Google has no mouth so it is not going to say "fuck it". Some person working for google will have to decide and authorize this.Then you have people who actually implemented the decision.It is not really a big problem to find out who is going rot in prison. Even if personal immunity was guaranteed, Google would never risk doing something like that - they have way too much to lose. For example if Google declines to hand over data quietly, FBI (or whoever) could take it themselves - seize all Google datacenters and search them for evidence for next several years.
Would you agree that parents generally know better what is good for 2 year old than the child?
I don't know about where you live, but around here we don't ration authority over people's lives on the basis of who is most likely to know what's good for them. We let people choose what they think is best for themselves.
Sure you do. 2 years old decides to play in the middle of busy street - no problem, that's what he decided for himself after all.
The real standard is whether a person takes responsibility for the consequences his or her choices have on others. Two-year-olds don't take responsibility for hardly anything, but it is certainly possible to reach that point well before you're 18, or 16, or even 14. At any age, your freedom should correlate with your willingness to accept responsibility.
Umm, no. The real standard is whether person is capable of taking responsibility. 5 years old may be quite willing to take responsibility for things way beyond his abilities to handle. On the other hand adult is required to take responsibility for his actions even if he does not want it. Age is not ideal indicator of capability, but at least simple one to implement,
Of course, for the topic under discussion the effects on others are minimal; ergo, so is the level of responsibility required. Any attempt to limit relationships between individuals of different ages should take place through social channels, not legal ones. If the contact is truly non-consensual (by adult standards) then treat it as such; otherwise the law has no place here.
That's very black and white view. Border between consensual and not is quite blurred in case of contacts between kids and adults, especially when adult is in position of trust or authority.
Would you agree that parents generally know better what is good for 2 year old than the child? If yes, then it is matter of setting minority age right and/or make acquiring legal rights and responsibilities more gradual. Notion that people don't have full capacity for rational thinking right from birth may be ancient, but it also happens to be right.
Your government has nukes, artillery, tanks, bombers, etc. Are you going to demand access to these too? After all your logic seems to be 'whatever government can has, I want too'.
At the point where I have more to lose than to gain from trying to take your shit. Imagine I have incurable disease which will kill me within a month or two, but I have no way in hell to pay $30000 required. Then tell me, why exactly shouldn't I kill you and take your shit? I have nothing to lose anyway. This 'socialism' you so despise is a pressure valve that prevents violent revolution.
To be honest defining basic rights as something that is entitled by the State is much more realistic view. If you or some other entity (in civilised world it would be the State) does not protect your rights with force, then you have no rights at all. Go to Somalia and insist you have inherent rights when armed band comes for you. Maybe you will amuse their leader enough that he grants you right to continue living. If not, they will cut off your head with machete (after some torture probably) and it will be end of you with all your 'inherently possessed rights'.
Makes me wonder why Europe agreed to hand USA data on all financial transactions happening inside EU (terrorist finance tracking program). Anybody with two brain cells to rub together would see that it is great industrial and economic espionage tool.
The Crown funded most of the transport, infrastructure and civil service of the American Colonies...
No, the colonies did becuase George III, a porphyric idiot, started upping the taxes to pay for England's little imperialistic chessmatch with France. The Crown bestowed no gifts. Or was the Boston Tea Party a little fraternity roughhousing?
Here is the statistic that should shut people like you up for good. Suicide and Murder Rates for the US and Great Britain are about the same.
By "here" you mean in your head? Only total moron would post lie that can be disproved by 30 second search in google. Here is source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate . USA - 4.7 homicides/100 000 vs 1.2 in UK. Almost 4x difference is 'about the same' ? Go back to polishing your penis enhancer^W^W gun and leave discussion to others.
One has strict gun control laws and the other does not. Suicide by guns in the US far outpace Suicide by guns in the UK, yet the overall rates are almost identical. The same is true for murder rates. In fact, if you exclude the cities in the US with the strictest gun control laws (DC, Chicago etc) which also happen to have the highest murder rates by guns, the murder rates in the US is actually LESS than most other countries.
