Do what I do; on the last day of your job, open every program code you have access to and reflow all the code into paragraphs.
You will not be soon forgotten.
What leaks do you need? If what Comey said wasn't enough nothing will satisfy you. He said she's a total fuckwit but her last name is Clinton so his hands are tied.
do you read the papers? every time a high profile investigation of anybody comes up with nothing, the prosecutor has a press conference details all the terrible things they found. if they found serious stuff they would have filed charges, they would look like they did their job, and let the courts decide whether to let her off the hook or not. if "the fix is in" then they wouldn't be announcing all this stuff in the first place.
Defying Clinton is probably as lethal as defying the mob. I know I'd be in Leavenworth if I did what she did. In fact, we were specifically directed to not send any confidential messages to private email servers; doing so with secret or top secret is asking for a trip to leavenworth... if you're not above the law.
if you're secretary of state, you are quite literally above a lot of laws. go try and issue US passports to people and see if the secretary of state isn't allowed a lot more latitude than you are.
Key points: FBI search of Nishimura's home turned up classified materials, but did not reveal evidence he intended to distribute them. He was sentenced to two years of probation and a $7,500 fine, and was ordered to surrender his security clearance. He is barred from seeking a future security clearance.
Or Petraeus who got 2 years probation along with a $100k fine. And that's just the tip of the iceburg for people who've been caught doing exactly the same thing as she did.
Like I said, one of many. That she got off without even a slap on the wrist tells me that there is far more going on behind the scenes, and likely huge piles of dirt on those who would have prosecuted her.
or, they got nothing and this is just a save face press conference. kind of like when the dread watergate investigation fizzled out with all the nation-destroying corruption boiling down to refusal to discuss the details of a blow job, so the 5 year $70 million starr report ended with "we found evidence of all ths terrible stuff but we're not going to prosecute anything".
While we would like to go off on this tangent, we're not able to participate because we are still investigating Obama's birth status and stuff.
hey, remember when the bushies outed valerie plame? yeah, there was sure a lot of republican determination to get to the bottom of that breach of security, wasn't there?
but I am definitely waiting for trump's operatives in hawaii to reveal that unbelievable information he told us they were digging up. oh wait, what's this? "Dr. Alvin Onaka, the Hawaii state registrar who handled queries about Mr. Obama, said recently through a spokeswoman that he had no evidence or recollection of Mr. Trump or any of his representatives ever requesting the records from the Hawaii State Department of Health."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07... whaaat? how can that be?
I doubt he was the head of his department. C'mon folks. Of course there are different rules for the Secretary of State vs. some functionary somewhere. No, she shouldn't have used a private server for a variety of reasons - but no, she didn't break the law and shouldn't be prosecuted. The standard in question was intention to disseminate classified material, and that wasn't proven. In fact that wasn't even hinted at - except by conspiracy theorists and outright Clinton haters. And, sadly, by a portion of the Bernie Sanders contingent who simply wanted the worst to be true so their guy could win - without actually getting enough votes to win. And no, the primary voting wasn't rigged either...
Indeed In fact, if the SofS were to designate various emails as secure or not secure, who has the authority to counter it?
I can't fathom why you're so overjoyed that the choice for our next President is still between a narcissistic race-baiting Dorito-tinted proto-facist and a vote-for-me-because-vagina self-enriching-at-the-publics-expense focus-polling-before-standing-for-anything unindicted felon.
Myself, I was hoping for a Democratic disqualification due to pending indictment, so we could get a reasonable third option.
To put it another way, even though you yourself can vote for anybody you want to for president, nevertheless you were dismayed that others might vote for people you find unacceptable, so you were hoping that would be prevented.
No, 99% of all violence by political groups in the U.S. are and have always been from the left -- definitely from the 1960's on including all of the violence towards blacks in the 60's which was all from Democrats and KKK which was formed to be the militant arm of the Democratic Party in the South.
Or as the Dilbert Zone's Scott Adams pointed out in his blog if you look at the statistics Democrats use guns overwhelmingly to kill each other and innocents while Republicans use them overwhelmingly for sport and to protect themselves from Democrats.
If you look at the political leanings of mass shooters when they have a political persuasion over 90% have been Democrats.
Basically, leftists have been and always are violent because their political beliefs feed their anger and their self-righteousness at being better than those on the right give so many leftists the conviction others deserve what they get. Just look at how badly Bernie Sanders supporters have been beating on very peaceful men and women at Trump rallies.
