do you seriously think that matters? In fact do you even think that would have worked? Not even a chance, and you know better.
Between both sides wiping their asses with the constitution and trying to cook it for their mid day meal there is exactly no chance a business is going to win that scenario. It is well known that the game is not played that way. Very few companies have the conviction lavabit does. By the way, do you have a lavabit email account? If you are not putting your money where your mouth is, perhaps you should not say much about this.
There is a reason governments do not let a terrible situation go to waste, all tyranny comes from this, it's even a quote from a founding father of the USA.
"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad."
~Madison
It should read... If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, -HERE OR- from abroad.
Was that YOUR dad? cause judging by the resulting child you are probably ugly as sin too, if feel sorry for ya! I don't blame you for posting as AC now!
I am reading into the "other compute card products" as also being part of the NUC's and Sticks lineup. So yea if those are not going to to be part of that then I might be unfairly bashing the compute cards. Hopefully your post is modded up so people are not unfairly biased by my post against the Cards. Though my thoughts on NUC and Stick's still stand.
lol, no, its one business one product that would naturally mean another business cannot own another business... buy that virtue umbrella corporations would be destroyed and impossible to build. It would also prevent shell corporations and the like as well.
Regarding your other totally legit argument about "partnerships"... those can be addressed with anti-trust laws, but realistically, if there are no large players, it really makes it potentially bad for business for a company to make these kinds of deals because it will marry their success to another businesses success. So yea, Strong Anti-Monopoly and Anti-Trust laws would go far to help keep the market free as possible rather than the over-regulation we have right now helping to ensure businesses stay entrenched through the revolving regulatory door between government and business for quick pay purchase of beneficial regulations and laws.
Verizon is mostly doing what they are told, its not like you are going to do anything to change it are you? It is only natural they are going to want immunity. Would you be okay with being required to give the government unfettered access to your data, be required to do so AND have no immunity from that collection?
I am totally okay with you being disgusted by it, I am as well, but it does little good when the wrong group is being blamed. It's like blaming a person being blackmailed to kill someone or their own family dies. I won't blame them for being in a crappy position, I am going to blame the folks that put them in the situation.
That being said, there are more than enough of other things Verizon can be blamed for, but not realistically this one.
I tried two different version of these and they sucked bad.
Here are some examples of problems. The biggest problem is the terrible implementation. Nothing was planned for expansion. The USB ports were limited though understandble, but often had a weird problem. The devices emitted an EMI field that prevented many wireless keyboards and mice from working. Had to get an extension usb cable or dongle to bring them far enough away from the device to function. No flexible cabling to plug them into devices with limited profiles for their HDMI connectors and really the same for the other ports. They really should have broken out ports to allow for far more flexibility than they did. The NUC was not as bad as the Sticks because they had more surface area to work with but still found many problems with them.
Their designs just kept them down and prevented them from being as useful as they could have been.
You did not point out a fallacy you just said there was one and pointed nothing out.
You are creating division, you are not a pragmatist either, though I can accept you might be in the middle. It is possible for folks in the middle to be entirely opposite of each other and still be in the middle.
To be pragmatic about things you have to ignore the rhetoric and only review the outcome. I don't care if Obama is a Democrat or if Trump is a republican. I cheer when either does something right and boo when I either does something wrong. Both are for big business, both are for big government, both are for destruction of liberty, both are for blaming the other side for problems of their own creation, both are corrupt, both lie, cheat, and steal, both abuse citizens... I mean... there is so much likeness that all of the other things that are different only results in your toilet being blue while their toilet is red!
I am tired of the "no they are different" baloney. They are the same enough to ignore both, and get rid of both, and vote in something else... just long enough to break them down. Incidentally, because of this... is why Trump got here and AOC as well. They are living PROOF that many people see very little differences between the parties and why their own parties are at odds with them!
"Look at Verizon. They sold all your phone records (and presumably your internet records) to the government without even telling you. Oh and they made sure to lobby Congress to exempt them from privacy laws and agreements so they couldn't even effectively be sued by the customers they screwed over."
You do understand that this looks bad for your government... not Verizon right? You are definitely blaming the wrong group here. The relationships between telco and government is a long and twisting one and Verizon was just wanting to protect itself from folks like you that cannot figure out who the real villain is and goes after the innocent. Governments have been backdooring your privacy through big business for a long time now, especially under the guise of "national security".