Exclude cities with highest murder rate and murder late drops a lot... thank you captain obvious! You can't exclude any cities, because people are free to move between them without any border control.
The problem is, the facts don't line up with the Liberal Logic. Less guns do not produce less violence. This means people are violent with whatever tool they find handy, just like killing themselves. We should address the reasons for violence, not the method.
Considering that you started your rant with total nonsense, your conclusions are not any better.
I mean just recently, you had a trained military person beheaded in broad daylight by a couple guys with knives. AND nobody stopped them. Nobody could. In America, you would have had someone (or a few someones) kick the shit out of the guys before they could finish cutting the soldiers head off.
Sure they would. That's why every other month another guy has ample time to shoot 20 people and off himself.
Sorry, I don't want to live in a Society that is so scared of everything that people don't step up and face evil directly. Call it "Rugged Individualism", something Liberals can't understand and therefore despise.
Your 'rugged individualism' exists only in Hollywood action flicks. Your are living in society of sheep scared half to death of 'terrorists' and everything else.You do know that majority of US citizens actually supports TSA ass-groping because it makes them feel safer? On Slashdot it might look differently, but slashdotters are tiny minority. If you want example of actually brave society, then look how Norway handled Breivik incident. They prosecuted, sentenced and chucked him into a prison then got on with their lives. No PATRIOT acts, no crazy witch hunts, all civil liberties retained - just business as usual.
Unfortunately you can't just legislate it away. That doesn't work, has never worked, and will never work.
Well, it works very well in Europe. So while this particular case is example of police idiocy, the law in UK is not crazy. But I agree that it would be extremely hard to do in USA.
Doesn't stop them from trying, though.
I'm not going to get into it beyond that though - I'm not an expert, but it doesn't take an expert to recognize that something is broken. I really don't think just taking them away is the answer. As other incidents have spotlit, the act will not change, only the tools. Children (and adults too) committing violence against their peers and authority figures is the symptom, the gun (or knife etc) is just the vehicle, and the real problem is something else that I can't really identify personally. People are losing hope, getting restless, frustrated, and angry. We need to determine (and fix) the cause of that, not the results. But good luck with that, because the people in charge only care about looking like they are fixing things. Which only compounds the problem.
With that logic every kind of weapon should be legalised. Why bother banning nerve gas and explosives ? After all this will only change tools, not the act itself.
Yeah, it's just like with movies and music - nobody wants content owned by big labels anymore because free stuff from garage bands is so much better. Oh wait, they don't and almost all downloaded music is actually pirated stuff.
Exactly. That's why EU Parliament is doing the posturing, not Commission. Because they can do it safely and Comission would be expected to actually do something.
You don't seem to get it. TFTP is one direction only - there is no reciprocal program which gives EU authorities access to transactions within USA (at least nobody heard about one). So USA gets great amount of data particularly useful for industrial espionage (I am sure Boeing would just love to know how much money Airbus is getting, from where, how much it is paying subcontractors,etc.) and Europe gets nothing.
From article "The vote is non-binding but illustrates MEPs' growing unease [...]" . So parliament showed right amount of outrage, won some brownie points among electorate and managed to do it without pissing off USA. Good job.
With "allies" like your country no one needs enemies.
If your country is in Europe and is a US ally today, chances are that it had been occupied by its enemy (either state or political party) and the US helped remove that enemy and return government to the people. That covers the West, and in some cases was a redo from 25 years before. As to the East, the US allied with newly free Western Europe against the Soviet empire in the East, supported freedom movements and dissidents there, and continued to defend Western Europe until Soviet rule collapsed and most of Eastern Europe was free as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Google has no mouth so it is not going to say "fuck it". Some person working for google will have to decide and authorize this.Then you have people who actually implemented the decision.It is not really a big problem to find out who is going rot in prison. Even if personal immunity was guaranteed, Google would never risk doing something like that - they have way too much to lose. For example if Google declines to hand over data quietly, FBI (or whoever) could take it themselves - seize all Google datacenters and search them for evidence for next several years.
Let's get this clear, it's a fucking phone, dammit, not a way of life
It would be a little more believable without all the foaming at the mouth.