You, the left is extremely violent compared to the right as defined on the U.S.
yes, the violence against blacks in the 60s was from the left. good call there, lots of people never figured that out, i bet. i suppose timothy mcveigh, too.
lethal rightwing terrorist incidents in the United States since 9/11/2001, and number killed
2015 Colorado Planned Parenthood Shooting 3
2015 Charleston Church Shooting 9
2014 Las Vegas Police Ambush 3
2014 Kansas Jewish Center Shooting 3
2014 Blooming Grove Police Shooting 1
2012 Tri-State Killing Spree 4
2012 St. John's Parish Police Ambush 2
2012 Sikh Temple Shooting 6
2011 FEAR Militia 3
2010 Carlisle, PA Murder 1
2010 Austin, TX Plane Attack 1
2009 Pittsburgh Police Shootings 3
2009 Holocaust Museum Shooting 1
2009 George Tiller Assassination 1
2009 Flores Murders, Pima County, AZ 2
2009 Brockton, MA Murders 2
2008 Knoxville, TN Church Shooting 2
2004 Tulsa OK, Bank Robbery 1
Everything you have written is a lie. The Brits handed equipment? Evictions? Resettlings..!? The day "the minority got military control"? An open air prison? What parallel universe are you living in?
Sorry, but Arabs have been butchering Jews at every opportunity for centuries. This started long before Israel was created, even long before Britain was even in the picture. You are clueless.
open air prison pictures:
Palestinian parliament https://i.guim.co.uk/img/stati... http://www.whyisrael.org/wp-co... https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Bank_Of_Palestine_-_Ramallah.jpg https://static-secure.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2010/11/1/1288603238635/M-venpick-hotel-in-Ramall-006.jpg http://www.jerusalemdiaries.com/photos/large/204.jpg http://www.pamolson.org/IMG_0376.jpg proposed palestinian presidential palace http://cdn.timesofisrael.com/u...
The Palestinians attacked Israelis as a matter of course long before any settlement existed.
Ah yes that faithful day when Britain so charitably handed the equipment that just won WWII to the minority Israel population. How the Israeli's trembled in fear at only having the best military equipment ever made and used it to immediately and forcibly evict non-jews from what the U.N. decided was Jewish land. Israel has literally been resettling Palestinians since day #1.
Its no surprise that the day the minority got military control they immediately started a campaign against the majority.
Regardless of the past, Palestinian children are born into and condemned to live in an open air prison run by the Israelis and this has been true for more than a generation. Until this fact changes there is no moral refuge to be found in the ill deeds of the Palestinians, for their deeds are Israels doings.
oh please, how old are you? as with any events which shaped history and thought, those who grew up in the current era have difficulty trying to replicate the thinking that prevailed before the events in question. in 1948, military victory of Israel was far from a sure thing, i fact arguably the smart money was betting they would be swamped. certainly, that was the thinking of the arab nations. and similarly in 1967. the idea that israel wanted territorial expansion is a fiction countering the fact that at the time, they weren't sure they would prevail then either. it was only after 1967 this image of the invulnerable israeli military took hold, not as a function of israel receiving " the equipment that just won WWII "
If you want the Palestinians to stop attacking Israelis a good step would be to stop the settlements
The Palestinians attacked Israelis as a matter of course long before any settlement existed. What makes you think they will stop if they were gone?
(Hint: Removing all settlements from Gaza only made matters far, far worse.)
yeah, but... even stipulating all the list of crimes of Palestinians, individual and as a group; even stipulating that the Israelis were entirely innocent of all evil intent and acting only in self defense; even stipulating the existential threat to israel from the panArab and Islamist movements; even stipulating everything bad on the Palestine side posed against everything good on the Israeli side; what part of that suggests "therefore, the best thing to do is move some israeli civilians into the middle of the Palestinian population, in gated enclaves guarded by the military" no matter how much i grind that through in my mind, I can't find any way that this doesn't make things worse, let alone where it is a clever response to a terrible situation. you can argue morality all day and night because it's individual, you can argue about who's most guilty, but i don't see any way where you can argue with any rational logic whatsoever that the settlements are of any benefit whatsoever, except to those (on both sides) whose political power comes from continued conflict.
>There never was a country called Palestine in history
Erm... yes there was. It existed until 1948 (for the last part of it's existence it was a British colony).
