...and by that I meant to point out that the exact same logic was used in that case.
The people need to unquestioningly trust the government. Therefore, they need to be told something in which to trust. The government says we’ve always been at war with Eurasia. Not because we actually have been, or even are currently, at war with Eurasia... but just because they need the people to blindly trust them.
the public's trust in the institution is vital to its continued functioning. It's paradoxical, unfair, illogical... and true.
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. It’s paradoxical, unfair, illogical... and utterly terrifying to think that anyone actually thinks it’s true.
Yes, “pictures don’t lie” is an over-generalization, and like all over-generalizations it is false. However that doesn’t make it any less generally true.
It can be done. In fact, it can be done without even breaking the law. You just have to find a willing scapegoat.
Remember the Scopes case? Yes, the monkey one... well, I know you don’t remember remember it, but I’m sure you remember about it. You might have even seen the movie that was based on the trial – well, you can throw most of that information out right now; they didn’t even attempt to claim that the movie was an accurate depiction of real events... in fact just about everything in the movie was exactly the opposite of how it really was.
The defendant actually said (off the record) that he knew he wasn’t guilty of the charges. They told him to keep his mouth shut. They needed the guilty verdict in order to challenge the law.
If that’s the case, then somebody with some clout needs to drum up a test case and challenge the security cameras in WalMart parking lots in those states.
Force the state supreme court to come down one way or another, but most of all to just to be consistent. Hopefully they’ll come up with something reasonably sane but at least you’ll know what’s covered by the law and what isn’t.
Ok, in hindsight, I shouldn’t have called him a dumbass.
However my point stands.
The reason 6 cops with batons can’t subdue a PCP-crazed maniac is because they’re doing it wrong.
Cops idea of subduing someone is inflicting as much pain and non-lethal physical harm as possible until the suspect complies with their demands, and that is wrong on so many levels. It’s wrong from a practical point of view because the suspect can’t even feel it in his drug-altered state, and regardless of whether or not it is effective it’s fundamentally wrong from a humane point of view because it’s essentially torture.
Now try to imagine 6 cops huddled around the maniac, but instead of pounding the shit out of him with the batons, they’re trying to hold him down with their little batons. They’re using the wrong fucking tool. That’s why it’s so hard.
I have about as much sympathy (and a lot more contempt) for the 6 cops subduing the guy as I have for the guy who complains that his peas are rolling off his knife when he tries to eat.
Hi, whoever modded that troll? Maybe you misunderstood me, but I was referring to really basic physics; it’s been a while since I took the class but I think you can figure out what the difference between an impact (extremely high force x extremely short time) and a restraining force (moderate force x long time).
If I ever taped the cops in behaviour that would negatively impact their public image, you can bet your last dollar that I won’t take it to the police, courts, or any such other thing. I’d go straight to the media.
That’s not blackmail. Blackmail would be if I anonymously mailed a copy to the department chief and told them that $10,000 in unmarked bills would keep it out of the evening news, and that would be unquestionably illegal. Straight-up putting it in the evening news, though, is fully legal and exactly what I’d be doing as soon as possible.
Good. I want them to be a little bit more uncomfortable; they’re paid to carry guns and yet they obviously need to take their job a little more seriously and professionally. Schoolyard bullying tactics are not acceptable.
If it's made completely legal to publish pics/video of the cops, why not also post their home address
Um, maybe you’ve been living under a rock, or maybe they just do things differently where I live, but they take their cop cars home and park them in their driveways around where I live. It’s considered beneficial for everyone to know that they live there. Supposedly keeps crime down in the neighbourhood.
The system is happy to hide the occasional act of injustice (and punish those who expose them) because the public's trust in the institution is vital to its continued functioning. It's paradoxical, unfair, illogical... and true.
In general you don’t know the least bit about what you’re talking about.
But if only selected portions are shown with the intention of embarrassing someone, it seems like a either libel or harassment (IANAL, so I don't know for sure).
It’s not libel by definition; libel is deliberately spreading false information. It may or may not be harassing; that would depend on the intent of the person who taped it, edited it, and distributed it.
In general I believe that you can't record audio, because there is an expectation of privacy there.
In general, wrong. It varies state-by-state; only 11 of the 50 states require all parties to know and consent to being taped. In general, if you can hear it, you can tape it as long as you’re not using the tape to commit a crime (e.g. blackmail).
Freeze distillation isn’t anything remotely similar to heat distillation.
