which requires dedicated years of study to fully master.
But going on how people here (and in the Tea Party and the Right in general), you'd think interpreting the Constitution would be the easiest thing in the world. It's the Dunning Kruger Effect writ large.
I'd suggest that reacting cynically to it makes it less likely that it will be righted. You're throwing a wet blanket on the outrage. No doubt that is an honest reaction, but everyone reading it is at least less motivated to do so much as e-mail their senator about it. Lets, for the moment, pretend that this is positively SHOCKING news, that this CANNOT FUCKING STAND, and that this is an unprecedented invasion of our privacy. Because in many ways it is. This surpasses 1984. Forget cameras in every household, we have unintentionally been giving hourly reports on everything to the government. That's not something that was true ten years ago.
Anyway, you don't get any points for thinking some bit of bad news was obvious before it was news. Well, you get mod points, so maybe you do, but I'd rather have negative karma and a slightly higher chance of the NSA being put back in its place.
Intelligent people invite opposing opinions and welcome discussions that may change each other's mind. Mindless goons with clubs and "loud" words don't seek to convince, they seek to demand. It's clear what camp you are in.
Edward Snowden has defected to China.
Currently, only North Koreans will defect to China.
Therefore we can conclude that Snowden is from North Korea or a comparable nation.
Q.E.D.
New Economic Perspectives
When you say telling the enemy do you mean because he told the citizens of the United States?
Why is it everyone keeps pointing at this guy an not a single fucking one of you treasonous bastards give a fuck about the constitution being raped and thus the government stepping out of its legal limits?
Obama has fucked us all and fuckers like you are the shit stains are trying to make they sound trivial. You're a betraying bitch, straight up.
They are doing it to foil terrorist attacks (and they've gone on the record saying that gathered intelligence has foiled "dozens" of terrorists attacks).
Of course they would say that. How do we know it's actually true?
Western spying is subject to a tremendous amount of oversight by the right people (and if you'll excuse me, Slashdot keyboard warriors aren't "the right people").
The whole point of Snowden's leak is that that is not true. There is essentially no oversight. Definately not enough oversight to comply with the 4th amendment.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
And how exactly are PRISM and net neutrality related? Nice attempt at posioning the well, though.
Not just that. Freedom is scary. There are always lots of "reasonable" arguments to give up some freedom (even just for a little while) in order to defeat or defend against the "bad guys".
You don't want your freedom getting in the way of fighting the bad guys, do you?
The bad guys will abuse your freedom so that they can attack us good guys.
As always, Fascism begins when the efficiency of the Government becomes more important than the Rights of the People.
I see you're wholly on the NSA's side in this matter.
Of course I wouldn't, it's his court and he's got a bloated, overblown rulebook full of over-interpretations of the constitution along with all the case law to go with it. Doesn't make him right and me wrong. If anything, it means that ignorance of the law is an excuse because I can't possibly know (or afford) to understand it.
It was written such that it would be. That lawyers have deliberately muddled things doesn't change it.
Note to all: attempting to understand your rights and the law without a law degree means you are incapable of recognizing your own incompetence. But this, of course, doesn't apply to benjfowler who is apparently right in all things.
The reason why he's angered the US government so badly, is because he's divulged sensitive information that has damaged American interests.
American interests are strictly limited by the Constitution. He may have damaged the interests of the criminals who run this country, but that's not the same as American interests.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
They are doing it to foil terrorist attacks (and they've gone on the record saying that gathered intelligence has foiled "dozens" of terrorists attacks).
The cutest part is that you actually believe this crap. Yeah they pinky swear this time that it's only to catch terrorists. It not like the government has been caught secretly spying on US citizens before for political reasons.
Realistically, the federal government will never relinquish the power that it has usurped - our right to be secure in our persons, papers, and effects will never be respected under the status quo.
The realistic course of action is to focus on state legislatures, and call a convention to forcibly remove these noxious elements from the sphere of federal power. The procedure to do so is quite clear:
The first question before us is clear: do we have agreeable legislatures in two thirds of the states, to initiate the process?
The next question is what needs to change, from what and to what? Do we need an obudsman, an office with full subpoena power over all the other branches, answerable to state legislatures? That might do it.
Funny you mention the year 1984... ...as recently as when that book was originally written, if this kind of news came out? I suspect that half the federal government would have been recalled, impeached, and imprisoned. That is, if the White House wasn't burned down first.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
as he has committed an extremely serious act of treason.
He has not committed treason. He may have violated the espionage act, but even that's not clear.
Regardless, the legality of what he's done is distinct from the rightness or wrongness of it. Depending on the circumstance, resistance - even passive resistance - can be contrary to "law", but the rightness of it is often beyond question.
I think this guy was fully aware that he was violating something and was going to pay a price probably in terms of his physical freedom, but the issue at hand is important enough that he's willing to make that sacrifice if necessary. We don't need to put this guy up on some pedestal and "honor" him, but he damned well deserves our gratitude.
"You can always tell who the mentally handicapped people are by their belief in freedom."
Really? I always thought it was determined by medical, psychological and educational professionals nowadays.
Amazing the people we'll have to reclassify if belief sets determine whether you're mentally handicapped. All that research out the window.
http://slashdot.org/story/06/05/11/1216245/the-nsa-knows-who-youve-called
And a seven-year-old story at that! Shame on you, Slashdot editors!
Dissent is not the same as treason.
He most definitely has not committed treason. He did commit a crime by disclosing classified information, but I think we need to first investigate and determine whether the government was indeed breaking the law. It cannot be illegal to reveal classified information relating to illegal activity. Otherwise, our government would be able to act completely unchecked by simply choosing to classify information on what they are doing, with no justification.
What would be the situation if the information isn't actually true? Something that isn't true can't be classified, or at least I would think it can't?
I'm assuming it's possible to release actual classified information out of context to make it appear something unjustifiable is happening. I'm not saying that's what I think is happening, I think the response from the government has been pretty much confirming they've really been trampling on our rights while trying to justify why they're trampling on our rights. That said, there is a process for determining a government action or law is unconstitutional, and the courts need to be involved. So I'm hoping this scandal causes an actual in-depth investigation to occur, and that conclusions one way or another are drawn before we go after Snowden.
Violated the 4th Amendment (oh right, we're not qualified to understand our own rights.)
No, they'd do it and rely on secrecy, security clearances, high pay, intimidation and threats of legal retribution if it gets out and they find out who did it.
A government with a track record of violating the constitution and human rights of many people has, yet again, violated the constitution?
This does not follow. The government has many a time done illegal, underhanded things and tried to cover it up. I bet you'd do your damnedest to suggest that no one's rights have been violated by the Drug War, too.
Are you suggesting that since our anal orifice is already stretched we should just roll over and get out the Vaseline(Tm) ?
Anything can be declared to be "classified." All that means is how the information is to be handled, regardless of the validity of the information.
The part where they need to violate the Constitution in order to do it. (They don't. They're just lazy and greedy.)
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
Yep, even many members of Congress are now coming out talking about how little they were informed of what was going on. And you have to love choice quotes from Clapper about how when previously asked about the surveillance that he was telling them the "least untruthful answer". And these are the people we are to trust?
And the President is supposed to act as a check on Congress and to defend the Constitution NOT to keep Americans "safe"! So nobody is doing their damn job except the watchers ....
They're the government. They can change the law whenever they want. And the President is one of the foremost experts on US constitutional law.
Think about what you've just written for a second.
Its really all about America's one true God capitalism. Any other system is hunted down and destroyed or made to look like boogeymen thanks to our all too willing media (content cartels). Congress didn't spend all that money on spying without a return. I bet at least one of these 'contractors' is porting a lot of data to high freg trading computers. Heck we already know that the super rich get consumer data 15 min's before us little folks. Just look how rich congress people get while in office and just after. All the data mining is for one thing and it ain't security ITS MONEY! Want to know why no one does anything about pay TV rates? Easy almost everyone that can do anything about it have stock in the pay TV co's! To cut this rant short as long as Americans worship money over all else nothing will ever change.
The spelling and grammar police can kiss my ass
...and yet how off the mark you are.
Here... let me fix that analogy of yours so it reflects reality.
Team A would check every other team's playbook without their knowledge.
They would do it by making copies of said playbooks naturally.
But they would also by spying on every coach of every team, every player of every team, their family members, neighbors, anyone who ever had any contact with them, including the players, families and everyone even remotely connected to players on the team A.
Would that be OK with you? One team doing all that spying so they could win every, single game? OK?