There is also such a country today. It consists of the West Bank and Gaza Strip and it's capital city is Jerusalem. This was recognized by the world at large as a de facto country when they were granted membership of the UN in 2012. Israel is illegally occupying land that is officially considered a different country by virtually all the governments of the world.
That is actually rather important. A key reason appartheid failed is because the "countries" it created for black people (the so-called homeland states) were never recognized as independent countries by the UN or any other countries. The lack of international recognition was a flat-out refusal to accept these forced resettlement locations as a human rights compliant policy and these puppet-states as "giving people their own country". The inverse is also true. When the world recognizes a country as existing, it exists and if a different government is occupying it that is an act of war.
arguably, a key reason Palestine failed it because it was never recognized as independent countries by Jordan and Egypt, not to mention all the other Arab countries, but rather immediately annexed by them as part of their territory. As a result, there were a couple of consequences; firstly, for Israel to unilaterally undo the internationally accepted annexation, declare the territory captured in 1967 liberated from Jordan and Egypt, and declare the new country of Palestine would be somewhat troublesome in international law.
secondly the apparatus of government, both explicit and implicit things like a de facto civil contract between the government and the population never arose, leaving a couple of junior size failed states; so that when Egypt and Jordan did eventually drop their claims to the West Bank and Gaza, late in the game, the sole focus of the governments on either side was conflict with Israel, rather than boring things like keeping the streets clean. and as the PA adapted to the role of civil servant rather than revolutionary, those who got bored with that formed Hamas. (yeah i know, the israelis supported hamas as a thorn in the PAs side. see my previous post about warmongers on both sides being in collusion to keep their power over their relative populations).
You do realise that "International Law" does not recognise "territory captured in a war", right? Been that way since before Israel was created by the UN...
it does recognize military occupation of a belligerent population, though.
arguably, had israel in fact just actually annexed the territories in 67 nobody would have cared outside the Arab countries which were already determined to smash Israel, and by now it would all be behind us, a new generation would have grown up on either side, and things would not be frozen in this feedback loop.
instead, jingoistic zealots on both sides get their energy from the continuing hostilities and whip up sentiment demanding retribution which renews the status quo and feeds more power to those same zealots. the conflict is more truly between the rabble rousers on both sides versus those on both sides who are willing to start anew than it is between the two nationalities.
as a model, look at this comments column, which instantly becomes a compendium of each side proclaiming the other side's list of crimes, which implicitly means moving forward is impossible without appropriate punishment. which, understandably, the opposing side does not agree to.
and the article isn't even about the conflict except tangentially. if it's that hard to avoid falling into this pit of mutual incrimination how can any solution be found?
Irrelevant. There are 2 groups people fighting over the same land. Eliminate the religious difference and you still have 2 groups of people fighting over the same land.
Also extremely stupid (and/or entirely evil). How do you "ban" religion? What are you going to do to people who disobey your "ban"? Do you have some sort of camps in mind for them?
before the american revolution connecticut and pennsylvania were in a shooting war over the region around wilkes barre which england had promised to both.
these things were pretty common in the aftermath of colonialism.
can we kickstarter a project to pay every restaurant and fastfood outlet to install one of these just to get rid of all the pictures of people's meals posted everywhere?
It helps authorities disable your camera so you can't record them kicking your arse onto an encrypted device and/or up to the iCloud....
Maybe. But it is pretty clear that all cell phone (and maybe camera) manufacturers will be forced by the government to license this technology from Apple, and I expect the final version will not work with a separate IR sensor, it will just use the camera lens to capture the "DO NOT FILM" command and act on it. Of course you could cover up the lens, but that defeats the device too. I doubt if you can effectively block the signal that disables the camera and still have enough light to film the cops beating you or your family.
just like my old media center PC hooked up via analog audio/video to the cable box is blocked from recording stuff on cable for timeshifting because the cable company puts some analog "do not copy" signal onto every channel all the time, so i have to subscribe to their DVR service.
Slashdot Mirror
Do what I do; on the last day of your job, open every program code you have access to and reflow all the code into paragraphs. You will not be soon forgotten.
has gone to his head.
./*bad
/*
good
*/
*/
is not the worst programming problem I see
print "HELLO MOON";
the optimal solution would be to pay people to make them, and have robots consume them.
I can assure you that logic has its limits. particularly when there is not enough data to come to a firm conclusion.