[...] baseball is slow and boring [...]
Are you saying this was classified information too?
Would you agree that parents generally know better what is good for 2 year old than the child?
I don't know about where you live, but around here we don't ration authority over people's lives on the basis of who is most likely to know what's good for them. We let people choose what they think is best for themselves.
Sure you do. 2 years old decides to play in the middle of busy street - no problem, that's what he decided for himself after all.
The real standard is whether a person takes responsibility for the consequences his or her choices have on others. Two-year-olds don't take responsibility for hardly anything, but it is certainly possible to reach that point well before you're 18, or 16, or even 14. At any age, your freedom should correlate with your willingness to accept responsibility.
Umm, no. The real standard is whether person is capable of taking responsibility. 5 years old may be quite willing to take responsibility for things way beyond his abilities to handle. On the other hand adult is required to take responsibility for his actions even if he does not want it. Age is not ideal indicator of capability, but at least simple one to implement,
Of course, for the topic under discussion the effects on others are minimal; ergo, so is the level of responsibility required. Any attempt to limit relationships between individuals of different ages should take place through social channels, not legal ones. If the contact is truly non-consensual (by adult standards) then treat it as such; otherwise the law has no place here.
That's very black and white view. Border between consensual and not is quite blurred in case of contacts between kids and adults, especially when adult is in position of trust or authority.
Would you agree that parents generally know better what is good for 2 year old than the child? If yes, then it is matter of setting minority age right and/or make acquiring legal rights and responsibilities more gradual. Notion that people don't have full capacity for rational thinking right from birth may be ancient, but it also happens to be right.
Your government has nukes, artillery, tanks, bombers, etc. Are you going to demand access to these too? After all your logic seems to be 'whatever government can has, I want too'.
He will be tech support for ... FSB
At the point where I have more to lose than to gain from trying to take your shit. Imagine I have incurable disease which will kill me within a month or two, but I have no way in hell to pay $30000 required. Then tell me, why exactly shouldn't I kill you and take your shit? I have nothing to lose anyway. This 'socialism' you so despise is a pressure valve that prevents violent revolution.
Nuke somebody and call it a 'kindness' ... only Americans.
To be honest defining basic rights as something that is entitled by the State is much more realistic view. If you or some other entity (in civilised world it would be the State) does not protect your rights with force, then you have no rights at all. Go to Somalia and insist you have inherent rights when armed band comes for you. Maybe you will amuse their leader enough that he grants you right to continue living. If not, they will cut off your head with machete (after some torture probably) and it will be end of you with all your 'inherently possessed rights'.
Makes me wonder why Europe agreed to hand USA data on all financial transactions happening inside EU (terrorist finance tracking program). Anybody with two brain cells to rub together would see that it is great industrial and economic espionage tool.
Why the downmodding? That's exactly how it is - without power to back up your rights, you have no rights at all.
The Crown funded most of the transport, infrastructure and civil service of the American Colonies...
No, the colonies did becuase George III, a porphyric idiot, started upping the taxes to pay for England's little imperialistic chessmatch with France. The Crown bestowed no gifts. Or was the Boston Tea Party a little fraternity roughhousing?
No, just bunch of traitors and terrorists.
Here is the statistic that should shut people like you up for good. Suicide and Murder Rates for the US and Great Britain are about the same.
By "here" you mean in your head? Only total moron would post lie that can be disproved by 30 second search in google. Here is source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate . USA - 4.7 homicides /100 000 vs 1.2 in UK. Almost 4x difference is 'about the same' ? Go back to polishing your penis enhancer^W^W gun and leave discussion to others.
One has strict gun control laws and the other does not. Suicide by guns in the US far outpace Suicide by guns in the UK, yet the overall rates are almost identical. The same is true for murder rates. In fact, if you exclude the cities in the US with the strictest gun control laws (DC, Chicago etc) which also happen to have the highest murder rates by guns, the murder rates in the US is actually LESS than most other countries.
Exclude cities with highest murder rate and murder late drops a lot ... thank you captain obvious! You can't exclude any cities, because people are free to move between them without any border control.