Now imagine that team A is Russia.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
The NSA has one last hole in its program to spy on every citizen- the home in which the citizen lives. Traditionally, throughout Human history, the residencies of civilians have provided refuge from organised efforts of intelligence gathering. This fact, for instance, has allowed the emergence of new political and religious movements, movements that the regimes at the time were determined to crush at birth.
Now Microsoft has partnered with the NSA to solve this problem. The Xbox One (now more commonly known as the XBone or XB1) has been designed from the ground up to spy on people in their own homes.
The XBone comes with a so-called Kinect sensor block. This block contains ordinary and infra-red high definition cameras. It also includes a 'depth processing' system that can easily extract Humans from the background, and apply a skeletal recognition algorithm to track body movement and shape (say when people are having sex). The final sensor is a microphone array that can clearly pick-up the conservations of multiple people in the room (and frequently, adjoining rooms as well).
While the XBone is receiving mains power, the Kinect is fully functioning and processing input. It CANNOT be switched off. If it suffers ANY hardware fault, the console immediately stops working. If the cameras are set facing the wall, or taped over, the console pesters the user to re-calibrate the Kinect.
All software developers (games and apps) must, at the very least, include code to request user calibration of Kinect, even if the app/game doesn't use Kinect features to any significant degree. All game/app interfaces MUST be Kinect aware (allow Kinect gestures to replace input from the controllers). At no time is the user allowed to think non-Kinect use of the console is normal.
Microsoft dedicates at least 1/4 of XBone's hardware resources to processing the data produced by the Kinect sensor system. These resources CANNOT be re-assigned to, say, a AAA high-graphic intensive game. The hardware available to Kinect includes real-time video-compression and encryption.
By default (and this CANNOT be disabled by the user) the Kinect is set to constantly monitor each new person who enters the room (and the times). A full face photograph is taken of each new person. This data is uploaded to remote servers on the Internet at least once each 24 hour period. While the Internet connection is off, this data is stored in a dedicated area of the HDD as an encrypted group of files, for later uploading.
All Internet connected XBones can be remotely programmed with a list of 'trigger' events that trigger against various data conditions recognised by the Kinect sensors. The triggers can include things like gunshots, a male shouting at a female, a given person entering the room, or people in the room moving in a particular way. When any trigger condition occurs, the console can begin streaming video data from the Kinect to either the HDD (for later uploading) or to a remote Internet server if the Internet is currently connected.
Of course, remote intelligence personnel can connect to ANY XBone currently on the Internet, and receive live output from the Kinect sensors regardless of what the console owner is currently doing. The console owner will have ZERO idea this is happening, unless they monitor their outbound Internet traffic. Even then, Microsoft has a program of constantly bursting data to and from each connected console to 'groom' the owner to expect unexplained Internet traffic via the console.
In many ways, Snowden's announcements (which others have correctly pointed out simply confirm data that leaked years ago) show that the NSA is 'bored' with their current level of data collection, now it is old hat to suck and save all regular Internet/phone traffic. Team Obama is desperate to go into places the NSA has never gone before. Much of the intent is the power powerful scumbags think they gain when they can become the supreme 'peeping-tom' and peer into the homes of millions of citizens at will.
Constitutional law is another branch of the law, one, AIUI, which requires dedicated years of study to fully master.
No, it takes dedicated years of study to become fully indoctrinated to the point where this kind of bullshit appears legal. The point of law school is not to teach you the law, it's to teach you how to distort the law to get your way.
Remember, just government relies on the consent of the governed. Uninformed consent is invalid. If The People cannot understand the Constitution, they can't consent to be governed.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Unless you know him to be younger, he might have actually voted for Nixon.
To be against government is one thing, but to literally tell our enemies what we do? DUMB!
Our enemies? The USA citizens are our enemy?
What country are you from that USA citizens are 'The Enemy'?
The only 'new' info that surfaced in this, was that all comm's were being monitored, instead of those that were connected to terrorism.
The fact that monitoring was taking place is not new, or news...it's been known for a few years.
Dumb! Indeed....
BTW, WTF does the NFL have to do with this?
(I too, can be obtuse!-)
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
America FUCK yeah!!!1111111
For hire.
You actually raise an extremely interesting point. I actually feel a bit dumb for not thinking of it before reading your post. Often with so many things, if I want to ask why person X did thing Y, I think "follow the money, who benefits/profits?"
Using this information (they say metadata because most people have no idea what that means and won't look it up, and this unfamiliarity with the term obfuscates the issue even further) to profit seems even more likely than strictly to keep an all-seeing eye on the citizenry of the US.
Ultimately, if we the people allow the government the power to know everything about our daily activities, the inevitable eventual outcome is a totalitarian police state.
As for you're statement that "Western spying is subject to a tremendous amount of oversight by the right people" ... that is clearly false ... without truthful testimony to Congress, congressional oversight is meaningless.
That is way more than "doing it to foil terrorist attacks".
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
People often say treason when they mean sedition.
And Bush before him .... let's not forget that this is a bipartisan issue in which skin-color is not an issue.
If it's genuinely gotten so bad that it takes an expert to understand the plain words of the constitution, we're screwed anyway.
It doesn't! Many laws are not that hard to read.
Our brave officials have gotten to redefining very plain words in the constitutions/laws in general.
"Spying" is not really "spying"
"Meta-data" is not "data"
"Imminent" danger means "there might or might not be a danger in the future"
"Militant" means "anyone we killed by drone"
"Terrorist" means "someone we don't like"
"Whistle-blower" means "traitor"
Oh, and many of those re-definitions are classified, so it takes years (and a whistle-blower) to even find out that they already happened.
And the President is supposed to act as a check ... NOT to keep Americans "safe"! So nobody is doing their damn job except the watchers ....
--------
United States Constitution, Article II, Section 2, Clause 1
“The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States....”
That is probably there for a reason.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
It's odd that I never heard Obama being described as "one of the foremost experts in Constitutional law" *before* all the violations of recent years since he's been President. Of all people you would have thought that someone with the power of veto and such insight might have exercised it...
But what do I know. I'm watching this from the UK, where we don't even have a constitution.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
its really presumptous to say someone broke a law without a fair trial
They do. It's just not written.
I'm struggling to find sympathy for him personally, as he has committed an extremely serious act of treason.
Saying he has no sympathy doesn't sound much like he's simply stating what will happen. Makes it sound like he approves.
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
how would they enforce net neutrality exactly?
Clearly you don't understand that they violated the Constitution ... the highest law of the land that supersedes all other laws ... the law that allowed them to do this is unconstitutional and therefore ILLEGAL and must be struck down.
Huh? How is that in any way a message? I mean, other than the hateful, ignorant one you've conjured up?
Can you explain your stance in a less angry, more rational manner?
Really? So you're going to argue that the NSA is in the right here too? How is his logic "troll level?"
I don't. I hope he's found untouchable and the head of the NSA goes to Federal Prison.
So if we put them in charge of making sure everyone plays fair on the internet you don't think they'd abuse it? lol. Here when they have no such authority, are already abusing it.
And this is supposed to validate what?
Irrelevant. This has been going on since before Obama was in office; even then he can be very, very wrong and has been on many occasions.
I have. You seem to have a logical short where you go "if the government does it then it's absolutely OK."
As a Brit, I've always wondered about how you guys look back on the revolution. Since the US was created out of a revolutionary war you'd think that there could be no act that is more than in keeping with the spirit and founding principles of the republic than seeking to overthrow a government that has overstepped its bounds. But most of your 'patriotic' type pundits seem to view any form of anti-establishment sentiment as either communism or treason.
In the UK we've never really gone in for violent revolution, so I can understand why our national identity doesn't lend itself to direct action. But you guys are always going on about the glory of the republic and the benefits that you gained via armed struggle against the state. How do you keep those sort if ideas straight in your heads alongside the sort of 'my country, right or wrong' jingoism that has you reciting oaths of loyalty in school and so forth?
Everyone thinks he's a hero.
But no one is willing to stand alongside him and shake a collective fist against the government for fear of 'reprisals'.
We've lost.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
They cannot change the law whenever they want.
"Article. V.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America can ONLY be changed via the process set out in Article V. Other laws can NEVER supersede it. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and if it says something is illegal then it's illegal, no matter what other laws may say.
Not a sentence!
Given the damage he's done to the US and the West, he will suffer consequences, there's no doubt about that.
