If that were true, then presumably "Europe"--rather a broad concept, isn't it?--should be "better" than the US. But in what way is it? Much worse unemployment, to name only one thing, and on the other hand major efforts by the rulers to do away with the social welfare state that's been in place since the end of World War II.
The law will have zero effect on the NSA. It will merely push what they do, and will continue to do, further into the dark recesses of their operation. It's like laws claiming to regulate banks' behavior. They can't work.
Don't agree with a lot of this but one thing to keep in mind is that we only have the Japanese gov't word for what they did. I don't know what happened or didn't, but I do know that "standing up to the US" plays very well in every country--sometimes even in the US.
It's a clear case of plausible deniability. The NSA made sure Obama didn't know what they were up to so he wouldn't be obliged to either stop them or lie. That's what good underlings do. "Will no one rid me of this cursed priest?"
The guy worked for the National SECURITY Council at the pleasure of the President of the United States of America [background music "America the Beautiful" or equivalent]--what court do you think is going to back him instead of the White House?
Anyone who takes Wikipedia's word for anything without another source deserves whatever they get, and this is not due to the growth of sockpuppets. It's always been true. A teacher I know tells her students that to cite Wikipedia "is like telling me you saw it written on a bathroom wall at the bus depot."
Would be a better name. This is just on a large scale what has been going on on a small scale. My wife, who's a college professor, tells her students that if you cite Wikipedia as a source it's like telling me you saw it written on a bathroom wall somewhere.
It's not that "everyone will forget about it," it's the lack of alternatives or options to do anything about it. Most people, taught from birth to believe in the efficacy of elections, believe in elections. When elections fail, what are you supposed to do?
RMS may know all there is to know about technology, but he apparently knows little about history or politics. "[R]estore democracy"? Might be true if it ever existed in the US.
Well said. Let me add that China-bashing is not going to solve any problems and really is designed to distract from real problems. Congress votes to ban Chinese from scientific meetings--this is the same Congress that allows tens of thousands of workers to go without paychecks (aka "government shutdown") and has done zero to create jobs, rein in government spying, and any number of other serious issues. And the White House too.
This is a perfect example of why patents should be abolished. Maybe in the 19th century they had some value but that time is long, long past. Now patents are a block to innovation.
Here's a formula guaranteed to prevent your being the victim of revenge porn: don't send anyone pictures you don't want to see on the Internet. Absolutely foolproof, guaranteed.
1. Working against the interests of the US government may be working IN the interests of a lot of us.
2. Denying this guy entry to the US is revealing how weak and unsure of themselves they are. You only use police methods when you can't win the argument.
It's utopian, and silly, to think that 1. everyone can so carefully inspect all software they use that you can keep snoopers out and 2. that this makes any difference anyway. There's nothing in what he says that will do anything to protect his privacy, nor will following his example protect yours. Repeat after me: this is not an engineering/programming/technical problem, it's a political problem.
This sting operation is a total waste of time and is itself a fraud, designed to make you think the NY a-g is protecting you. He's not. First of all, this is not a real problem. No one over the age of six is taken in by fake reviews. Second, once burned twice shy--if you are taken in once, you never will be again. No state action needed. Third, the spoofers will find a new way to post fake reviews. Go chase ripoff landlord, Mr. Schneiderman, if you want to do something that will help a lot of people.
The courts and judges are part of the same system as the NSA and the president and the congress, whose political goal is the defense of capitalism. When their core interests are threatened there are no laws that can keep them from doing whatever they think they need to do to stay in power. The courts will put a "legal" seal of approval on it. As Malcolm X so insightfully pointed out many years ago--you can't rely on any part of the government to protect your rights. Not Congress, not the White House, not the courts. No matter which party whose purpose is defense of capitalism holds whichever office.
And replace him with who? Has there ever been a president who didn't break any number of laws when it came to defending the basic interests of the US ruling class?
Also it's stupid to think that they are spying "only on foreigners." Like they would tell the truth about what they're doing. Or, if they get a US citizen on the line, do they hang up?
You can't expect corporate executives to defend your rights. Marissa Mayer, the gang at Google, Verizon, you name them, they and the NSA are all on the same side, which is the side of protecting US capitalism. World capitalism, actually, to be more accurate.
And we also only have Google's word for what how their new superduper encryption will work. Good PR for them to say what they're saying. And meanwhile, off camera, who knows what's going on?
If you read the article carefully--I know, that's a stupid thing to say on/.--you'll see that the NSA often simply bypassed encryption entirely by grabbing the data either before it was encrypted or after it was decrypted. So the argument about which encryption is "better" is irrelevant. More importantly, anyone who believed that any of their communications COULD NOT through technical means end up in the hands of the government was/is naive.
Slashdot Mirror
If that were true, then presumably "Europe"--rather a broad concept, isn't it?--should be "better" than the US. But in what way is it? Much worse unemployment, to name only one thing, and on the other hand major efforts by the rulers to do away with the social welfare state that's been in place since the end of World War II.