The problem is, the facts don't line up with the Liberal Logic. Less guns do not produce less violence. This means people are violent with whatever tool they find handy, just like killing themselves. We should address the reasons for violence, not the method.
Considering that you started your rant with total nonsense, your conclusions are not any better.
I mean just recently, you had a trained military person beheaded in broad daylight by a couple guys with knives. AND nobody stopped them. Nobody could. In America, you would have had someone (or a few someones) kick the shit out of the guys before they could finish cutting the soldiers head off.
Sure they would. That's why every other month another guy has ample time to shoot 20 people and off himself.
Sorry, I don't want to live in a Society that is so scared of everything that people don't step up and face evil directly. Call it "Rugged Individualism", something Liberals can't understand and therefore despise.
Your 'rugged individualism' exists only in Hollywood action flicks. Your are living in society of sheep scared half to death of 'terrorists' and everything else.You do know that majority of US citizens actually supports TSA ass-groping because it makes them feel safer? On Slashdot it might look differently, but slashdotters are tiny minority. If you want example of actually brave society, then look how Norway handled Breivik incident. They prosecuted, sentenced and chucked him into a prison then got on with their lives. No PATRIOT acts, no crazy witch hunts, all civil liberties retained - just business as usual.
Unfortunately you can't just legislate it away. That doesn't work, has never worked, and will never work.
Well, it works very well in Europe. So while this particular case is example of police idiocy, the law in UK is not crazy. But I agree that it would be extremely hard to do in USA.
Doesn't stop them from trying, though.
I'm not going to get into it beyond that though - I'm not an expert, but it doesn't take an expert to recognize that something is broken. I really don't think just taking them away is the answer. As other incidents have spotlit, the act will not change, only the tools. Children (and adults too) committing violence against their peers and authority figures is the symptom, the gun (or knife etc) is just the vehicle, and the real problem is something else that I can't really identify personally. People are losing hope, getting restless, frustrated, and angry. We need to determine (and fix) the cause of that, not the results. But good luck with that, because the people in charge only care about looking like they are fixing things. Which only compounds the problem.
With that logic every kind of weapon should be legalised. Why bother banning nerve gas and explosives ? After all this will only change tools, not the act itself.
Clearly the only answer is 'more guns'. If other 14 years olds (hell, why not start at 8 years?) all were carrying, this tragedy could be avoided.
Week later: 20 kids gunned down in another school massacre in USA. "Crazy" depends on what you want laws to achieve.
Yeah, it's just like with movies and music - nobody wants content owned by big labels anymore because free stuff from garage bands is so much better. Oh wait, they don't and almost all downloaded music is actually pirated stuff.
Exactly. That's why EU Parliament is doing the posturing, not Commission. Because they can do it safely and Comission would be expected to actually do something.
You don't seem to get it. TFTP is one direction only - there is no reciprocal program which gives EU authorities access to transactions within USA (at least nobody heard about one). So USA gets great amount of data particularly useful for industrial espionage (I am sure Boeing would just love to know how much money Airbus is getting, from where, how much it is paying subcontractors,etc.) and Europe gets nothing.
No, it does not cut both ways. TFTP is sharing data in one direction from Europe (SWIFT headquarter is in Belgium) to USA.
From article "The vote is non-binding but illustrates MEPs' growing unease [...]" . So parliament showed right amount of outrage, won some brownie points among electorate and managed to do it without pissing off USA. Good job.
With "allies" like your country no one needs enemies.
If your country is in Europe and is a US ally today, chances are that it had been occupied by its enemy (either state or political party) and the US helped remove that enemy and return government to the people. That covers the West, and in some cases was a redo from 25 years before. As to the East, the US allied with newly free Western Europe against the Soviet empire in the East, supported freedom movements and dissidents there, and continued to defend Western Europe until Soviet rule collapsed and most of Eastern Europe was free as well.
USA sold whole east of Europe to Stalin ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yalta_Conference ), so don't expect much gratitude there.
Protip: leave your mom's basement and then try looking for a police patrol.
That's rather risky. Saddam tried that in 2000 and it did not end well for him ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar_warfare ) .