While it raises important issues, I'm struggling to find sympathy for him personally, as he has committed an extremely serious act of treason. By doing what he did, he's ended himself as surely as if he'd put a gun to his own head. Except he'll probably have the US government do it for him (or if he's lucky, life in supermax).
You can't do what he did, and not expect consequences.
Per Article III Secton 3 of the United States Constitution (emphasis mine):
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
As Snowden has taken care to NOT release material that would put people in harm's way, he has done nothing to levy war against the United States, nor has he adhered to their enemies or given aid and comfort. What he's done is illegal under current laws, but it is NOT treason. He acted upon a moral duty to the ideals of the Constitution to expose government wrongs, and in so doing, pissed off a lot of powerful people. THAT is why they want to crucify him - because he DARED believe that the Holy Administration of Purchased Officials should be held accountable for their actions.
If Snowden committed treason, then what does that say about Bradley Manning, who threw a temper tantrum and gave a cache of whatever classified material he could get his hands of (damn the safety reprecussions) to an asshole with an ax to grind? If you believe Snowden a traitor, then Manning is one as well.
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
Yeah it's easy to point out numerous examples of politically-oriented spying by the government. But ignore all that because they double pinky swear they won't do it now!
Right, Left or Center everyone has to admit Clapper lied. In recent interviews he's playing the "definition of is" game that Clinton played and he's a liar just like Clinton was. He lied to Congress and half the leadership is defending him! We're in an appalling state, hell recent polls indicate 56% of the populous supports this! That's damn near a super majority. I'm appalled by my country, but make no mistake there are paid attacks by journalists happening against Snowden, they are almost trivial to spot because of how transparent they are.
Good point. I like this bit:
By that logic, you could say that the NSA is internally engaging in seditious action towards the American people with this program. Of course, Snowden isn't being seditious either as he's simply provided evidence of their highly questionable activities.
They can't "change the law" when that law happens to be in the Constitution. The Fourth Amendment protects us against unreasonable searches, so unless the NSA somehow got secret approval from 67% of the states, the government has acted wrongly. Think about what you just wrote for a second.
Dude, you beheaded your own king...
You may be right. Same here in Germany. "Volksbefragung" (obligatory survey about pretty much everything), stoped by our constitutional court in it's overbroad spilling of data to everyone. There was an outcry by many citizens. Now they will implement a data retention for 6 months containing the most sensitive data. A few people complaining, nothing to worry about.
People are getting used to surveillance because they trade it for connecting to other people by facebook.
They are giving up privacy because there they got "nothing to hide". Except when one day they have.
But at least our country is not yet as much as oceania was in 1884 or the US is now. YET.
overall this BS: we knew this in 2006 (see link below)...we just didn't know the name and that 500,000 dork contractors could access it....
to the comment...ah, the trolling begins...first when i point out that "Snowden is an idiot" that is in *no* way a pass on the NSA. That's a *different issue*...this is about his choices...
you fired off a bunch of questions that I already answered, but b/c you quoted me and said I'm being 'hateful' it makes your trolling more surreptitious...you didn't try to contradict my argument: this started a conversation that needed to happen in the mainstream media, but Snowden's way of doing it was as dumb as possible
not necessary...but I would like some genuine discussion...
see, here's who was not surprised by PRISM: anarchists, 'libertarians', illuminati, and IT PROFESSIONALS
because IT workers actually understand signal communications concepts...if data is transmitted it is interceptable
another Red Herring is that these are *new* revelations...this was authorized **BY CONGRESS** in the Patriot Act...Obama can't make Congress undo it...he has brought to light what Bush started and changed what he could realistically...
this was reported on in 2006 "NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls"
So Snowden is an idiot...he threw away his life on a dork's gamble based on internet-troll logic...he will not get a book deal or have mass suporters like Bradley Manning...
Thank you Dave Raggett
Given the damage he's done to the US and the West,...
What damage?
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
This precisely.
We are putting in place all the chains necessary for a psychopathic demagogue to rise to power and control the nation. I'm willing to stipulate that none of the politicians currently in office (elected, appointed, or career) are psychopathic demagogues, but I'm not willing to stipulate that will be the case forever. Once in power, we've created the legal positions, the technical means, and the infrastructure necessary to acquire and maintain nearly complete control of the citizenry, well, forever.
And the worms ate into his brain.
You operate under the assumption that libertarians want to do whatever they want, government be damned. That's a rather stupid assumption considering that most simply want government to stop over-regulating and return to a smaller and less-intrusive form of itself. But then, you lib[ertarian]s always were more than happy to operate on bad assumptions (or rather, just parrot what you're told to).
What?
When he says "libs" he's speaking of liberals, not libertarians. His point is not non-nonsensical, just myopic and asinine.
Meh, that was some considerable time ago - and we just ended up with a kind of mini monarchy for a few years before reverting to the status quo (albeit with a few more constitutional restraints on the crown). Being a regicide has never been much of a badge of honour.
More recently, we kept the monarchy in the 18th century while the French were murdering their aristocracy, we had a general strike that didn't become a communist revolution and we flat out ignored the blackshirts who were agitating in the late 30s / early 40s.
On 9/11 3000 Americans died in terrorist attacks.
Other losses incurred as a result were much worse.
Who watches the watchers?
Congress is supposed to watch the watchers. The voters are supposed to watch Congress.
Actually, Congress, the President, and the Courts are supposed to watch each other (aka "separation of powers), and the voters watch Congress and the President.
The Separation of Powers part of this has broken down over the last century or so. Thanks to Teddy "Bully Pulpit" Roosevelt and the necessity of presidential leadership during the World Wars and the Cold War, Congress has gotten into the habit of deferring to the President a lot more than it used to. The Progressive Era and the New Deal (in particular, Wickard vs. Filburn) set Supreme Court precedents of deferring to Congress, essentially reversing the assumption from "Congress may only make laws about things the Constitution explicitly allows" to "Congress may make laws about anything the Constitution doesn't explicitly forbid." And with this increase in number and especially scope of laws, Congress can't write them without leaving a huge amount of the details and oversight to the discretion of the bureaucracies implementing them -- a power it is not supposed to delegate, because it means that the executive branch (the bureaucracies) is effectively crafting legislation.
This is an example of what happens when people grant power to government to achieve something they want, without considering how that power will be used. Both the political right and left are guilty of this. Whenever the questions of "should we give government this power?" or "should we set this precedent?", people tend to think in the short term about how people who think like they do can use that power or precedent to do things that they want done. The question they usually fail to ask, and should, is "how will someone whose ideas I detest use this?" Think of someone whose ideology you loathe -- it doesn't matter who it is. Assume that someone like them will have political power someday, because they will. Now look at any question of "should the government have this power?" in terms of what that person would do with it.
To use a tech-related analogy: when the developers of an online game are working on a feature (a new item, new rule, new quest, whatever) or even major bug fix, they not only have to ask "will this be fun for the players?" They also have to ask "will this empower griefers? How about gold-farmers? Bot-users? Does it leave anything open to exploit?" And that's the type of question too many Americans have been neglecting to ask for a long time.
"The Greens lynched a hacker in Chicago. Last month, but I think the body's still hanging from the old Water Tower."
This needs to be tattooed on the inside of the eyelids of every child.
Okay, I apologise for my tone - I overstepped the mark there.
My understanding (from knowing a lawyer and a barrister socially), is that a layman's reading of any law, regulation, or Constitution may be completely different from it's legal meaning. Furthermore, case law is used as guidance on how to interpret it in certain situations.
It's not safe for somebody not trained in law to read something legal and draw any useful conclusions; just as my doctor ticks me off for self-diagnosing myself from stuff I've read on the Internet.
I must have missed the memo. What damage? How does the world knowing that the NSA spies on a sizeable fraction (likely a majority) of US citizens (and residents) with a phone or net connection damage the US or "the West"? Embarrassment at the illegality and/or supreme wrongness of it doesn't count as damage.
Oh, and just to pre-empt the obvious objection: If I record when you call who and how long you keep the connection open, and I'm not the phone company preparing a bill for airtime and long-distance charges, I'm spying on you.
If opportunity came disguised as temptation, one knock would be enough.
3^2 * 67^1 * 977^1
Obama lectured on Constitutional Law at University of Chicago, in a position equivalent to a low level faculty member.
While that generally requires a good knowledge of the topic it DOES NOT make you one of the foremost experts in the field. That accolade belongs to people who have a long history of insight and research, and have devoted their lives to the topic.