If you’re drinking something that was heat distilled, you’re drinking the lightweight, volatile compounds that evaporated at a certain temperature. It’s relatively specific with respect to what you’re getting, and that is necessary because the stuff that you’re distilling usually has nasty compounds that aren’t good to drink. However by removing the drinkable compounds from the nasty undrinkable stuff you have a good product.
If you’re drinking something that was freeze distilled, you’re drinking the concentrated mixture of everything that was left when water, and only water, was removed. If you started with nasty undrinkable stuff, it’s just stronger nasty undrinkable stuff afterward. If you started with regular beer, though, it shouldn’t have any significant amount of the poisonous stuff that you’d normally find in a heat distillation’s input product, and the output is stronger beer.
What that doesn't explain is why home-brewing of beer is legal yet home-brewing of spirits is not even though you could produce commercial quantities of both just as easily.
Not entirely true; distilling is much more complex than simply brewing beer... and thus while it could be virtually impossible to crack down on every guy brewing beer in his basement, finding the illegal stills and shutting them down is more manageable of a job.
Not that they wouldn’t want to shut down the untaxable beer brewers... but what’s the point of even trying?
Pfff, like Paramount uses real christmas trees in their gin? It’s the cheapest stuff you can buy.
OTOH I noticed a new gin from a local distillery and figured I’d try it... didn’t really like it all that much. They do make good vodka though and since they’re local the price is very reasonable.
Slashdot Mirror
...and by that I meant to point out that the exact same logic was used in that case.
The people need to unquestioningly trust the government. Therefore, they need to be told something in which to trust. The government says we’ve always been at war with Eurasia. Not because we actually have been, or even are currently, at war with Eurasia... but just because they need the people to blindly trust them.
the public's trust in the institution is vital to its continued functioning. It's paradoxical, unfair, illogical... and true.
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. It’s paradoxical, unfair, illogical... and utterly terrifying to think that anyone actually thinks it’s true.
Yes, and I’d guess that it’s also why Loc Blocks aren’t being used to build stuff like this.
Like I said, the printer isn’t terribly impressive... the main thing that impressed me was what I already knew: LEGO products are quality stuff.
What’s at hand, in this case, is the wrong tool. It’s designed to inflict pain and injury rather than physically subduing the suspect.
There are ways for forensic investigators to determine if a picture has been digitally altered.
Very interesting read.
Yes, “pictures don’t lie” is an over-generalization, and like all over-generalizations it is false. However that doesn’t make it any less generally true.
It can be done. In fact, it can be done without even breaking the law. You just have to find a willing scapegoat.
Remember the Scopes case? Yes, the monkey one... well, I know you don’t remember remember it, but I’m sure you remember about it. You might have even seen the movie that was based on the trial – well, you can throw most of that information out right now; they didn’t even attempt to claim that the movie was an accurate depiction of real events... in fact just about everything in the movie was exactly the opposite of how it really was.
The defendant actually said (off the record) that he knew he wasn’t guilty of the charges. They told him to keep his mouth shut. They needed the guilty verdict in order to challenge the law.
If that’s the case, then somebody with some clout needs to drum up a test case and challenge the security cameras in WalMart parking lots in those states.
Force the state supreme court to come down one way or another, but most of all to just to be consistent. Hopefully they’ll come up with something reasonably sane but at least you’ll know what’s covered by the law and what isn’t.
Ok, in hindsight, I shouldn’t have called him a dumbass.
However my point stands.
The reason 6 cops with batons can’t subdue a PCP-crazed maniac is because they’re doing it wrong.
Cops idea of subduing someone is inflicting as much pain and non-lethal physical harm as possible until the suspect complies with their demands, and that is wrong on so many levels. It’s wrong from a practical point of view because the suspect can’t even feel it in his drug-altered state, and regardless of whether or not it is effective it’s fundamentally wrong from a humane point of view because it’s essentially torture.
Now try to imagine 6 cops huddled around the maniac, but instead of pounding the shit out of him with the batons, they’re trying to hold him down with their little batons. They’re using the wrong fucking tool. That’s why it’s so hard.
I have about as much sympathy (and a lot more contempt) for the 6 cops subduing the guy as I have for the guy who complains that his peas are rolling off his knife when he tries to eat.
The right to record generally only applies to audio, or the audio track of a video.
Traffic cams and surveillance cams don’t record audio so they loophole themselves out of this.