What leaks do you need? If what Comey said wasn't enough nothing will satisfy you. He said she's a total fuckwit but her last name is Clinton so his hands are tied.
do you read the papers? every time a high profile investigation of anybody comes up with nothing, the prosecutor has a press conference details all the terrible things they found.
if they found serious stuff they would have filed charges, they would look like they did their job, and let the courts decide whether to let her off the hook or not.
if "the fix is in" then they wouldn't be announcing all this stuff in the first place.
Defying Clinton is probably as lethal as defying the mob. I know I'd be in Leavenworth if I did what she did. In fact, we were specifically directed to not send any confidential messages to private email servers; doing so with secret or top secret is asking for a trip to leavenworth ... if you're not above the law.
if you're secretary of state, you are quite literally above a lot of laws. go try and issue US passports to people and see if the secretary of state isn't allowed a lot more latitude than you are.
Yep. See other examples like this navy reservist.
Key points: FBI search of Nishimura's home turned up classified materials, but did not reveal evidence he intended to distribute them. He was sentenced to two years of probation and a $7,500 fine, and was ordered to surrender his security clearance. He is barred from seeking a future security clearance.
Or Petraeus who got 2 years probation along with a $100k fine. And that's just the tip of the iceburg for people who've been caught doing exactly the same thing as she did.
But you're right, defying Clinton is like defying the mob. Ask this guy who just happened to "crush his own throat" right before testifying. Then there are all those other mysterious deaths, and so many of those.
i never thought of petraeus' girlfriend as an email server, but OK.
Like I said, one of many. That she got off without even a slap on the wrist tells me that there is far more going on behind the scenes, and likely huge piles of dirt on those who would have prosecuted her.
or, they got nothing and this is just a save face press conference. kind of like when the dread watergate investigation fizzled out with all the nation-destroying corruption boiling down to refusal to discuss the details of a blow job, so the 5 year $70 million starr report ended with "we found evidence of all ths terrible stuff but we're not going to prosecute anything".
We're sorry.
While we would like to go off on this tangent, we're not able to participate because we are still investigating Obama's birth status and stuff.
hey, remember when the bushies outed valerie plame? yeah, there was sure a lot of republican determination to get to the bottom of that breach of security, wasn't there?
but I am definitely waiting for trump's operatives in hawaii to reveal that unbelievable information he told us they were digging up. oh wait, what's this?
"Dr. Alvin Onaka, the Hawaii state registrar who handled queries about Mr. Obama, said recently through a spokeswoman that he had no evidence or recollection of Mr. Trump or any of his representatives ever requesting the records from the Hawaii State Department of Health." http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07...
whaaat? how can that be?
I doubt he was the head of his department. C'mon folks. Of course there are different rules for the Secretary of State vs. some functionary somewhere. No, she shouldn't have used a private server for a variety of reasons - but no, she didn't break the law and shouldn't be prosecuted. The standard in question was intention to disseminate classified material, and that wasn't proven. In fact that wasn't even hinted at - except by conspiracy theorists and outright Clinton haters. And, sadly, by a portion of the Bernie Sanders contingent who simply wanted the worst to be true so their guy could win - without actually getting enough votes to win. And no, the primary voting wasn't rigged either...
Indeed In fact, if the SofS were to designate various emails as secure or not secure, who has the authority to counter it?
All hail her Grace, Queen Hillary of House Clinton, President of the US and of the Congress, Chosen of the Street, and Detested by the Realm.
I for one welcome our new female overlords.
I can't fathom why you're so overjoyed that the choice for our next President is still between a narcissistic race-baiting Dorito-tinted proto-facist and a vote-for-me-because-vagina self-enriching-at-the-publics-expense focus-polling-before-standing-for-anything unindicted felon.
Myself, I was hoping for a Democratic disqualification due to pending indictment, so we could get a reasonable third option.
To put it another way, even though you yourself can vote for anybody you want to for president, nevertheless you were dismayed that others might vote for people you find unacceptable, so you were hoping that would be prevented.
No, 99% of all violence by political groups in the U.S. are and have always been from the left -- definitely from the 1960's on including all of the violence towards blacks in the 60's which was all from Democrats and KKK which was formed to be the militant arm of the Democratic Party in the South.
Or as the Dilbert Zone's Scott Adams pointed out in his blog if you look at the statistics Democrats use guns overwhelmingly to kill each other and innocents while Republicans use them overwhelmingly for sport and to protect themselves from Democrats.