They've sailed close to the wind a lot. They've done some things which a lot of people could call vicious (e.g. drone strikes on women and children; made the incredibly unpopular decision of bailing out TBTF banks, etc).
I personally wouldn't go as far as to say they're completely useless though. Underestimating the current administration would be a mistake.
Good -- and if it does turn out to be illegal (and believe me, with the Supreme Court being full of conservatives, they're going to get scrutiny), then I certainly won't argue with that. I don't think folks like you and me are qualified to make that call, though.
Snowden may yet have done "the right thing". But I really believe that here, the ends don't justify the means.
You're throwing a wet blanket on the outrage.
Oh please! What outrage? The kind that will put the republican half back into the white house again? I'll believe there is outrage when the democrat/republicans lose 50% of the vote. Let's say Obama gets into trouble for this, who will be the next Gerald Ford to pardon him? The people will all grumble and shuffle their feet until another Ronnie Reagan will come along and make them all feel good and patriotic and stuff and forget the 'mistakes' of Viet... I mean Afghanistan and Iraq, and Tunisia, and Libya, and Syria, and.. Turkey?! What's up with that? Gettin' a little closer to pissin' in your own pool, eh?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
So you support the government assassinating people for the sake of national pride?
Have you stopped beating your wife yet?
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
While I agree completely, it's more about the exchange rate than anything else...
Pretty much. You're facing off against people who can redefine the word treason to mean whatever they want, and have that troop of yes-men known as the citizenry nodding their heads as any charge is read off.
I am John Hurt.
While it raises important issues, I'm struggling to find sympathy for him personally, as he has committed an extremely serious act of treason.
Although he did break the law, he did not commit treason.
I'm not so sure.
The US government isn't engaging in economic espionage (and they damned well should, since US businesses pay taxes as well).
I believe that actually there have been some cases come to light not all that long ago where information extracted via US government espionage has been found to have been given to US corporations for their private benefit.
This power was not granted, it was simply taken by stepping over democracy's dead corps.
This power was not granted, it was simply taken by stepping over democracy's dead corps.
That would be "dead corpse." The way you're spelling it, a dead corps would be a few divisions of zombie Marines. Which, granted, would be pretty cool.
"Semper braaaaains! Oorah!"
"The Greens lynched a hacker in Chicago. Last month, but I think the body's still hanging from the old Water Tower."
fleeing to an enemy country
Speaking of "important details", the US and China are not at war.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
I think you might have the problem, I read that the same way too.
Although I'm not a big zombie fan, I like your thinking. If you're looking at a zombie army you can't overlook The Bid Dead One
No mission too difficult, no sacrifice too great, duty....mmmmm...brains!!
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
I can guarantee almost no one wants total freedom, it involves to much personal responsibility.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Well, he's in Hong Kong at a safe house. Hard to go stand beside him when he's hiding.
Apparently, BMWs force you to go to the dealer to have the car computer reprogrammed if the battery dies, so the computer "knows" the stats on the battery.
And they cheerfully charge you $500 for that "service"... And it isnt just them.. Ford (may they rot in the lowest regions of hell) charges $120 for a locksmith to call up an 800-number, give the operator the vin number of the vehicle and the operator reads back a serial number that the locksmith then writes to an rfid chip in the key. I had to get a replacement key a while back for my 2007 Ford Ranger, and the other costs charged by the mobile locksmith weren't too bad, but when he told me about $120 charge TO Ford merely for a FUCKING number to load into the RFID chip in the key, I damn near lost it... I was later told I could have gone to a Ford dealer and had a key made BY them for much less... Except, I needed the key to be ABLE to DRIVE my flippin' truck TO the dealer.. Don't ask WHY.. suffice it to say... KIDS will lose ANYthing they get their damned little hands on...
THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
Agree, when in Rome do as the Romans do.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
We're raised from pretty early on with the idea of nebulous "bad guys". It usually starts pretty young when police come to lecture at public schools. Whether it's about drugs, violence, stranger danger or whatever. We're taught that there's good guys, and that there's bad guys. You can tell the difference because people in authority will tell you who's who. Violence against bad guys is OK because they're bad.
If that sounds incredibly simplistic and childish, it is. But the language used starts so young that people hardly even notice it as the grow into ages where it should be insulting. You'll still hear police and often politicians hitting that or similar semantic buttons when speaking to adults. We're raised on it so we don't really notice it. But the end effect is that it's very easy to get people in the US to view violence as moral or immoral by labeling people as "good guys" and "bad guys". We were good guys fighting bad guys, so it was ok. But revolution now would be against good guys, and it would make the people doing it bad guys. We know because the good guys told us that they're the good guys.
It's not a bipolar situation. Neither the NSC, CIA or the Chinese are on 'our' team.
And who the fuck is the ref, anyway? I wanna call a few fouls.
From the Constitution, Article III, Section 3:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
So, match up what he's done with the above definition of Treason, and explain it to those of us who are slow today...
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
I am genuinely curious
I always have that hunch that in this cyberworld that we live in, everybody is hacking everybody else --- just like the good ol' pre-cyberworld time, everybody's spies are spying on everybody-else
Even close allies like US-Israel, they spied on each others all the time
But the thing that I genuine do not understand is, why is USA so loudly proclaiming to the world that China is hacking USA while US is doing the same thing (or perhaps more) to China ??
It's like a boxing match -- boxer A trading punches with boxer B -- and only boxer B crying foul every single time boxer A's punch lands on him
It's getting ridiculous, man, very very VERY ridiculous !!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
People have as much freedom as they're willing and able to take. A 14 year old libertarian with a gun has exactly as much freedom as he'd be able to take from someone through murder or violent intimidation. It might not be a pleasant fact of life, but the reality is that until caught a person is as powerful as what moral and legal lines they're willing to cross that other people in their culture won't. It might no be a long lasting freedom, as they'll possibly be caught, but still.
only good thing this BS has done: Make mainstream media aware of how much access (unaccountable) contractors like Booz/Allen have to gov't data..[snip]...He broke the law, I hope he goes to Federal Prison.
I see. No good deed should go unpunished, right?
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Unfortunately in this modern era, it's hard to recommend someone actually buy a car -- you should lease with a 100% of service covered (this is yet another one of the subtle ways people with poor credit are relegated to the Second Class).
If you must own a car, you should pay cash up front. If you want a new car with all the googaws, you should prepare to be slowly bled dry by service. The other option is to buy something from before the Computer Revolution and expect to get it serviced a lot, but for a lot cheaper!
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
In the UK we've never really gone in for violent revolution
British self-delusion. The English Civil War(s), and more generally the Wars of the Three Kingdoms, were about a lot more than beheading one lousy king, and were incredibly bloody affairs that can hardly be dismissed, as you try to do, as some minor exception to an otherwise peaceful history. The real difference between Britain and France or the US is that you had your revolution earlier.
Meh, that was some considerable time ago
17th century. American Revolution was 18th century. Not exactly recent.
you guys are always going on about the glory of the republic and the benefits that you gained via armed struggle against the state
As would the British if Cromwell hadn't been such a schmuck. You brought back Chuck 2, but in many meaningful ways what you call your Civil War(s) was a revolution. Things changed considerably and Chuck 2 was careful not to tell Parliament to go screw itself and wind up like his father. Britons pride themselves on the Glorious Revolution, but usually overlook that it was largely made possible by the recent Civil War(s) that, de facto, put Parliament in the driver's seat.
the sort of 'my country, right or wrong' jingoism that has you reciting oaths of loyalty in school and so forth?
The Pledge of Allegiance is not jingoistic in any way. That's some sort of weird European hangup over something that's little different from singing a national anthem.
The flaw in your logic is the postal service. They are now maintaining images of the exterior of every piece of mail that they process. The exteriors of written correspondence are also part of my effects. This intrusion, useful as it has been, violates the 4th.
Perhaps a convention could clarify our privacy rights - if Google, Verizon, Microsoft, et al. cannot guarantee privacy from all intrusions, then they cannot prevent any intrusions. From this moment forward, all information on 3rd party carriers must be opened to public inspection. Everything. I get to hear all of your phone calls, read all of your email, and see all of your searches, and you get the same access to mine.
The court rulings have established unequal privilege and power for a shadow government, and I do not believe that they are correct. The majority of U.S. citizens appear to agree with me.
We've been having serious national problems in the political realm since Nixon because the powerful think they own the populace and do not have to abide by the rules for the rest of us. What do you suggest we do?
