Uh, one thing is tracking them everywhere they go, another is just logging the timestamps of when they go through the entrace door. There's a big difference.
The same goes for mandatory drug-tests at work when they get older. Perhaps the employer would also like to get some bloodwork done, to make sure you're not going to keel over from something you're genetically-predisposed to in a few years.
Sorry, but I don't see how is mandatory drug-tests - an obvious and disgusting privacy violation - in any way similar to this.
Our society - I don't know about Brazil's - has been getting increasingly more one-sided in disfavor of the individual. The approach in TFA doesn't seem like another likely maneuver towards that to you?
Well, I'm not part of "your society" either, but no, I don't see how is this a maneuver towards that, and apparently no one here has been able to explain it either.
This is not more "monitoring the state" than a traditional roll call. It's just logging entrances and exits. Doing it automatically or by hand is irrelevant.
Do you really think they're putting a GPS (plus some kind of GSM modem to keep track of the location ) in each uniform? And that whole setup fits "underneath each school's coat-of-arms"?
It's probably a basic RFID tag that gets logged by a reader by the door.
I'm pretty sure they don't have the right of skipping classes. I don't see what rights does this violate that a guy manually logging their names to paper wouldn't.
This thread seems filled by Luddites, "uh, it's dangerous because it's a CHIP!!1!".
That's a terrible system, then. Here the teacher always marks the absence, regardless of the reasons, and then the parent/legal guardian can justify it later.
How exactly did you get from Europe to SOPA? You do know how's sponsoring all that crap? It's the US that has been pressuring Europe to pass those laws, not the other way around.
Let's also bring over the vast array of cameras from the U.K. while w are at it!
Eve Online is anything you want it to be. It has no arbitrarily imposed goals, you choose your own destiny and how you get there.
Goals are not the only important parts. To pay an adventure game, you need affordances which Eve doesn't provide; for example, not being able to walk inside your own ship automatically disqualifies Eve as a potential candidate for the game Notch is describing.
You do realize that every form of "participation" requires some action on the part of the citizen, don't you? "We should be allowed to send an email..." means you must have an email account. "We should be able to poke stuff into a web form..." means you must have Internet access AND a web browser. "We should be able to mail them a letter..." means you have to be able to afford a stamp and have the ability to write. Every means of participation inconveniences some citizens. Does that make all of those means of participation "fundamentally wrong"?
I believe the problem is that you are forced to use a single company, which can censor your posts or shut you off whenever they want. None of your examples have the same issue.
Yes, if facebook charged you money to participate, I'd agree that it was wrong to use facebook for this. Facebook is free. If you already have internet access, you can have facebook for nothing extra. Since the OP was talking about interacting in an internet environment to start with, then whether it is via facebook or email or web makes no significant difference. OTH, the phone company charges you money to call your Senator. Why is the phone company ok and facebook bad? Or do you think the fact that Senators have phones is "fundamentally wrong", too?
Get a free account under a dummy name. Use a throwaway email address. Don't be stupid and send friend requests to any real people who might out you. Don't post your real information. Don't use a real picture of yourself for your avatar. Do none of the things that would identify you. Do all of the things you would do for any other internet connection or app that would anonymize you. You get to participate, facebook gets nothing. What's your problem with that?
What you're suggesting is against their ToS, which might be a crime under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Also, Facebook still gets benefit of being validated as a proper communication channel for constituents, therefore entrenching their position of control over everyone's communications. It's littering, as Mr. Moglen says.
I don't really like the idea of the government having any excuse for taxes other than to fund itself. Maybe instead the rules should be changed so it is easier for corporations to be sued over externalities or something.
If the externality is not supposed to happen (e.g. oil spill), lawsuits make sense, but if it's an expected event like the fact that you're using a limited resource that belongs to the common, how do lawsuits fit in? It doesn't really make sense to sue someone over that.
If you don't like that the money from those taxes can be used for anything, a better option is to set up an independent organization that can only use the funds for a specific purpose, like one that receives the taxes from tobacco and can only use them for funding lung cancer prevention and treatment.
Slashdot Mirror
In this instance, how is it any different?
Uh, one thing is tracking them everywhere they go, another is just logging the timestamps of when they go through the entrace door. There's a big difference.
The same goes for mandatory drug-tests at work when they get older. Perhaps the employer would also like to get some bloodwork done, to make sure you're not going to keel over from something you're genetically-predisposed to in a few years.
Sorry, but I don't see how is mandatory drug-tests - an obvious and disgusting privacy violation - in any way similar to this.
Our society - I don't know about Brazil's - has been getting increasingly more one-sided in disfavor of the individual. The approach in TFA doesn't seem like another likely maneuver towards that to you?
Well, I'm not part of "your society" either, but no, I don't see how is this a maneuver towards that, and apparently no one here has been able to explain it either.
Which is not the plan. They'll only install a reader by the door, according to the news reports.
Until you can explain exactly how is this "anti-freedom", you're nothing but Luddites.
Slippery slope is a fallacy. Accepting something harmless like this doesn't force you to accept actual rights-violating systems.
Oh, and I don't watch TV.
Should I get to choose whether my child can reply to a roll call or not? If not, how is this different?
