Did you read my link? The Bush DOJ downgraded the case to a civil case because there was not enough evidence, before Obama was sworn in. That is an objective fact. You can dispute it, but the evidence it overwhelming, I mean, its a historical fact, just pretending it isn't won't make it go away.
I certainly think there was wrongdoing in the LMSD case. Personally, I think they should have been prosecuted, and I hope that they lose the civil case. But thinking the FBI is protecting some employee of a school district is so far outside of rationality, it beggars the imagination how a presumably grown human being could make that claim with a straight face.
I don't think any sort of court ruling in this case could hurt the FBI's ability to spy. I think the history of the FBI going after people who do spy illegally proves this point.
Human factor? It's usually the dog who rats me out. Damn dog can't keep his fool snout shut. Take last week, he comes out chewing on some new Manolo Blahniks slathered in caviar and the wife says, "Where did you get those? Are you guys running numbers again?" and the dog is like, "Haha, running numbers? That's so last week, we're running an Internet porn site now!" and I'm like "dog... shut up dog. Ixnay on the ornpay, dog" but he's a dog, all he hears is "dog blah blah blah dog blah blah." Damn dog.
How could it affect their own efforts? They are the freaking FBI, not the Lower Marion School district. It's their job to spy, when given authorization. Prosecuting the LMSB could not in any way affect their ability to spy themselves. You really think the FBI is cool with just any old government employee spying? That's the FBI's turf!
Read the independent investigation. There was not enough evidence of wrongdoing to prosecute. The school district got consent from the parents when they lent out the computers.
HAhaha, the black panthers? Intimidating white voters? Was anyone scared away? No. Two big black guys standing outside a polling place may scare the piss out of you but that doesn't make what they were doing illegal.
Besides, it was the Bush DOJ that dropped the case. Oopsie! That kinda blows your argument out of the water, now doesn't it, winger?
If you read the independent investigation I'd linked to, you would understand why your characterization of the case is ludicrous. Of course what was done was morally wrong, and the school district will likely lose the civil case, but they did not actually break the law because they obtained consent when they loaned the computers. Oh, shucks, your argument is once again shown to be full of holes. Better luck next time.
Nice anti government rant. Too bad the facts don't fit. Here's the report from the independent investigation. http://www.lmsd.org/documents/news/100503_ballard_spahr_report.pdf The FBI investigated the case and found there was not enough evidence to convict anyone of criminal charges. Are you claiming the FBI is in cahoots with the Lower Marion School District? Are you honestly saying the FBI will not prosecute low level government employees because the FBI feels it is the right of any government employee to spy on citizens? Put down the Kool-Aid and take off the tinfoil hat.
Last millennium called, it wants it's critique of OSS back. It also wants its snowclones back, but it said I could use them this one last time because it's for a good cause.
Microsoft has been doing this once or twice a year since somewhere around 2003. Just wait, the latest turncoat from the open source community to get hired up for whatever craptastic OSS lab Microsoft is setting up this week as part of its never-ending propaganda campaign will come on here and want us all to submit questions, to which he will give misleading non-answers, just so the vile pigs at Redmond can go "We're trying to engage the community!"
As in, "Redmond expects that every developer will do his duty" and "Engage the community more closely."
There should be a detective show called "Johnny Monkey," because every week you could have a guy say "I ain't gonna get caught by no MONKEY," but then he would, and I don't think I'd ever get tired of that.
One thing developers like is to be tricked. For instance, I was going to take Fyodor to Disneyland, but instead I drove him to an old burned-out warehouse. “Oh, no,” I said, “Disneyland burned down.” He cried and cried, but I think that deep down he thought it was a pretty good joke. I started to drive over to the real Disneyland, but it was getting pretty late.
OSX LEOPARD: Ah yeah, I could do that, sir yes, I suppose I could. What I was going to do was ask him if he could... you know, just give me minesweeper during the week, you know, something playable, but not Steam, which is a pain in the arse to be quite blunt, sir, excuse my French but...
BRIAN: Did you say -- OSX Leopard? OSX LEOPARD: That's right, sir. (he salutes)... sixteen years behind the bell, and proud of it, thank you sir. BRIAN: What happened? OSX LEOPARD: I was cured, sir. BRIAN: Cured? OSX LEOPARD: Yes sir, a bloody miracle, sir. Bless you. BRIAN: Who cured you? OSX LEOPARD: Jobs did. I was hopping along, when suddenly he comes and cures me. One minute I'm a Leopard with no games, next moment me productivity's gone. Not so much as a by your leave.
And what drug are you on, exactly?? The drug war does NOT help the addict what so ever. The drug war helps maintain the government as the top dealer of all drugs.