While I am not a tin-foil hat afficitionado, I can see both sides of this one. I don't want to pay for this data to be observed, evaluated, stored and ... of course backed up and so on... I am not too concerned about others knowing what I am doing or thinking... in fact, I'd be proud if someone cared about what i though!
Just like I don't want to pay for the health insurance for someone who doesn't wear a helmet, I don't care to pay for someone to monitor every utterence of everybody....
Given a list of suspicious people... it seems to be within (existing) legal boundaries to monitor what that small subset says.. Lets stick with that. Oh.. and keep the costs down, OK?
Time for a new Political party in the US (or two!) One is off the rails Other cant pony up a leader.
.. maybe there should be a focused, dedicated project trying to drown all the information in misinformation...
This post is provided without warranty as to reliability, accuracy or otherwise or fitness for any particular purpose.
The Progressive Era and the New Deal ... essentially reversing the assumption from "Congress may only make laws about things the Constitution explicitly allows" to "Congress may make laws about anything the Constitution doesn't explicitly forbid."
You're off by at least a hundred years. The precedent that "strict constructionists" overlook is the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. Tom Jefferson and Jimmy Madison, ironically the original strict constructionists, tossed their own principle in the trash because they decided that buying that land (a power obviously not explicitly granted by the Constitution) was more important. Congress agreed when they forked over the money for it. RIP strict constructionism.
BTW, strict constructionism was never a clearly established principle, just one interpretation of the Constitution. Other Founding Fathers, including some that had been at the Constitutional Convention like Washington and Hamilton, never agreed with it.
Those that hunt Snowden and bring him to ground will always look over their own shoulders until they are brought to ground. The truth is like a seed, there are all sorts of ground to flourish in, or wither in. When it finally takes root, watch out.
The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
That statement, that news shouldn't be published until "all the facts" are known is ludicrous. I'm no conspiracy nut, but we still don't have "all the facts" on the JFK assassination. But it would be silly to have ignored it, and just started referring to President Johnson one day.
The JFK assassination? We still don't have all the facts on the Revolution!
At my son's B-day party my mom was getting on some rant about health-care--she is a nurse--and she said" the people have spoken they voted for OBAMA!" She is an Obama mama. Then my "father in law" said "yeah, but Congress won't work with him." Anyway, I got to thinking, the PEOPLE also voted for George Bush, the same ones who elected Obama to office, and the people also voted for Congress! WTF the fuck is wrong with people's logic? I think my mom is nuts by ignoring these bits of fractured logic, but I suspect the problem is spread among the vast majority of the populace. She has a Master's degree by the way. I've seen enough master-idiots to ward me away from pursuing one myself (I work in education).
Thoughts?
I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
I don't know ... Coast Guard?
The Progressive Era and the New Deal ... essentially reversing the assumption from "Congress may only make laws about things the Constitution explicitly allows" to "Congress may make laws about anything the Constitution doesn't explicitly forbid."
You're off by at least a hundred years. The precedent that "strict constructionists" overlook is the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. Tom Jefferson and Jimmy Madison, ironically the original strict constructionists, tossed their own principle in the trash because they decided that buying that land (a power obviously not explicitly granted by the Constitution) was more important. Congress agreed when they forked over the money for it. RIP strict constructionism.
That's one instance, and yes there were others, but I'm talking about the preponderance of court rulings, and the expectations of such rulings implied by what laws were passed.
"The Greens lynched a hacker in Chicago. Last month, but I think the body's still hanging from the old Water Tower."
So typical... Since it's said the NSA snoops on the whole world BUT the citizens of usa.
Privacy is terrorism.
1642-1651.
Also the Troubles.
The history of the UK involves a lot of war, most notably between the various states of the British Isles but there has been at least 1 English civil war. Only in the last 200 odd years has the UK acted as a unified nation... mostly (they still dont like English Pounds in Scotland).
However my own nation, Australia voted for it's establishment as an independent state in 1901, before then we were six British colonies.
The full quote is "My country, right or wrong. If right to be kept right, if wrong to be set right" and was said by an American senator (Carl Schultz IIRC). It's a statement that suggests one shouldn't blindly accept the superiority of ones own nation and if a problem exists with your own country, should be corrected. I agree with your point... But you've used completely the wrong phrase. The US belief in "Manifest Destiny" would have been a much better example.
This I couldn't agree with more.
I mentioned the Troubles earlier, what glory has that bought to Ireland, Northern Ireland or the UK?
Violent revolution more often than not ends with a violent and despotic government. Understandably paranoid about the threat of a violent uprising. You need only look at some of the more famous revolutions in recent history, Russia, Iran, China... Even Russia and China still have very oppressive governments.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
That is all
Way to go, to take what I wrote completely out of context. That speaks volumes about 1) the quality of your thinking, 2) your honesty.
he quoted your entire post, hardly taking things out of context.
I'm struggling to find sympathy for him personally
You don't support Snowden.
By doing what he did, he's ended himself as surely as if he'd put a gun to his own head. Except he'll probably have the US government do it for him
You speculate that the US govt will likely assassinate Snowden.
What's out of context? This is one of those issues that you either have to be for or against. Being apathetic here will allow the govt to keep trampling our rights, which is just as bad as supporting the assassination of whistleblowers.
I actually like them in charge of roads. The US highways and Interstate in my area are maintained. The state/municipal roads? Shoot you should purchase a moon buggy for those.
Now, I am not saying they should be in charge of all roads, but without them, we would not have the interstate system. They should build and maintain Interstates and federal highways. Probably one of the few things that I think is a legitimate use of the interstate commerce clause.
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
I've said it before, the Constitution is an incredibly difficult document to understand, if you are trying to understand it as a means of limiting rights/expanding government authority.
It's a spectacularly clear and concise document to understand if you are looking at it from the perspective of protecting rights/limiting government authority.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
This lesson was sent home with a friend. He went to a company site for a couple months, and to ensure the battery didn't die on his car, he disconnected it.
When he came back, he found that the car would not start, even with the battery at full charge. Apparently, BMWs force you to go to the dealer to have the car computer reprogrammed if the battery dies, so the computer "knows" the stats on the battery.
NSA is the least of our worries. At least they (tm) have done some good security hardening with SELinux and MAC/MIC policies.
I've don't think I've ever seen such a tortured justification for overbearing government action in my life. Are you taking lessons from NPR or something? If you buy a car like that from a company, you're the idiot for doing business with them. Getting screwed by the NSA doesn't mean you were stupid enough to give them your money, it just means you live in the United States.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
Harder still to stand beside him when he is locked up, unable to communicate with any but his jailers.
And the President is supposed to act as a check ... NOT to keep Americans "safe"! So nobody is doing their damn job except the watchers ....
--------
United States Constitution, Article II, Section 2, Clause 1
Well he takes an oath of office - I'm sure it's in there somewhere, let's see...
Yep, you're right!
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
Hong Kong is run very differently than China.
do you
a. go to prison for 30 years
b. pay a zillion dollars
c. get extradited
d. get a slap on the wrist b/c companies do it al the time
why is it hard to recommend buying a car? seems logical to me...
Advertising is supposed to stop thoughts before voting.
I think it uses the same kernel as ECHELON.
I'd say it's stating an opinion that treason is telling people that their government agencies are lying to them and breaking the law, which is truly strange since even selling weapons to a terrorist group that had killed over a hundred US marines only a year previously isn't considered treason by US Republicans.
As soon as treason gets rolled out for leaking information you know that you are dealing with a fruitcake.
Boeing vs Airbus - not sure when it all came out in court (it was a few years back) but it certainly was in the news for a while.
I believe you think you were not supporting assassination.
However how is what you were saying any different than: "She deserves to get raped for wearing something like that in public."
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
The Pledge of Allegiance is not jingoistic in any way. That's some sort of weird European hangup over something that's little different from singing a national anthem.
Bull fucking shit. Anyone who actually grew up in the US knows better than that.
It is jingoistic, nobody else does anything remotely like it, and when you get right down to it, it's weird.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
So then, what do you think of North and Poindexter? Since knowingly selling weapons to Hezbollah via a third party (Iran) not long after they had killed over a hundred US marines is apparently not enough to provide support to an enemy how the hell can Snowdon be considered to be supporting an enemy?
Meh, that was some considerable time ago - and we just ended up with a kind of mini monarchy for a few years before reverting to the status quo (albeit with a few more constitutional restraints on the crown). Being a regicide has never been much of a badge of honour.