Indeed, this is why I advocate for single product ownership. It is much harder for Google to aggregate personal data when they don't also own all the downstream products. But I don't think people are getting the connection with that. If a business gets to own so much stuff at once, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have any privacy because they know so much about the rest of you that you cannot keep anything a secret. People are going to be so disappointed thinking that government is going to save them... government wants all of that data too! If the collection of it is stopped, they won't get either. Instead they are going to let the collection of the data continue, but instead reword it like the GDPR so that businesses cannot monetize it so easily, but still allow it to be collected so government can still use it. Things like the GDPR are not pro-privacy, it's just privacy theater just like the TSA at checkpoints being security theater. People are just going to have to get used to being spied on now... because we just cannot seem to do anything other than sabotage ourselves in outrage for things that have happened.
#1. Increasing your own product line. #2. Removing competition.
Both in the vast majority of cases becomes a negative to a free market because it foments monopoly. The more increased a product line is the more lock in you wind up getting into, even though increasing product line is "usually" beneficial. And with the removal of competition... well that is easy enough on its own.
Monopolies are not free-market, monopolies are products of lazy citizens that refuse to perform the "self-policing" that they often ignorantly attribute to "large corporations", yes large corporations advance this fallacy as well, and why when I hear people say it I just tell them that they are actually playing into the hands of big businesses. Sometimes monopolies are directly created by the very regulations that people put in to stop them... FCC is a great example of this.
I would propose that we ask for a "regulation" that prevents any one person or business from owning more than 1 product. If you are a search engine... that is all you get to be. If you make operating systems... you are not allowed to make hardware. If you make gaming systems... you don't get to make games. If you are a content provider... you don't get to own content! The only exception should be if they are first to market with the idea or concept they get a 10 year exception. For example, the first person to invent movies can also invent the tools to make, distribute, or show them. But after 10 years, they no longer get to exclusively make movies or the tools to make movies, or control their distribution, or control how they are shown.
There is way too much conflict of interest and today's regulations are all about controlling things the wrong way and the "regulate all the things" folks just are not understanding that... leading to just exactly this problem right fucking here!
That's the problem right there. Can't determine the facts because "muh politics"!
Yes, the "rhetoric" is different for both sides, but the outcome is shockingly much the same. Take for example how Obama trashed Bush policies but totally used them and strengthened them as well for HIS purposes. Heck he even tried to make it harder for future presidents to do the things he did after he left office... that totally does not smack of hubris huh? Now, lets point out how Trump trash talked Obamacare and many of the republicans... turns out they are not so hot on getting rid of it now are they?
It's kind like how racists see other people as being different, yet we are all humans just the same. You only see a difference because you ONLY focus on those differences. I see very little difference because I ONLY focus on the fruits of their labors. Hence the article I linked and why I called out the hypocrisy on the left for it as they do just exactly the same thing, just maybe ever so slightly different.
A great way to put it might be like this. If you are friendly with someone, they might easily say... yes, I will give you this information for little effort, but if you are not friendly, it takes more effort, but if both are successful and information is traded the only result is the fact that you willing to be unfair to those you do not like and fair with those you do. That is not really fair now is it? That is actually worse than an eye for an eye as well! Is it really okay to keep punishing people for a single transgression eternally? Great way to make friends there! But perhaps that is why people are moving from the center and out to the fringes these days... because of folks like you.
Stop creating division and lets all get back here in the middle!
Nothing but straw man arguments 100%. I am not talking about the issue from a legal point of view, I am just talking about the data itself in relation to people giving it up and then getting upset about it being mined. The fact that such information was gained in various ways is really not germane here. But since you brought it up even the the law suit is not about Facebooks TOS being violated, but instead about Facebook's often talked about misleading "privacy" settings.https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/dec/19/facebook-cambridge-analytica-washington-dc-lawsuit-data
I understand you need to make it out to be something bigger that it is, but I don't feel sorry you got played, its been in the news before Trump even announced his candidacy!
"This is typical both sides do it hypocrisy of the Right. See also whataboutism."
Let me tell you what is typical, for people on the left to blame anyone that does not follow their narrative as always being on the right. For you guys the only choice is "with us or against us". There are actually more than just 2 sides here and that kind of rhetoric just puts everyone else against you and that means you can get outnumbered real fast if you keep that up.