Hi, whoever modded that troll? Maybe you misunderstood me, but I was referring to really basic physics; it’s been a while since I took the class but I think you can figure out what the difference between an impact (extremely high force x extremely short time) and a restraining force (moderate force x long time).
Fuck no. You don’t know what blackmail means.
If I ever taped the cops in behaviour that would negatively impact their public image, you can bet your last dollar that I won’t take it to the police, courts, or any such other thing. I’d go straight to the media.
That’s not blackmail. Blackmail would be if I anonymously mailed a copy to the department chief and told them that $10,000 in unmarked bills would keep it out of the evening news, and that would be unquestionably illegal. Straight-up putting it in the evening news, though, is fully legal and exactly what I’d be doing as soon as possible.
Good. I want them to be a little bit more uncomfortable; they’re paid to carry guns and yet they obviously need to take their job a little more seriously and professionally. Schoolyard bullying tactics are not acceptable.
If it's made completely legal to publish pics/video of the cops, why not also post their home address
Um, maybe you’ve been living under a rock, or maybe they just do things differently where I live, but they take their cop cars home and park them in their driveways around where I live. It’s considered beneficial for everyone to know that they live there. Supposedly keeps crime down in the neighbourhood.
Well, duh. You wouldn’t go to the mafia to report the mafia goon who extorted you.
Next time he’ll go to the evening news. Fuck the police.
You don’t subdue someone with impact forces, dumbass. You subdue them with restraining forces.
Get some fucking rope or something. I don’t know.
Clubbing them until they yield is nothing short of barbaric.
The system is happy to hide the occasional act of injustice (and punish those who expose them) because the public's trust in the institution is vital to its continued functioning. It's paradoxical, unfair, illogical... and true.
We’ve always been at war with Eastasia.
Obviously the soap box is bringing this to attention.
In this case, the film box. Pictures don’t lie.
With a video camera the camera would’ve gone down the stairs first and been checked afterward to make sure it broke.
Wonder how the website would react to a takedown notice from the cops?
I guess if people saw it soon enough, it might leak through their fingers.
In general you don’t know the least bit about what you’re talking about.
But if only selected portions are shown with the intention of embarrassing someone, it seems like a either libel or harassment (IANAL, so I don't know for sure).
It’s not libel by definition; libel is deliberately spreading false information. It may or may not be harassing; that would depend on the intent of the person who taped it, edited it, and distributed it.
In general I believe that you can't record audio, because there is an expectation of privacy there.
In general, wrong. It varies state-by-state; only 11 of the 50 states require all parties to know and consent to being taped. In general, if you can hear it, you can tape it as long as you’re not using the tape to commit a crime (e.g. blackmail).
Sure, then you just get it confiscated and the footage mysteriously disappears.
He knows that people call it freeze distillation. He doesn’t think it should be called that.
Freeze “distillation” is just about as much distillation as making tomato paste is. You’re removing water. What remains is more concentrated.
I’m confused... are you saying that could happen? Or that it has happened?
Freeze distillation isn’t anything remotely similar to heat distillation.
If you’re drinking something that was heat distilled, you’re drinking the lightweight, volatile compounds that evaporated at a certain temperature. It’s relatively specific with respect to what you’re getting, and that is necessary because the stuff that you’re distilling usually has nasty compounds that aren’t good to drink. However by removing the drinkable compounds from the nasty undrinkable stuff you have a good product.
If you’re drinking something that was freeze distilled, you’re drinking the concentrated mixture of everything that was left when water, and only water, was removed. If you started with nasty undrinkable stuff, it’s just stronger nasty undrinkable stuff afterward. If you started with regular beer, though, it shouldn’t have any significant amount of the poisonous stuff that you’d normally find in a heat distillation’s input product, and the output is stronger beer.
What that doesn't explain is why home-brewing of beer is legal yet home-brewing of spirits is not even though you could produce commercial quantities of both just as easily.
Not entirely true; distilling is much more complex than simply brewing beer... and thus while it could be virtually impossible to crack down on every guy brewing beer in his basement, finding the illegal stills and shutting them down is more manageable of a job.
Not that they wouldn’t want to shut down the untaxable beer brewers... but what’s the point of even trying?
Pfff, like Paramount uses real christmas trees in their gin? It’s the cheapest stuff you can buy.
OTOH I noticed a new gin from a local distillery and figured I’d try it... didn’t really like it all that much. They do make good vodka though and since they’re local the price is very reasonable.