1649, to be exact. 127 years before the Americans decided to throw off the yoke of King George. However, keep in mind that the religious descendants of the movement that lopped off Charles' head were among the first colonists in what later became the United States. Then a few years later (in 1688) y'all had the Glorious Revolution, importing a foreign king to replace the one you didn't like, largely because he was too easy on Catholics.
And if you read the writings of some the the USA's leading revolutionaries, they thought they were honoring an English tradition resisting monarchs who had gotten too big for their britches.
Anyone who actually grew up in the US knows better than that.
Does having been born and living my entire life in the US qualify as "actually grew up in the US"?
It is jingoistic
Wikipedia defines jingoism as "extreme patriotism in the form of aggressive foreign policy". Please indicate what part of the Pledge of Allegiance that applies to.
nobody else does anything remotely like it
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of South Korea
Pledge of Allegiance to the Philippine Flag
and again, and again, and nobody ever seems to answer me. probably because what he did isnt illegal.
The Pledge of Allegiance is not jingoistic in any way.
Except maybe that little bit about 'under God' being added during the McCarthyist 1950's. We can't turn our children into Godless Commies, can we?
'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
Crackpot or no, you're certainly adept at raising up strawmen.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
That would be "dead corpse."
No, that would be redundant.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
The difference though (at least from my point of view) is that the tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy brigade never had any actual real evidence to justify their complaints that the government was listening in on everything.
Snowden has flipped that around. It's no longer a suspected conspiracy theory, because it has been proven to exist (... assuming his evidence pans out to be real, which I have no reason to doubt at the moment).
There was a reason that during the American Revolution tarring and feathering conservatives was quite acceptable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
I remember as a kid when some unlucky kid had to go to the States and go to school there. They'd come back with horror stories about the lack of freedom and that pledge was at the top of the list as one of the signs of a repressive state. The amazing thing was the American propaganda was so good that Americans honestly believe[d] they were living in freedom as they were forced to pledge allegiance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
The US government isn't engaging in economic espionage...
Sez you.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Freedom is always a balancing act with some freedoms that have to be given up. The best example is the freedom of what you can do with your fist. Another example is driving where you give up some freedoms such as which side of the road you drive on or whether to drive on the sidewalk in trade for some safety.
The real problem is giving up freedoms for no or very little net gain and that is what has been happening with the terrorist bogeyman. Reasonable freedoms to surrender might include things like having open cockpit doors. Unreasonable is the communication history of everyone.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
So I guess marrying that Chinese girl means I'll become a traitor to the US, since she's an "enemy" national?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Hong Kong is in China, but is not quite like the rest of China.
HK does have free speech and freedom to assemble--I myself have seen Falun Gong open-air meetings there numerous times, with no intervention from the authorities. (I've visited there 4-5 times in the last 7 years.)
ProTip: Think before you spout.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
damaged American interests.
My interest is in the highest law of the land, the US constitution. If the government was violating it in any way, I expect people who know about it to come forth and inform the American people of the government's wrongdoings.
Check UIDs. I'm COLD FJORD(826450). User COID FJORD(2949869) has impersonated me. Don't confuse us if he trolls you.
Exactly. The issue is that many people seem to not care about the constitution, and such mindsets are poisonous to the pursuit of liberty.
Check UIDs. I'm COLD FJORD(826450). User COID FJORD(2949869) has impersonated me. Don't confuse us if he trolls you.
Having watched the cybersecurity senate hearing earlier today some amusing highlights.
Senator asks what law permits collection of everyones phone records without any suspicion... Answer our secret interpretation of law is classified.
Senator sounds defcon 1 citing hundreds of thousands of "cyber attacks" against the US government systems every hour.
Boston mentioned in context of justification for a program.
Head of NSA says we collect all data so that we can reference it later if we need to...there is no other way to do it.. Like telcoms don't retain CDRs for years and couldn't provide them to a spooky TLA with a proper warrant.
We are less safe because our elected officials fail us.
All you have to do is wear a rubber mask that looks like George Bush whenever you are in the room with the gadget. Its a perfectly reasonable trade-off.
Every month like clockwork 1300 people are killed in this country. No "terror" fearing talking heads seem to give two shits about that.
A 9/11 every 3 months and still endless shit about us being "less safe" cuz of something that happened 12 years ago.
The actual tragedy are politicians who waste countless billions on militiary industrial complex with statistically irrelevant results while that money stands a much better chance of saving real lives if used for other purposes...assuming that is actually what they care soo much about.
Heck you can save lives to unecessary car accidents and save money in the process just by reigning in the TSA.
I heard on the news that Saddam Hussain was working with the terrorists. Year after year our officials make shit up and lie to us, start wars based on knowingly dubious and false information and none of them go to jail not a single goddamn one of them. Sell weapons to Iranians to raise money to fight wars in Nicaragua and everyone gets pardoned. Lie after lie, abuse after abuse, secret courts, secret laws.
The government does not deserve our trust. No government on earth deserves the trust of its people.
Teacher really liked you best, didn't she?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Not for me, but I don't have a driver's license :) :)
I use a scooter to go to work, 10 minute trip, passing by all the cars that look like they are parked on the road instead of driving, yay for traffic jams
This is the sig that says NI (again)
That's not entirely true; third-party brake pads with sensors are readily available. In fact, they're so readily available that I ended up getting sensor-equipped pads for my non-sensor-equipped older VW and cut off the connectors.
Your friend's mechanic was just too lazy or incompetent to choose the right ones.
(I suppose it's possible that it might be hard to find cheap brake pads with sensors, but using cheap brake pads is a bad idea to begin with so I have limited sympathy.)
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
If you're passing the cars in traffic jams on a scooter, you're breaking the traffic laws (license or not).
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
I'm not a great history buff (seriously), so perhaps you can help me?
I know of the beheading of King Charles in 1642 and his beheading was the result of him declaring war against his own people which was in direct opposition to the parliament law which stated the English monarch cannot rule without Parliament's consent... And did not. That seems more like the country having a civil war over the King violating the law, not a revolution. Where and when have I misunderstood history?
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Yes many people considers giving up privacy and even some personal freedoms as an acceptable cost for any marginal effect on personal security, good for them.
But IMHO the much bigger issue is how they threw this in effect in secrecy without public debate. I think what both the NSA and the government learned from this, is that it really is better to ask for forgiveness (if caught) then permission.
Who watches the watchers?
Congress is supposed to watch the watchers. The voters are supposed to watch Congress.
Emphasis on "supposed to," both instances: The only thing those in Congress are watching are their account balances and poll numbers. The only thing (most) voters are watching are their televisions*.
* I haven't looked up them up, but I doubt C-SPAN's numbers are "up there." (Further, it's been my observation that even when C-SPAN is airing unfiltered, uninterrupted, and otherwise uncontaminated coverage of a high-profile government event, many (if not most) people still opt for the distorted version of events offered by CNN, Fox, MSNBC, et al.)
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
Of course, Snowden isn't being seditious either as he's simply provided evidence of their highly questionable activities.
It depends on your perspective. From the NSA's point of view, the seditious are the ones getting in the way of their lawful monitoring of communications in order to try and prevent the treasonous acts of bombing the US. Maybe the NSA are like IT Support; You only ever realise they exist when they get it wrong?
From your point of view, the NSA are the seditious, infringing on your rights to privacy and freedom of association etc.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Why'd you put father-in-law in quotes? If you're married, he's your father-in-law. If you're not, he's the dad of your Steady Betty. Pretty simple, really.
Since datavirtue hasn't answered your question, I offer some speculations on his behalf: The "father-in-law" could be the step-father or really shitty father to his wife — or ex-wife, even — thus, writing "father in law" provided a succinct short-hand which he could use and avoid delving into the particulars of the situation.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
> Bruce Schneier has published an opinion piece saying that while Snowden did break the law, we need to investigate the government before any prosecution occurs.
The law is whatever the government makes it. That doesn't mean it's right. Sometimes laws are passed by congressmen bribed ^H^H^H receiving donations from lobbyists. Sometimes laws are passed by politocrats who figure whats the point of all that power if they can't use it. Absolute power may be a cliche, but look at how its changed Obama from a progressive socialist to someone who makes Bush look like a hippie. That doesn't make it right. Schneier needs to transcend Kohlberg's 5th stage. ghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development and the Constitution makes this "law" illegal anyway. We just have to wait 5 years for it to work its way up to SCOTUS.
I was unaware all the traffic laws in the world are identical. I guess I learned something today.
How can the voters watch congress when congress is hiding things from them? In order for voters to make an informed decision, they need to know the facts.