You also need to put the whataboutery to rest as well. The original term is Hypocrisy or rather "tu quoque logical fallacy". I am not seeking to defend anyone's actions. I am just making it clear that your hypocrisy leaves you no room for complaint. In fact, I consider people that trot out "whataboutism" as a direct admission of... "I know I am hypcrite, but since they are hypcrits too, I have a right to be a hypocrite as well." So don't be shocked when a 3rd party, such as myself comes along and calls you out.
When democrats abuse information for elections..."it's justified for the cause" but when republicans do it... "it's because they are evil".
Read this guys article. https://www.snopes.com/fact-ch... Yes, BOTH side really are the same, big business federalists that have no reason to care about you beyond your vote. They only care about their constituents and that is where they appear different is because their constituents have differences.
The Cambridge Data lesson is in a nutshell... a beacon of the Hypocrisy of the Left... no so much on the right because it benefited them this time. BOTH Parties have been doing things like this in all sorts of ways for decades. Before Cambridge, Before the internet. They have been using census data, voter records, polls, and anything they can get their hands on to redraw districts, target campaign speech locations, issue spotting, and just about anything a campaign manager can think of to get the upper hand.
This is nothing shocking or surprising but instead, a NATURAL result of people giving up their privacy to a feckless company that generates revenue off of their personal data! The people upset about this are really just pissed off they didn't do a better job at it.
It's still going to be done, they will just now do it a different way and because of the mfg outrage machine they will just have to find other less obvious ways to do it.
This is stupid... I wonder if the car will let you drive home if a passenger is drunk? No more designated driver for you!
But hey, look on the bright side, at least Volvo will have random pictures of you and your family in the car. I love these new "safety" spying features!
Or we could just stop putting antibiotics into everything everywhere creating the resistance.
microbes don't just adapt, they also fight each other for space and when you wipe out one colony type you also reduce the threat against those of a different type. the microbiome in the gut is a great example of things like this. Even the once thought to be vestigial appendix has a use discovered for it now as a safe-house for beneficial bacteria.
creating a vaccine for something serious like measles is great, creating one for every little illness... yea, I am sure that will go over well. Can they make one for my stubbed toe too? It might get infected!
Yes, the government should really setup a process where citizens can report on other citizens with recorded evidence of such problems so they can send them tickets like they do with traffic cameras. Now, the other new problem... people being distracted while trying to snitch on each other in a game of one-up-man-ship.
There is nothing like a society where we all look at each other with contempt and suspicion, right? Hmm... we are going that way anyways so why not?
The fact that they are distracted regardless of distraction is enough of a problem, their level of situational awareness actually has about zip to do with it as this is specific to each individual and event. There is exactly zero convincing evidence that their situational awareness is automatically better just because passengers get quiet or by the fact they are present or not. Lots of kids have died with loads of passengers in the car, still had accidents, still died, and still resulted in laws in some areas outlawing new drivers from having underage passengers. In fact passengers suddenly getting quiet could be the catalyst for a deadly accident to occur as the driver suddenly becomes distracted by what has distracted all of their passengers!
Seeing that their post was modded insightful while also stating incorrect information you might as well say that there is support for doing just exactly that. There already are laws for banning teens from driving in cars with other teems for much the same reason.
People really are trying to make a law about every little aspect of life, and then they turn around and wonder why government has become so oppressive and why prosecutors are able to throw so many charges at people to scare them into taking a plea deal even if they are completely innocent.
We live in a vicious fear based society where if you make them afraid of something... you can control them.
"If it saves lives, good. And it's a really easy tax to avoid, don't use your phone while driving."
Let me explain why this logic is absolutely asinine, abusive, and counter productive.
If you are willing to text and drive risking your life, the life of your occupants if you have them, AND the lives of the drivers around you, tell me why you think a law that allows police to scan your device "AFTER" the accident that has already happened is going to change that?
This is NOT about catching people that are texting, this is about gaining access to phones to find out if they illegally used their phones AFTER the fact. That is a huge difference, most places already have laws for people caught texting... accident or not!
You are not thinking forensically about it. A log is no proof, it can be hacked, but hey software for keeping your device clean would soon become handy. Additionally, even with blue tooth connected, I can physically pick up the phone and initiate a dial manually by hand and still invoke blue tooth. Also, I have accidentally butt dialed emergency numbers on my phone sitting in the car not touching it.
The Technology is incredibly immature and unreliable... if I sat as a juror I would not be willing to convict based on this evidence alone, but an ignorant person might, and there are more than enough ignorant angry jurors.