The law will have zero effect on the NSA. It will merely push what they do, and will continue to do, further into the dark recesses of their operation. It's like laws claiming to regulate banks' behavior. They can't work.
Don't agree with a lot of this but one thing to keep in mind is that we only have the Japanese gov't word for what they did. I don't know what happened or didn't, but I do know that "standing up to the US" plays very well in every country--sometimes even in the US.
As opposed to a 14-year-old boy? Girls can't code?
And the US has been colonizing Puerto Rico since 1898. I think that's pretty notable.
It's a clear case of plausible deniability. The NSA made sure Obama didn't know what they were up to so he wouldn't be obliged to either stop them or lie. That's what good underlings do. "Will no one rid me of this cursed priest?"
The guy worked for the National SECURITY Council at the pleasure of the President of the United States of America [background music "America the Beautiful" or equivalent]--what court do you think is going to back him instead of the White House?
Anyone who takes Wikipedia's word for anything without another source deserves whatever they get, and this is not due to the growth of sockpuppets. It's always been true. A teacher I know tells her students that to cite Wikipedia "is like telling me you saw it written on a bathroom wall at the bus depot."
Would be a better name. This is just on a large scale what has been going on on a small scale. My wife, who's a college professor, tells her students that if you cite Wikipedia as a source it's like telling me you saw it written on a bathroom wall somewhere.
It's not that "everyone will forget about it," it's the lack of alternatives or options to do anything about it. Most people, taught from birth to believe in the efficacy of elections, believe in elections. When elections fail, what are you supposed to do?
RMS may know all there is to know about technology, but he apparently knows little about history or politics. "[R]estore democracy"? Might be true if it ever existed in the US.
Sorry, but passing yet another law isn't going to stop the government agencies that have been breaking existing ones for decades.
Well said. Let me add that China-bashing is not going to solve any problems and really is designed to distract from real problems. Congress votes to ban Chinese from scientific meetings--this is the same Congress that allows tens of thousands of workers to go without paychecks (aka "government shutdown") and has done zero to create jobs, rein in government spying, and any number of other serious issues. And the White House too.
This is a perfect example of why patents should be abolished. Maybe in the 19th century they had some value but that time is long, long past. Now patents are a block to innovation.
Here's a formula guaranteed to prevent your being the victim of revenge porn: don't send anyone pictures you don't want to see on the Internet. Absolutely foolproof, guaranteed.
1. Working against the interests of the US government may be working IN the interests of a lot of us. 2. Denying this guy entry to the US is revealing how weak and unsure of themselves they are. You only use police methods when you can't win the argument.
It's utopian, and silly, to think that 1. everyone can so carefully inspect all software they use that you can keep snoopers out and 2. that this makes any difference anyway. There's nothing in what he says that will do anything to protect his privacy, nor will following his example protect yours. Repeat after me: this is not an engineering/programming/technical problem, it's a political problem.
This sting operation is a total waste of time and is itself a fraud, designed to make you think the NY a-g is protecting you. He's not. First of all, this is not a real problem. No one over the age of six is taken in by fake reviews. Second, once burned twice shy--if you are taken in once, you never will be again. No state action needed. Third, the spoofers will find a new way to post fake reviews. Go chase ripoff landlord, Mr. Schneiderman, if you want to do something that will help a lot of people.
The courts and judges are part of the same system as the NSA and the president and the congress, whose political goal is the defense of capitalism. When their core interests are threatened there are no laws that can keep them from doing whatever they think they need to do to stay in power. The courts will put a "legal" seal of approval on it. As Malcolm X so insightfully pointed out many years ago--you can't rely on any part of the government to protect your rights. Not Congress, not the White House, not the courts. No matter which party whose purpose is defense of capitalism holds whichever office.
And replace him with who? Has there ever been a president who didn't break any number of laws when it came to defending the basic interests of the US ruling class?
Also it's stupid to think that they are spying "only on foreigners." Like they would tell the truth about what they're doing. Or, if they get a US citizen on the line, do they hang up?
You can't expect corporate executives to defend your rights. Marissa Mayer, the gang at Google, Verizon, you name them, they and the NSA are all on the same side, which is the side of protecting US capitalism. World capitalism, actually, to be more accurate.
And we also only have Google's word for what how their new superduper encryption will work. Good PR for them to say what they're saying. And meanwhile, off camera, who knows what's going on?
Exactly. More laws, more illusions.
If you read the article carefully--I know, that's a stupid thing to say on /.--you'll see that the NSA often simply bypassed encryption entirely by grabbing the data either before it was encrypted or after it was decrypted. So the argument about which encryption is "better" is irrelevant. More importantly, anyone who believed that any of their communications COULD NOT through technical means end up in the hands of the government was/is naive.