With both parties' knowledge or no, the flaw is that they can arrange a meeting at 2AM in a swamp somewhere for secret money hand-offs. If no one knows about the meeting, then it won't be recorded, so they won't get caught.
Guess the point I'm making is that I'm happy to have balance-of-power situations always recorded, with everyone's knowledge, to stop the behaviour, and then also happily record them without their knowledge in situations like the above to catch them in the act if need be. But I think that recording them with everyone's knowledge will lower the risk of bad behaviour right then and there, so that's a good start.
Trust. Remember that? Lost it a long time ago. No one trust anyone else. Spy, counterspy. When will it end?
I love how so many people are all nostalgic about the good ol' days, like these problems just didn't exist before. Snake oil salesmen have existed ever since snake oil existed. For everyone whose word is his bond and whose handshake is his contract, there are three who will try to weasel out of what they said before, or will tell you that you didn't understand what they meant, or that they can't remember what they said, or....
I'd love a world of trust. I'd also love backup when my trust is misplaced.
Why necessarily non-consenting? (Or, more accurately, without both parties' knowledge?)
I have no problem with everyone knowing that we're recording every situation where balance-of-power is involved. If politicians are always recorded when they meet with lobbyists, or police always recorded when dealing with suspects, then illegal/unethical behaviour will be stopped simply because they *know* that they're on camera.
I don't care about catching them in the act; I care about the act stopping.
"If people equate freedom of speech with watching child pornography, then the Rudd-Labor Government is going to disagree."
Right, because looking at ANY "inappropriate" material (and who decides what "inappropriate" is, anyway?) is the EXACT same as looking at child porn. No difference whatsoever.
Granted, you can opt out of this service, so I'm not 100% incensed that such a thing is being called for (but I'd be much happier if it were opt-in instead of opt-out). However, I am very pissed that people can make statements like the above and not get laughed out of office. When did false equivalency become acceptable? It makes my head asplode sometimes.
H'm. Let's count the problems together:
1) They did not inform or ask their members that they would be collecting this information. Even the eeeeeeeeevil Microsoft/Apple/whoever we hate today notifies us that generic data is being collected. People tolerate generic data collecting; they don't tolerate duplicity all that well.
2) The data is encrypted, so there's absolutely no way to tell if what they're saying is true or not.
3) They've been doing this for months without anyone noticing it (and letting others know), and now they're acting surprised that people are upset. So they're either stunned beyond all reason or flat-out liars.
Pretty good reasons to be pissed, I'd say.
Yes, and two bombs were dropped on actual people. Your incidents pale in comparison to them.
The fact that there have been bigger stories doesn't negate the fact that this is a story as well, and not a very good story either. Losing track of nukes for over three hours is completely unacceptable.
A website that cares about duplicate detection! It's as if they understand that readers don't want to read the same story again and again and again!
I wish I could think of another website that would benefit from this technology!
We've been promised that cars like this will be coming in the future for many years now. So far, nothing's come of it.
Wake me when one of these is actually being mass-produced and is affordable for the average person.
And on the other side of the coin (FTA): And there's a cute penguin robot, Mel, that makes eye contact with people and nods when they talk.
Men have now been officially made redundant.
Well, here's the one difference I see:
This crazy new "religion" refers to things that ACTUALLY @^&#ING EXIST IN THE REAL WORLD.
I know, I know, it's "wacky", it's "out there", but it might just fly!
Slashdot Mirror
That said, maybe I'll try again...it's a good cause, and it's the best screensaver I've had, if nothing else.
Guess the point I'm making is that I'm happy to have balance-of-power situations always recorded, with everyone's knowledge, to stop the behaviour, and then also happily record them without their knowledge in situations like the above to catch them in the act if need be. But I think that recording them with everyone's knowledge will lower the risk of bad behaviour right then and there, so that's a good start.
Guy: Don't taze me, bro!
I love how so many people are all nostalgic about the good ol' days, like these problems just didn't exist before. Snake oil salesmen have existed ever since snake oil existed. For everyone whose word is his bond and whose handshake is his contract, there are three who will try to weasel out of what they said before, or will tell you that you didn't understand what they meant, or that they can't remember what they said, or....
I'd love a world of trust. I'd also love backup when my trust is misplaced.
I have no problem with everyone knowing that we're recording every situation where balance-of-power is involved. If politicians are always recorded when they meet with lobbyists, or police always recorded when dealing with suspects, then illegal/unethical behaviour will be stopped simply because they *know* that they're on camera.
I don't care about catching them in the act; I care about the act stopping.
So, after the breakup, can you introduce her to me?
Argh. Not false equivalency; false dilemma is what I was aiming for. I go sleep now.
Right, because looking at ANY "inappropriate" material (and who decides what "inappropriate" is, anyway?) is the EXACT same as looking at child porn. No difference whatsoever.
Granted, you can opt out of this service, so I'm not 100% incensed that such a thing is being called for (but I'd be much happier if it were opt-in instead of opt-out). However, I am very pissed that people can make statements like the above and not get laughed out of office. When did false equivalency become acceptable? It makes my head asplode sometimes.
I've heard that Valtrex is really good in helping clear up open source. Should do the trick for you.
H'm. Let's count the problems together: 1) They did not inform or ask their members that they would be collecting this information. Even the eeeeeeeeevil Microsoft/Apple/whoever we hate today notifies us that generic data is being collected. People tolerate generic data collecting; they don't tolerate duplicity all that well. 2) The data is encrypted, so there's absolutely no way to tell if what they're saying is true or not. 3) They've been doing this for months without anyone noticing it (and letting others know), and now they're acting surprised that people are upset. So they're either stunned beyond all reason or flat-out liars. Pretty good reasons to be pissed, I'd say.
Yes, and two bombs were dropped on actual people. Your incidents pale in comparison to them.
The fact that there have been bigger stories doesn't negate the fact that this is a story as well, and not a very good story either. Losing track of nukes for over three hours is completely unacceptable.
71,000 dead is a lot, a whole lot, but it's also .002% of the population
Iraq now has a population of 3.5 billion people? Damn, what are they, the Zerg?
FUCK FAT People. They are just UGLY.
/.
You are a very brave person to post that sentiment on
Since when, exactly, did reporting a broken link become "flamebait"? I grow confused.
It appears that the group has been taken down. Looks like censorship has won out. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not, really.
I think there would be quite a few women who would be interested in working two jobs if one of the fringe benefits was two implants.
Come to think of it, I know even more men who would want women to enter the workforce with two jobs...
A website that cares about duplicate detection! It's as if they understand that readers don't want to read the same story again and again and again! I wish I could think of another website that would benefit from this technology!
Thus the use of "quotation marks" around "giving". May I recommend this link for further understanding of the subject: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaiuSTyruOk
We've been promised that cars like this will be coming in the future for many years now. So far, nothing's come of it. Wake me when one of these is actually being mass-produced and is affordable for the average person.
And on the other side of the coin (FTA):
And there's a cute penguin robot, Mel, that makes eye contact with people and nods when they talk.
Men have now been officially made redundant.
Well, here's the one difference I see: This crazy new "religion" refers to things that ACTUALLY @^&#ING EXIST IN THE REAL WORLD. I know, I know, it's "wacky", it's "out there", but it might just fly!