Preponderance is for Civil not Criminal law. Police enforcing traffic law is a criminal concern because you have to be breaking a law to be legally pulled over.
"The problem is not that your hands are not on the wheel, but that your mind is not on the road."
Among all of the other "distractions" possible this is hardly worth arguing about. The police themselves are legally allowed to multitask with all sorts of instrumentation in their vehicles during the course of their duties. Proper enforcement and laws are already there. People are still dying on the roads and the only effect currently is that cities are collecting more fines for people being road hazards. We really need to move away from a fine based system and institute a revolving point based system... but that would hurt a lot of city economies. It just pays to be corrupt, so we will remain that way. The objective is to generate revenue, not save lives. If we were actually serious about saving lives we should do a lot of things differently.
"This law clearly is not about enforcing texting and driving; there is something else going on here."
Yes, this would make a great prelude to opening full legalize search and seizure of all data on peoples phones as well. I did not actually consider that in my first post but you definitely bring up a great point. Almost all laws today are now end runs around civil liberty just so a dossier of citizens can be built so they can charge you with criminal liability for about 100 laws just to scare you into accepting a plea deal. Because everyone knows that citizens are so damn dumb that risking their life in a trail by jury is a risky proposition. Most American citizens will now happily render a guilty verdict just their precious time being wasted having to serve on a jury. There are a lot of self-righteous hypocrite bastards out there.
No, it will not harm the prepaid cell phone users, and is a straw-man post.
The MNVO's are only part of the problem and only possible because of the "original" problem. If they can get a contract for service from a traditional telco then the telco is also complicit in the problem and specifically why I said that there is no motivation to put and end to the problem because money. It talks and the bullshit walks.
The telco's are liars because it is good business to lie about this problem. Everyone running mouth about people not understanding the technology are full of the BS and are nothing other than ignorant nay-Sayers looking to act like they know more than they do about the issue or troll for lulz. Liars, hackers, spoofers, and the like are being caught all the time when they finally piss off the right people, which is why I also brought up William Webster in my original post. They can be discovered! And the easiest solution to the problem is to place liability on the telcos for keeping the problem going.
Slashdot Mirror
do you seriously think that matters? In fact do you even think that would have worked? Not even a chance, and you know better.
Between both sides wiping their asses with the constitution and trying to cook it for their mid day meal there is exactly no chance a business is going to win that scenario. It is well known that the game is not played that way. Very few companies have the conviction lavabit does. By the way, do you have a lavabit email account? If you are not putting your money where your mouth is, perhaps you should not say much about this.
There is a reason governments do not let a terrible situation go to waste, all tyranny comes from this, it's even a quote from a founding father of the USA.
"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad."
~Madison
It should read...
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, -HERE OR- from abroad.
Was that YOUR dad? cause judging by the resulting child you are probably ugly as sin too, if feel sorry for ya! I don't blame you for posting as AC now!
Fair point!
I am reading into the "other compute card products" as also being part of the NUC's and Sticks lineup. So yea if those are not going to to be part of that then I might be unfairly bashing the compute cards. Hopefully your post is modded up so people are not unfairly biased by my post against the Cards. Though my thoughts on NUC and Stick's still stand.
but still not as good as your dad does. You could probably learn a "trick" or two from him!
lol, no, its one business one product that would naturally mean another business cannot own another business... buy that virtue umbrella corporations would be destroyed and impossible to build. It would also prevent shell corporations and the like as well.
Regarding your other totally legit argument about "partnerships"... those can be addressed with anti-trust laws, but realistically, if there are no large players, it really makes it potentially bad for business for a company to make these kinds of deals because it will marry their success to another businesses success. So yea, Strong Anti-Monopoly and Anti-Trust laws would go far to help keep the market free as possible rather than the over-regulation we have right now helping to ensure businesses stay entrenched through the revolving regulatory door between government and business for quick pay purchase of beneficial regulations and laws.
You are wrong and here is why.
Verizon is mostly doing what they are told, its not like you are going to do anything to change it are you? It is only natural they are going to want immunity. Would you be okay with being required to give the government unfettered access to your data, be required to do so AND have no immunity from that collection?
I am totally okay with you being disgusted by it, I am as well, but it does little good when the wrong group is being blamed. It's like blaming a person being blackmailed to kill someone or their own family dies. I won't blame them for being in a crappy position, I am going to blame the folks that put them in the situation.
That being said, there are more than enough of other things Verizon can be blamed for, but not realistically this one.