If you look at the political leanings of mass shooters when they have a political persuasion over 90% have been Democrats.
Basically, leftists have been and always are violent because their political beliefs feed their anger and their self-righteousness at being better than those on the right give so many leftists the conviction others deserve what they get. Just look at how badly Bernie Sanders supporters have been beating on very peaceful men and women at Trump rallies.
You, the left is extremely violent compared to the right as defined on the U.S.
yes, the violence against blacks in the 60s was from the left. good call there, lots of people never figured that out, i bet.
i suppose timothy mcveigh, too.
lethal rightwing terrorist incidents in the United States since 9/11/2001, and number killed
2015 Colorado Planned Parenthood Shooting 3
2015 Charleston Church Shooting 9
2014 Las Vegas Police Ambush 3
2014 Kansas Jewish Center Shooting 3
2014 Blooming Grove Police Shooting 1
2012 Tri-State Killing Spree 4
2012 St. John's Parish Police Ambush 2
2012 Sikh Temple Shooting 6
2011 FEAR Militia 3
2010 Carlisle, PA Murder 1
2010 Austin, TX Plane Attack 1
2009 Pittsburgh Police Shootings 3
2009 Holocaust Museum Shooting 1
2009 George Tiller Assassination 1
2009 Flores Murders, Pima County, AZ 2
2009 Brockton, MA Murders 2
2008 Knoxville, TN Church Shooting 2
2004 Tulsa OK, Bank Robbery 1
Everything you have written is a lie. The Brits handed equipment? Evictions? Resettlings..!? The day "the minority got military control"? An open air prison? What parallel universe are you living in? Sorry, but Arabs have been butchering Jews at every opportunity for centuries. This started long before Israel was created, even long before Britain was even in the picture. You are clueless.
open air prison pictures:
Palestinian parliament https://i.guim.co.uk/img/stati...
http://www.whyisrael.org/wp-co...
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Bank_Of_Palestine_-_Ramallah.jpg
https://static-secure.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2010/11/1/1288603238635/M-venpick-hotel-in-Ramall-006.jpg
http://www.jerusalemdiaries.com/photos/large/204.jpg
http://www.pamolson.org/IMG_0376.jpg
proposed palestinian presidential palace http://cdn.timesofisrael.com/u...
The Palestinians attacked Israelis as a matter of course long before any settlement existed.
Ah yes that faithful day when Britain so charitably handed the equipment that just won WWII to the minority Israel population. How the Israeli's trembled in fear at only having the best military equipment ever made and used it to immediately and forcibly evict non-jews from what the U.N. decided was Jewish land. Israel has literally been resettling Palestinians since day #1. Its no surprise that the day the minority got military control they immediately started a campaign against the majority. Regardless of the past, Palestinian children are born into and condemned to live in an open air prison run by the Israelis and this has been true for more than a generation. Until this fact changes there is no moral refuge to be found in the ill deeds of the Palestinians, for their deeds are Israels doings.
oh please, how old are you? as with any events which shaped history and thought, those who grew up in the current era have difficulty trying to replicate the thinking that prevailed before the events in question. in 1948, military victory of Israel was far from a sure thing, i fact arguably the smart money was betting they would be swamped. certainly, that was the thinking of the arab nations.
and similarly in 1967. the idea that israel wanted territorial expansion is a fiction countering the fact that at the time, they weren't sure they would prevail then either. it was only after 1967 this image of the invulnerable israeli military took hold, not as a function of israel receiving " the equipment that just won WWII "
If you want the Palestinians to stop attacking Israelis a good step would be to stop the settlements
The Palestinians attacked Israelis as a matter of course long before any settlement existed. What makes you think they will stop if they were gone? (Hint: Removing all settlements from Gaza only made matters far, far worse.)
yeah, but... even stipulating all the list of crimes of Palestinians, individual and as a group; even stipulating that the Israelis were entirely innocent of all evil intent and acting only in self defense; even stipulating the existential threat to israel from the panArab and Islamist movements; even stipulating everything bad on the Palestine side posed against everything good on the Israeli side; what part of that suggests "therefore, the best thing to do is move some israeli civilians into the middle of the Palestinian population, in gated enclaves guarded by the military"
no matter how much i grind that through in my mind, I can't find any way that this doesn't make things worse, let alone where it is a clever response to a terrible situation. you can argue morality all day and night because it's individual, you can argue about who's most guilty, but i don't see any way where you can argue with any rational logic whatsoever that the settlements are of any benefit whatsoever, except to those (on both sides) whose political power comes from continued conflict.