Now Snowden has given us the facts - the fact that the US government is spying on its own citizens. Its now up to said citizens to make this legal or illegal through their votes and protests.
Also - the NSA is only a cog of a much bigger machine called Echelon.
In the Netherlands, we drive our scooters on the bicycle path a lot of the time (at least for the part where I pass the cars). So I am not breaking any traffic laws :)
This is the sig that says NI (again)
and you dont even know what law they broke.
you should probably step back for a minute and contemplate what you are saying.
David Brooks is a priviledged, water-carrying toady with delusions of intellect; a partisan hack whose undeserved notariety matches his swollen ego.
Bicycle paths are for bicycles, asshole. would you like it if I drove on your lawn?
Rage all you want against the 'terrifying new revelations' about government data collection, this is the INEVITABLE arc of human societies.
I know Toynbee may socio-historically old-fashions, but it seems a never-ending repetitious cycle: humans scrabble their way out of chaos and savagery, build cohesive societies that take care of basic needs freeing their citizenry to think and dream and grow. Ultimately, the weight of a society exceeds its carrying capacity (largely through the people's ignorance of how great they have it compared to the alternatives) and everything collapses in anarchy and violence, until some inspired individuals lead the way back out of chaos again.
But we're social animals (emphasis on the latter). Freedom is HARD; look carefully behind a student's eyes on graduation day, and you'll see a core anxiety "OK WTF do I do NOW with my life?"
(An aside: I believe that this is the core reason that college is perceived to be so necessary to job-hunters today. It's not the commonly-ranted "companies are demanding college degrees for everything" complaint, that's confusing cause/effect. I believe that the comfort-value of a life-on-rails with few meaningful choices has kept people in school longer and longer. It's simple, lazy, expensive procrastination of "real life" for another 4+ years. Faced with a ridiculous excess of applicants with college degrees, wouldn't you as a business likewise begin to demand them if only as a first-tier way to weed out candidates who ostensibly have fewer skills? If you think about it, it's actually contrary to what they should WANT in an employee, and why a thoughtful HR department should consider carefully if they really want degree-holding applicants, if the degree isn't directly pertinent to the job.)
You can see it too if you play a face-to-face roleplaying game with today's teens, they are literally paralyzed with choices, as opposed to the linear games with fixed, obvious options that they're used to from their PC or consoles.
In a couple of moments of startling clarity from an otherwise vapid film: ...
"Loki: I come with glad tidings of a world made free.
Nick Fury: Free from what?
Loki: Freedom. Freedom is life's great lie.
Loki: Is not this simpler? Is this not your natural state? It's the unspoken truth of humanity, that you crave subjugation. The bright lure of freedom diminishes your life's joy in a mad scramble for power, for identity. You were made to be ruled. In the end, you will always kneel."
They are lines that are supposed to enrage, of course, to light the righteous indignation in freedom-loving Americans (and in fact it's immediately followed by the formulaic 'defense of the lone guy brave enough to stand up' and Capt America's line "You know, the last time I was in Germany and saw a man standing above everybody else, we ended up disagreeing."
ANYONE who watches that and doesn't immediately recognize the historical, essential truth of Loki's statement hasn't been paying attention.
As artists have a particularly skillful ability to be succint:
http://i.imgur.com/DrlRmZK.jpg
(sfw)
Personally I suspect that freedom on the level of that envisaged by the Founding Fathers is unsustainable, because it demands a broad level of intelligence, education, the leisure to care about things larger than ones' next meal, and the willingness to put in the WORK. Lying in your hammock isn't freedom, it's the reward of freedom.
Either people are generally too indolent to be willing to work for it (think herd of sheep or cattle, happy to merely have food and get milked/sheared once in a while in exchange for perceived comfort & safety - until the farmer needs meat, but that's in the distant future...), or the governments have figured out that the way to ensure their grip on power is to opiate the masses. Either way, the masses are largely happy with it and always have been.
So stop your screaming and shouting. Ecce homo, indeed.
-Styopa
Seriously - playing devils advocate here - just what if they are indeed not abusing this capability?
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Tell that to the park ranger who rescues your granola ass from the side of a mountain.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Have you researched range voting? The author of approval voting now prefers this method.
One last thing: Sometimes I wonder; "Is that someone's signature? Or do they type that at the end of each post?"
That seems more like the country having a civil war over the King violating the law, not a revolution.
The English do call it their Civil War, but I'd argue it was a revolution since they overthrew the existing government and instituted a new (though not necessarily better) form w/ Cromwell as Lord Protector. They get away w/ calling it a civil war instead of a revolution because they had an un-revolution (the Restoration) nine years later, so they figure it doesn't really count.
Personally, I look at it from the view of intent. Thankfully, some of the framers wrote extensively on the subject, making the latter view of it as a clear and concise document the obvious choice for anyone who wishes to view it as intended.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Not in California. You are allowed to split lanes there. The police do it. Without sirens or lights.
I'm not sure you understand (I apologize if I'm misreading, but your phrasing in a couple of places seems to imply you're not from the United States) that in the US, the entire principle upon which our bill of rights (the first 10 amendments of our constitution) was written included the necessity for the language to be so plain, simple, and so unequivocating that they could not be abused without even the most common of men being able to identify when those rights were being infringed.
Over the past 220 years, of course, our lawyers and government officials have done everything they could to twist the words and the language into things which the founders could never have meant in the language of their day, and if one simply takes the time to read their writings, would never have passed into law in the first place.
In this example, the fourth amendment was intended to ensure the right of the people not to have their property, persons, homes, recorded information (papers essentially being the medium of the day, as opposed to the literal meaning of paper itself), and so forth, against general government scrutiny as well as to prohibit general warrants (such as Writs of Assistance, which were heavily abused in the colonies and are essentially not substantially different from PRISM and other government tracking and general surveillance programs).
So rest assured, I am quite confident that my understanding and view of how the fourth amendment was intended by its authors to restrict the government is sufficient to apply it in this case, as well as that my understanding of the reasons for which it was authored as it was is properly sufficient. Regardless of how the present government may choose to interpret it, something that has been quite questionable in many rulings despite the plainness of the language. For one such example, you might examine Kelo v. City of New London, which was clearly decided in a way not consistent with the intent of its authors in any manner, or even with the language itself barring an egregious twist of the words and meanings.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Indeed, I'm quite aware of these things, but regardless of their de-facto usage, it doesn't make them right.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
As a Brit, I've always wondered about how you guys look back on the revolution. Since the US was created out of a revolutionary war you'd think that there could be no act that is more than in keeping with the spirit and founding principles of the republic than seeking to overthrow a government that has overstepped its bounds. But most of your 'patriotic' type pundits seem to view any form of anti-establishment sentiment as either communism or treason.
In the UK we've never really gone in for violent revolution, so I can understand why our national identity doesn't lend itself to direct action. But you guys are always going on about the glory of the republic and the benefits that you gained via armed struggle against the state. How do you keep those sort if ideas straight in your heads alongside the sort of 'my country, right or wrong' jingoism that has you reciting oaths of loyalty in school and so forth?
Are you also confused about why Americans buy, keep, use,and love guns so much?
Take those two facts and rub them together for a little while and you'll figure it out.
I think what both the NSA and the government learned from this, is that it really is better to ask for forgiveness (if caught) then permission.
Nothing new here. Outside of a peon or two acting as patsies, who in the Government has been punished for:
a) Fast and Furious.
b) Collusion to undermine the First Amendment, slander, libel against OWS.
c) Wrongful death of US Officials in Benghazi.
d) Perjury (starting with Bill Clinton, but GW on war in the middle east, Obama on the NDA, Hillary on Benghazi, and the list could get pretty long so I'll stop)
e) GSA abuse of power, fraud, blackmail (just the cover up for the multi-million dollar party in Vegas)
You get the idea, there is no accountability. The media is good at assisting in cover ups by changing the subject and not talking about key issues so that people don't know or forget about them. People are slowly waking up to how bad it has become, and I have hope that it will change for the better.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Not in France.
Anarchists never rule
Metaphor.
Meta - phor.
M e t a - p h o r
A figure of speech.
Stand by him figuratively.
As in protest.
Not all go to Hong Kong.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Why thank you, I probably do. You're probably right. And had the previous generation(s), and our messed up government not tanked and destroyed the economy. Maybe there would be other employers hiring.
Fuck, maybe I wouldn't have to drive 110 miles to a state I dislike, all so I can have a job, keep a roof over my family's head and put food on the table. *cough choke gasp*
Because, it goes well beyond that. They are tracking word usage, and content.