I tried two different version of these and they sucked bad.
Here are some examples of problems.
The biggest problem is the terrible implementation. Nothing was planned for expansion. The USB ports were limited though understandble, but often had a weird problem. The devices emitted an EMI field that prevented many wireless keyboards and mice from working. Had to get an extension usb cable or dongle to bring them far enough away from the device to function.
No flexible cabling to plug them into devices with limited profiles for their HDMI connectors and really the same for the other ports. They really should have broken out ports to allow for far more flexibility than they did. The NUC was not as bad as the Sticks because they had more surface area to work with but still found many problems with them.
Their designs just kept them down and prevented them from being as useful as they could have been.
You did not point out a fallacy you just said there was one and pointed nothing out.
You are creating division, you are not a pragmatist either, though I can accept you might be in the middle. It is possible for folks in the middle to be entirely opposite of each other and still be in the middle.
To be pragmatic about things you have to ignore the rhetoric and only review the outcome. I don't care if Obama is a Democrat or if Trump is a republican. I cheer when either does something right and boo when I either does something wrong. Both are for big business, both are for big government, both are for destruction of liberty, both are for blaming the other side for problems of their own creation, both are corrupt, both lie, cheat, and steal, both abuse citizens... I mean... there is so much likeness that all of the other things that are different only results in your toilet being blue while their toilet is red!
I am tired of the "no they are different" baloney. They are the same enough to ignore both, and get rid of both, and vote in something else... just long enough to break them down. Incidentally, because of this... is why Trump got here and AOC as well. They are living PROOF that many people see very little differences between the parties and why their own parties are at odds with them!
So you might right in the future but not now!
"Look at Verizon. They sold all your phone records (and presumably your internet records) to the government without even telling you. Oh and they made sure to lobby Congress to exempt them from privacy laws and agreements so they couldn't even effectively be sued by the customers they screwed over."
You do understand that this looks bad for your government... not Verizon right? You are definitely blaming the wrong group here. The relationships between telco and government is a long and twisting one and Verizon was just wanting to protect itself from folks like you that cannot figure out who the real villain is and goes after the innocent. Governments have been backdooring your privacy through big business for a long time now, especially under the guise of "national security".
lol... yea that is true, People are already wanting to throw me off the Tower of Commerce for it!
I need someone to rub my lobes before they toss me!
Indeed, this is why I advocate for single product ownership. It is much harder for Google to aggregate personal data when they don't also own all the downstream products. But I don't think people are getting the connection with that. If a business gets to own so much stuff at once, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have any privacy because they know so much about the rest of you that you cannot keep anything a secret. People are going to be so disappointed thinking that government is going to save them... government wants all of that data too! If the collection of it is stopped, they won't get either. Instead they are going to let the collection of the data continue, but instead reword it like the GDPR so that businesses cannot monetize it so easily, but still allow it to be collected so government can still use it. Things like the GDPR are not pro-privacy, it's just privacy theater just like the TSA at checkpoints being security theater. People are just going to have to get used to being spied on now... because we just cannot seem to do anything other than sabotage ourselves in outrage for things that have happened.
#1. Increasing your own product line.
#2. Removing competition.
Both in the vast majority of cases becomes a negative to a free market because it foments monopoly. The more increased a product line is the more lock in you wind up getting into, even though increasing product line is "usually" beneficial. And with the removal of competition... well that is easy enough on its own.
Monopolies are not free-market, monopolies are products of lazy citizens that refuse to perform the "self-policing" that they often ignorantly attribute to "large corporations", yes large corporations advance this fallacy as well, and why when I hear people say it I just tell them that they are actually playing into the hands of big businesses. Sometimes monopolies are directly created by the very regulations that people put in to stop them... FCC is a great example of this.
I would propose that we ask for a "regulation" that prevents any one person or business from owning more than 1 product. If you are a search engine... that is all you get to be. If you make operating systems... you are not allowed to make hardware. If you make gaming systems... you don't get to make games. If you are a content provider... you don't get to own content! The only exception should be if they are first to market with the idea or concept they get a 10 year exception. For example, the first person to invent movies can also invent the tools to make, distribute, or show them. But after 10 years, they no longer get to exclusively make movies or the tools to make movies, or control their distribution, or control how they are shown.
There is way too much conflict of interest and today's regulations are all about controlling things the wrong way and the "regulate all the things" folks just are not understanding that... leading to just exactly this problem right fucking here!
Killed by Google!