For fucks sake, people, it's a damn RFID tag, not a GPS embedded under their skin.
It's not a GPS, just RFID.
It's and RFID tag, it doesn't "track them everywhere they go", it just records the timestamp of when they go through the reader.
This is not more "monitoring the state" than a traditional roll call. It's just logging entrances and exits. Doing it automatically or by hand is irrelevant.
Explain exactly how is this "evil" (and remember this is a simple RFID tag, not a GPS locator).
Do you really think they're putting a GPS (plus some kind of GSM modem to keep track of the location ) in each uniform? And that whole setup fits "underneath each school's coat-of-arms"?
It's probably a basic RFID tag that gets logged by a reader by the door.
I'm pretty sure they don't have the right of skipping classes. I don't see what rights does this violate that a guy manually logging their names to paper wouldn't.
This thread seems filled by Luddites, "uh, it's dangerous because it's a CHIP!!1!".
That's a terrible system, then. Here the teacher always marks the absence, regardless of the reasons, and then the parent/legal guardian can justify it later.
No. My laptop isn't polluted with Windows.
To me, 1024 is definitively not enough for a full A4 page, and if I have to scroll, a little more or less doesn't make much difference, in my opinion.
I have 800 vertical pixels, and I usually zoom the text to fit half the page. Having 1024 wouldn't give me anything.
I disagree: widescreen is great for having two VIM windows side-by-side, or having only one VIM and a document, etc.
Most websites have to be scrolled anyway, more vertical space doesn't make much of a difference, but tiling windows horizontally is damn handy.
I don't live in the Foxconn factories, no. All I know is reports, both from theirs and from the USs.
The average suicide rate in Foxconn is lower than the average on all US states.
s/paten/trademark/
Sure, I'm not deflecting the blame from our politicians; no amount of pressure excuses them from enacting terrible laws like those.
I'm just saying that SOPA being pushed through the US Congress had nothing to do with Europe, and all to do with lobbying from their own industries.
Well that's how we get SOPA. Great plan. Not.
How exactly did you get from Europe to SOPA? You do know how's sponsoring all that crap? It's the US that has been pressuring Europe to pass those laws, not the other way around.
Let's also bring over the vast array of cameras from the U.K. while w are at it!
Meh, the UK are barely European anyway ;)
Eve Online is anything you want it to be. It has no arbitrarily imposed goals, you choose your own destiny and how you get there.
Goals are not the only important parts. To pay an adventure game, you need affordances which Eve doesn't provide; for example, not being able to walk inside your own ship automatically disqualifies Eve as a potential candidate for the game Notch is describing.
Not to mention that Facebook itself is an email provider, users just have to enable that option to get an @facebook.com address.
You do realize that every form of "participation" requires some action on the part of the citizen, don't you? "We should be allowed to send an email..." means you must have an email account. "We should be able to poke stuff into a web form..." means you must have Internet access AND a web browser. "We should be able to mail them a letter..." means you have to be able to afford a stamp and have the ability to write. Every means of participation inconveniences some citizens. Does that make all of those means of participation "fundamentally wrong"?
I believe the problem is that you are forced to use a single company, which can censor your posts or shut you off whenever they want. None of your examples have the same issue.
Yes, if facebook charged you money to participate, I'd agree that it was wrong to use facebook for this. Facebook is free. If you already have internet access, you can have facebook for nothing extra. Since the OP was talking about interacting in an internet environment to start with, then whether it is via facebook or email or web makes no significant difference. OTH, the phone company charges you money to call your Senator. Why is the phone company ok and facebook bad? Or do you think the fact that Senators have phones is "fundamentally wrong", too?
There are other costs besides monetary. By using Facebook, you're promoting a company that makes money off of spying on people (no, not only what they choose to put there about themselves). http://www.betabeat.com/2011/12/13/in-which-eben-moglen-like-legit-yells-at-me-for-being-on-facebook/
Get a free account under a dummy name. Use a throwaway email address. Don't be stupid and send friend requests to any real people who might out you. Don't post your real information. Don't use a real picture of yourself for your avatar. Do none of the things that would identify you. Do all of the things you would do for any other internet connection or app that would anonymize you. You get to participate, facebook gets nothing. What's your problem with that?
What you're suggesting is against their ToS, which might be a crime under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Also, Facebook still gets benefit of being validated as a proper communication channel for constituents, therefore entrenching their position of control over everyone's communications. It's littering, as Mr. Moglen says.
Which could have happened without this particular interaction. What's your point?
When was the last time you had to put out a fire on Eve? Eve Online is a trading sim, not an adventure game like he seems to be describing.
I don't really like the idea of the government having any excuse for taxes other than to fund itself. Maybe instead the rules should be changed so it is easier for corporations to be sued over externalities or something.
If the externality is not supposed to happen (e.g. oil spill), lawsuits make sense, but if it's an expected event like the fact that you're using a limited resource that belongs to the common, how do lawsuits fit in? It doesn't really make sense to sue someone over that.
If you don't like that the money from those taxes can be used for anything, a better option is to set up an independent organization that can only use the funds for a specific purpose, like one that receives the taxes from tobacco and can only use them for funding lung cancer prevention and treatment.