>There never was a country called Palestine in history
Erm... yes there was. It existed until 1948 (for the last part of it's existence it was a British colony).
There is also such a country today. It consists of the West Bank and Gaza Strip and it's capital city is Jerusalem. This was recognized by the world at large as a de facto country when they were granted membership of the UN in 2012. Israel is illegally occupying land that is officially considered a different country by virtually all the governments of the world.
That is actually rather important. A key reason appartheid failed is because the "countries" it created for black people (the so-called homeland states) were never recognized as independent countries by the UN or any other countries. The lack of international recognition was a flat-out refusal to accept these forced resettlement locations as a human rights compliant policy and these puppet-states as "giving people their own country". The inverse is also true. When the world recognizes a country as existing, it exists and if a different government is occupying it that is an act of war.
arguably, a key reason Palestine failed it because it was never recognized as independent countries by Jordan and Egypt, not to mention all the other Arab countries, but rather immediately annexed by them as part of their territory. As a result, there were a couple of consequences; firstly, for Israel to unilaterally undo the internationally accepted annexation, declare the territory captured in 1967 liberated from Jordan and Egypt, and declare the new country of Palestine would be somewhat troublesome in international law.
secondly the apparatus of government, both explicit and implicit things like a de facto civil contract between the government and the population never arose, leaving a couple of junior size failed states; so that when Egypt and Jordan did eventually drop their claims to the West Bank and Gaza, late in the game, the sole focus of the governments on either side was conflict with Israel, rather than boring things like keeping the streets clean. and as the PA adapted to the role of civil servant rather than revolutionary, those who got bored with that formed Hamas. (yeah i know, the israelis supported hamas as a thorn in the PAs side. see my previous post about warmongers on both sides being in collusion to keep their power over their relative populations).
You do realise that "International Law" does not recognise "territory captured in a war", right? Been that way since before Israel was created by the UN...
it does recognize military occupation of a belligerent population, though.
arguably, had israel in fact just actually annexed the territories in 67 nobody would have cared outside the Arab countries which were already determined to smash Israel, and by now it would all be behind us, a new generation would have grown up on either side, and things would not be frozen in this feedback loop.
instead, jingoistic zealots on both sides get their energy from the continuing hostilities and whip up sentiment demanding retribution which renews the status quo and feeds more power to those same zealots. the conflict is more truly between the rabble rousers on both sides versus those on both sides who are willing to start anew than it is between the two nationalities.
as a model, look at this comments column, which instantly becomes a compendium of each side proclaiming the other side's list of crimes, which implicitly means moving forward is impossible without appropriate punishment. which, understandably, the opposing side does not agree to.
and the article isn't even about the conflict except tangentially. if it's that hard to avoid falling into this pit of mutual incrimination how can any solution be found?
Irrelevant. There are 2 groups people fighting over the same land. Eliminate the religious difference and you still have 2 groups of people fighting over the same land.
Also extremely stupid (and/or entirely evil). How do you "ban" religion? What are you going to do to people who disobey your "ban"? Do you have some sort of camps in mind for them?
before the american revolution connecticut and pennsylvania were in a shooting war over the region around wilkes barre which england had promised to both. these things were pretty common in the aftermath of colonialism.
Hasbara.
gesundheit
Donut... Tim Horton's
another tragedy, the result of Godless Harry Potter pandering to Satanic Witchcraft.
can we kickstarter a project to pay every restaurant and fastfood outlet to install one of these just to get rid of all the pictures of people's meals posted everywhere?
It helps authorities disable your camera so you can't record them kicking your arse onto an encrypted device and/or up to the iCloud....
Maybe. But it is pretty clear that all cell phone (and maybe camera) manufacturers will be forced by the government to license this technology from Apple, and I expect the final version will not work with a separate IR sensor, it will just use the camera lens to capture the "DO NOT FILM" command and act on it. Of course you could cover up the lens, but that defeats the device too. I doubt if you can effectively block the signal that disables the camera and still have enough light to film the cops beating you or your family.
just like my old media center PC hooked up via analog audio/video to the cable box is blocked from recording stuff on cable for timeshifting because the cable company puts some analog "do not copy" signal onto every channel all the time, so i have to subscribe to their DVR service.