That's the problem right there. Can't determine the facts because "muh politics"!
Yes, the "rhetoric" is different for both sides, but the outcome is shockingly much the same. Take for example how Obama trashed Bush policies but totally used them and strengthened them as well for HIS purposes. Heck he even tried to make it harder for future presidents to do the things he did after he left office... that totally does not smack of hubris huh? Now, lets point out how Trump trash talked Obamacare and many of the republicans... turns out they are not so hot on getting rid of it now are they?
It's kind like how racists see other people as being different, yet we are all humans just the same. You only see a difference because you ONLY focus on those differences. I see very little difference because I ONLY focus on the fruits of their labors. Hence the article I linked and why I called out the hypocrisy on the left for it as they do just exactly the same thing, just maybe ever so slightly different.
A great way to put it might be like this. If you are friendly with someone, they might easily say... yes, I will give you this information for little effort, but if you are not friendly, it takes more effort, but if both are successful and information is traded the only result is the fact that you willing to be unfair to those you do not like and fair with those you do. That is not really fair now is it? That is actually worse than an eye for an eye as well! Is it really okay to keep punishing people for a single transgression eternally? Great way to make friends there! But perhaps that is why people are moving from the center and out to the fringes these days... because of folks like you.
Stop creating division and lets all get back here in the middle!
Nothing but straw man arguments 100%. I am not talking about the issue from a legal point of view, I am just talking about the data itself in relation to people giving it up and then getting upset about it being mined. The fact that such information was gained in various ways is really not germane here. But since you brought it up even the the law suit is not about Facebooks TOS being violated, but instead about Facebook's often talked about misleading "privacy" settings.https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/dec/19/facebook-cambridge-analytica-washington-dc-lawsuit-data
I understand you need to make it out to be something bigger that it is, but I don't feel sorry you got played, its been in the news before Trump even announced his candidacy!
"This is typical both sides do it hypocrisy of the Right. See also whataboutism."
Let me tell you what is typical, for people on the left to blame anyone that does not follow their narrative as always being on the right. For you guys the only choice is "with us or against us". There are actually more than just 2 sides here and that kind of rhetoric just puts everyone else against you and that means you can get outnumbered real fast if you keep that up.
You also need to put the whataboutery to rest as well. The original term is Hypocrisy or rather "tu quoque logical fallacy". I am not seeking to defend anyone's actions. I am just making it clear that your hypocrisy leaves you no room for complaint. In fact, I consider people that trot out "whataboutism" as a direct admission of... "I know I am hypcrite, but since they are hypcrits too, I have a right to be a hypocrite as well." So don't be shocked when a 3rd party, such as myself comes along and calls you out.
When democrats abuse information for elections..."it's justified for the cause" but when republicans do it... "it's because they are evil".
Read this guys article.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-ch...
Yes, BOTH side really are the same, big business federalists that have no reason to care about you beyond your vote. They only care about their constituents and that is where they appear different is because their constituents have differences.
The Cambridge Data lesson is in a nutshell... a beacon of the Hypocrisy of the Left... no so much on the right because it benefited them this time. BOTH Parties have been doing things like this in all sorts of ways for decades. Before Cambridge, Before the internet. They have been using census data, voter records, polls, and anything they can get their hands on to redraw districts, target campaign speech locations, issue spotting, and just about anything a campaign manager can think of to get the upper hand.
This is nothing shocking or surprising but instead, a NATURAL result of people giving up their privacy to a feckless company that generates revenue off of their personal data! The people upset about this are really just pissed off they didn't do a better job at it.
It's still going to be done, they will just now do it a different way and because of the mfg outrage machine they will just have to find other less obvious ways to do it.
This is stupid... I wonder if the car will let you drive home if a passenger is drunk? No more designated driver for you!
But hey, look on the bright side, at least Volvo will have random pictures of you and your family in the car. I love these new "safety" spying features!
Or we could just stop putting antibiotics into everything everywhere creating the resistance.
microbes don't just adapt, they also fight each other for space and when you wipe out one colony type you also reduce the threat against those of a different type. the microbiome in the gut is a great example of things like this. Even the once thought to be vestigial appendix has a use discovered for it now as a safe-house for beneficial bacteria.
creating a vaccine for something serious like measles is great, creating one for every little illness... yea, I am sure that will go over well. Can they make one for my stubbed toe too? It might get infected!