And because if the government really cared about terrorist threats. They would have followed up on the Boston Bomber after twice being contacted by the Russian government.
They're too busy trying to track domestic threats and political adversaries. Tea party members and OWS members.
VW/Audi group has opened up its software to third parties... It is THE MOST OPEN car platform you can scan, hack, and play with, bar none. That's why guys like Ross-Tech sell their VAG-COM / VCDS software and ANY COMPETENT mechanic who knows what he's doing will use that software instead of cheap generic OBD-II scanners.
You also need to educate yourself before doing any repairs on the car, that's part of the process.
Disclaimer: I'm a successful DIY-er on my Audi, and I use aftermarket VCDS software to access and program all computer modules of my car.
Eh...it's summer already.
You seem to have no idea about dutch traffic laws.
While driving on the road, I will come up to a sign that says that I have to move myself and my scooter to the bicycle path, probably because it was deemed that the following road situation is too hazardous for the scooter.
And please don't call me names, I haven't been rude to you.
Here we have signs like this: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uZh1eqAvzak/T7Pl3mWBfLI/AAAAAAAAAj0/2PgDN807HkM/s1600/Brom-fiets+bord.png
On these bicyclepaths I am not allowed to drive on the road.
This is the sig that says NI (again)
What freedom did they want that they didn't have? Curious about that. Also at my school foreign students were not required to do the pledge. Nor was anyone else if they didn't feel like it.
...the voice of reason...LMOL.....one of the big stories not being talked about is private contractors have access to national security information. Since when did it become ok for privare contractors to have access to national security information? Time to end this private contractors scam - they don't save us money and only but us at greater risk. Booz Allen is another Blackwater.
I don't see those as being connected.
It's the same argument as "understand vs condone" - "yes, you can understand someone doing something without condoning it." They are not intrinsically linked.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
My BMW battery went dead more than once and the car started just fine after a charge or new battery.
Yes, I'm sure it came as quite a "shock" that the U.S. spies on foreign nations. I'm sure the U.S. would also be quite "shocked" to discover that other nations spy on it.
Higher Logics: where programming meets science.
Even if you buy it, the cost of proprietary service required means you're really only renting it.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Which would be to order the military to stand down in the event of military coup attempt ... again defending the constitution ...
but if you buy it, you can also resell it at any point to the dealer or a person or on craigslist. this is a sign of ownership. also, you pay a fixed amount, and once you pay off that amount you can keep it and maintain it as long as you like. this doesn't sound like renting it; this sounds like buying it.
i hate hate hate when non-bicycles are in bicycle paths. i also hate hate hate when bikes or scooters are on sidewalks. this sidewalk's for regular walking, not for fancy walking! +1 if you get the reference.
"Spying" is not really "spying"
"Meta-data" is not "data"
"Imminent" danger means "there might or might not be a danger in the future"
"Militant" means "anyone we killed by drone"
"Terrorist" means "someone we don't like"
"Whistle-blower" means "traitor"
"War" Is "Peace"
"Freedom" Is "Slavery"
"Ignorance" Is "Strength"
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I can totally understand that, here in the Netherlands however, us scooter drivers often have to share the bicycle path by law.
This is the sig that says NI (again)
Interesting podcast -- https://www.grc.com/securitynow.htm look for Episode 408. It's a somewhat speculative discussion about what PRISM probably is, but Steve Gibson is pretty knowledgable, and backs up his theory with facts that seem to support it.
TLDL summary-- It's a tap on the fiber at the ISP just upstream of Google, etc., capturing a copy of all traffic to/from that service. See prior stories about "What is that secret room at AT&T?", etc.
A transcript of the podcast should be up by Friday, according to the web site.
well laws should be changed! they should be consistent with the laws of natural persons and the international bicyclists union.
My point was that him saying "I'm struggling to find sympathy for him" goes beyond merely understanding the events. It expresses a particular feeling you have about the events.
For example, I understand that some people beat up other people. But if I see a guy getting the shit kicked out of him on TV, and I say "I have no sympathy for that guy", how is that not me condoning the beating?
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
what law did he admit breaking?
A lack of sympathy does not imply that you condone what is being done, only that there is no empathy for the person.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Being an old geezer/geek, I can remember the 1960's. In 1960 every publication believed anything the U.S. Federal Government said. By 1970 we had taught the population, especially reporters, that the government MAY be lying to you. Some swung far to the opposite side, and assumed that any government statement was a lie.
Today we may be seeing a similar phenomenon. The U.S. Federal Government has run secret programs spying here and there. Does the government listen to every phone conversation in the USA? It is technically feasible, with datacenters scanning for key words. Of course the XYZ agencies would love to do it. And of course they would do it secretly. We are rapidly reaching the general assumption that if the government CAN spy, it WILL spy. And, of course, lie about it.
In the 1960's Uncle Sam lied and claimed not be lying. In the 2010's Uncle Sam spies and claims not to be spying. Do you believe him?
(Disclaimer: I don't have to believe him; I live in Thailand. They admit to spying on me.)
Politicians will have special privileges.
http://cnbc.com/id/43471561
Casteism
Traffic laws should only be changed if things aren't working out safetywise.
Here in the Netherlands a traffic accident with bicycles/scooters is actually quite rare, so here we are doing fine.
A bigger problem is people using their cellphone while driving their car.
This is the sig that says NI (again)
And and I can see from your anger management (or lack thereof), that discussing anything with you isn't going to be a productive use of time.
I see, with that little orange dot next to your name, that you'll probably dismiss anything I say out of hand anyway.
I maintain a healthy skepticism about everyone on the internet. The dot is just something I use as a reminder that I've dealt with previously. In the case of the orange (for you, red for me), it reminds me that I've had a disagreement with you, and that I believe we will continue to disagree in general. Nothing more, nothing less.
I suggest that you treat it as I use it, and simply recognize it as a reminder that we've had a disagreement and that I believe we will continue to disagree and, in the future, we are unlikely to reach resolutions that result in either of us presenting an argument that the other will find satisfactory to change our view.
To claim I will "dismiss anything [you] say out of hand" is silly. It is more likely that I will simply disagree on various grounds with your point, or the basis on which you have built your point.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Quoth the mods: "-1, Insufficiently absolutist"
But we aren't talking about a mere lack of sympathy, which may be because you don't know if you should sympathize. We're talking about looking at the situation, and deciding that you have no sympathy for the person, for the things that are about to befall him.
Person 1: "You gotta help me out man!"
Person 2: "Why?"
Person 1: "I robbed a liquor store! The Man is gonna throw me in jail!"
Person 2: "I have no sympathy for you."
If you cannot see how that means that Person 2 approves of Person 1 going to jail, then I don't know what else to say.
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
I'm not going to say it doesn't usually mean that... because it does.
But that is not what is actually being said!
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
What I'm getting at is that we don't sing songs glorifying the violent overthrow of the state. I'm not making a value judgement about revolutions - it all seems to have worked out quite well for you. But to take an example, the UK national anthem is a dirge about God saving the Queen (it's pure bullshit and pretty embarrassing on the rare occasion we win an international sporting event). Nobody takes it very seriously and you'll be hard pressed to find an Englishman who knows much more than the first verse.
Anyway, while we're all beseeching the almighty to take care of the monarchy, you guys are singing about bombs, rockets and the havoc of war. So whenever I see our government giving corrupt tax breaks to corporations I don't expect anyone to do anything about it because, you know, sure democracy is broken, but whatta ya gonna do? Whereas in the states its all 'hoist the red flag of revolution and let all men be free' one minute and choosing between scented and unscented lube at the airport the next.
This whole NSA thing is a good example. I can't go twenty minutes without being watched on CCTV in the UK, so I've always assumed that any privacy that I think I've got is an illusion. Freedom in the Uk is whatever the government allows you to do. But we're a bunch of serfs, obsessed with social class and mostly disinterested in civil liberties. What's your excuse?
Dude, you beheaded your own king! He started it.
Heavy is the head that wears the tinfoil hat.
At least five English kings were deposed and murdered or banished. Richard Ii & lll Ed Ii, charly I, James II. Now the monarch reins ( not rules) by the will of the people, expressed through Parliament. They can be voted out, and it may become necessary to do that for Charly III.
Heavy is the head that wears the tinfoil hat.
You missed Charles II. He was deposed by Parliament. Seems like it's unlucky to be a king of England named Charles.