Yes, the government should really setup a process where citizens can report on other citizens with recorded evidence of such problems so they can send them tickets like they do with traffic cameras. Now, the other new problem... people being distracted while trying to snitch on each other in a game of one-up-man-ship.
There is nothing like a society where we all look at each other with contempt and suspicion, right? Hmm... we are going that way anyways so why not?
This is a complete fallacy.
The fact that they are distracted regardless of distraction is enough of a problem, their level of situational awareness actually has about zip to do with it as this is specific to each individual and event. There is exactly zero convincing evidence that their situational awareness is automatically better just because passengers get quiet or by the fact they are present or not. Lots of kids have died with loads of passengers in the car, still had accidents, still died, and still resulted in laws in some areas outlawing new drivers from having underage passengers. In fact passengers suddenly getting quiet could be the catalyst for a deadly accident to occur as the driver suddenly becomes distracted by what has distracted all of their passengers!
Seeing that their post was modded insightful while also stating incorrect information you might as well say that there is support for doing just exactly that. There already are laws for banning teens from driving in cars with other teems for much the same reason.
People really are trying to make a law about every little aspect of life, and then they turn around and wonder why government has become so oppressive and why prosecutors are able to throw so many charges at people to scare them into taking a plea deal even if they are completely innocent.
We live in a vicious fear based society where if you make them afraid of something... you can control them.
"If it saves lives, good. And it's a really easy tax to avoid, don't use your phone while driving."
Let me explain why this logic is absolutely asinine, abusive, and counter productive.
If you are willing to text and drive risking your life, the life of your occupants if you have them, AND the lives of the drivers around you, tell me why you think a law that allows police to scan your device "AFTER" the accident that has already happened is going to change that?
This is NOT about catching people that are texting, this is about gaining access to phones to find out if they illegally used their phones AFTER the fact. That is a huge difference, most places already have laws for people caught texting... accident or not!
You are not thinking forensically about it. A log is no proof, it can be hacked, but hey software for keeping your device clean would soon become handy. Additionally, even with blue tooth connected, I can physically pick up the phone and initiate a dial manually by hand and still invoke blue tooth. Also, I have accidentally butt dialed emergency numbers on my phone sitting in the car not touching it.
The Technology is incredibly immature and unreliable... if I sat as a juror I would not be willing to convict based on this evidence alone, but an ignorant person might, and there are more than enough ignorant angry jurors.
Preponderance is for Civil not Criminal law. Police enforcing traffic law is a criminal concern because you have to be breaking a law to be legally pulled over.
"The problem is not that your hands are not on the wheel, but that your mind is not on the road."
Among all of the other "distractions" possible this is hardly worth arguing about. The police themselves are legally allowed to multitask with all sorts of instrumentation in their vehicles during the course of their duties. Proper enforcement and laws are already there. People are still dying on the roads and the only effect currently is that cities are collecting more fines for people being road hazards. We really need to move away from a fine based system and institute a revolving point based system... but that would hurt a lot of city economies. It just pays to be corrupt, so we will remain that way. The objective is to generate revenue, not save lives. If we were actually serious about saving lives we should do a lot of things differently.
"This law clearly is not about enforcing texting and driving; there is something else going on here."
Yes, this would make a great prelude to opening full legalize search and seizure of all data on peoples phones as well. I did not actually consider that in my first post but you definitely bring up a great point. Almost all laws today are now end runs around civil liberty just so a dossier of citizens can be built so they can charge you with criminal liability for about 100 laws just to scare you into accepting a plea deal. Because everyone knows that citizens are so damn dumb that risking their life in a trail by jury is a risky proposition. Most American citizens will now happily render a guilty verdict just their precious time being wasted having to serve on a jury. There are a lot of self-righteous hypocrite bastards out there.
No, it will not harm the prepaid cell phone users, and is a straw-man post.
The MNVO's are only part of the problem and only possible because of the "original" problem. If they can get a contract for service from a traditional telco then the telco is also complicit in the problem and specifically why I said that there is no motivation to put and end to the problem because money. It talks and the bullshit walks.
The telco's are liars because it is good business to lie about this problem. Everyone running mouth about people not understanding the technology are full of the BS and are nothing other than ignorant nay-Sayers looking to act like they know more than they do about the issue or troll for lulz. Liars, hackers, spoofers, and the like are being caught all the time when they finally piss off the right people, which is why I also brought up William Webster in my original post. They can be discovered! And the easiest solution to the problem is to place liability on the telcos for keeping the problem going.