Thus, the quotes around the word "help." Helping the addicts is the justification used, and if that justification works for the drug war (obviously, I don't think it does) then it should work for any other addiction as well. If we "help" one type of addict, we should help them all.
Especially those addicted to material consumption and consumerism. Why, we allow "pushers" to air advertisements that have been proven to "force" people to desire and purchase things they wouldn't have spent money on otherwise. We need to help these poor addicts of consumerism.
But of course, that would ruin our economy, now wouldn't it? You see, we have these puritanical ideals ingrained into our culture. Excess is bad. Taking too much, using too much, these are bad according to deep seated tenants of our culture. But our economy requires excess consumption, and so we excuse that type of addiction, but our puritanical ideals demand we punish excess consumption, and so we define certain types of consumption as automatically excessive and punish those in lieu of punishing all excess.
With our country's "War" on drugs, we have a society which perpetuates the idea that addiction is the fault of the dealer. The drug war is socialism for cops and addicts, it takes money from the general population and uses it to "help" a small class of people who are prone to addiction or can't find employment except as a state thug. If drug addicts can get this socialist "help,"why not other addicts? If drug dealers are to blame for addiction, why not video game publishers?
So? My point was that it has never inconvenienced me, not that it never happened. I may have lost potential jobs due to the nefarious actions of invisible pink unicorns, too. You won't see me worrying about either one.
In the Soviet Union, as with most "people's revolutions" the rich corrupted the process very early on. Where brutality is required to win the revolution, the brutal lead the resulting nation.
I will admit that I am caught on the horns of dilemma regarding limited government. On the one hand, I'm actually an anarchist. Which doesn't mean what you think it means: an-archy means "no rulers" not "no government" which would be "anocracy," right? Well, at heart I want limited government, and state's rights. But I see too many states who would totally screw things up and drag the rest down with them if the federal government just stepped out of the way tomorrow.
Libertarians are a type of anarchist as well, but I strongly disagree with their focus, because it leads to bad government. You want to know what "bad government" is? Here it is in a nutshell:
Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defence of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.
Obviously not every resume, but then again, I wouldn't work for anyone who had a problem with my politics, and I get enough offers that I can pick and choose, so I am not impacted by my political speech being public and non-anonymous. People are just as likely to read what I wrote and find it a reason to hire me as they are to find it a reason not to. There are lefty hippie businesses out there and they certainly wouldn't hire a teabagger.
You are right, of course, about the polarization and I do realize that Republicans and even Tea Partiers are not monsters bent on destroying the country. I'm just immensely frustrated with the level of dishonest, hate filled propaganda coming from the right wing media machine and I don't see any equivalent on the left. Fox News is whipping people into a violent, fear-fueled frenzy, telling them that the enemies of America have already carried out a coup. In the "war" that they are telling the base they are in, any tactic is acceptable, even murdering the "traitors." And we have seen right wingers driven to violence by the media, like that fellow who tried to attack the little non-profit that no one would ever have even heard of if Glenn Beck hadn't decided to vilify them.
Nothing like that call to violence has ever come out of the left wing media.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow. Okay, thanks for being honest.
Did you read my link? The Bush DOJ downgraded the case to a civil case because there was not enough evidence, before Obama was sworn in. That is an objective fact. You can dispute it, but the evidence it overwhelming, I mean, its a historical fact, just pretending it isn't won't make it go away.
I certainly think there was wrongdoing in the LMSD case. Personally, I think they should have been prosecuted, and I hope that they lose the civil case. But thinking the FBI is protecting some employee of a school district is so far outside of rationality, it beggars the imagination how a presumably grown human being could make that claim with a straight face.
I don't think any sort of court ruling in this case could hurt the FBI's ability to spy. I think the history of the FBI going after people who do spy illegally proves this point.
You may find this article helpful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_imaging
Human factor? It's usually the dog who rats me out. Damn dog can't keep his fool snout shut. Take last week, he comes out chewing on some new Manolo Blahniks slathered in caviar and the wife says, "Where did you get those? Are you guys running numbers again?" and the dog is like, "Haha, running numbers? That's so last week, we're running an Internet porn site now!" and I'm like "dog... shut up dog. Ixnay on the ornpay, dog" but he's a dog, all he hears is "dog blah blah blah dog blah blah." Damn dog.
I'd bet that you could use that many megapixels to seriously boost dynamic range by averaging several adjacent pixels into one.
How could it affect their own efforts? They are the freaking FBI, not the Lower Marion School district. It's their job to spy, when given authorization. Prosecuting the LMSB could not in any way affect their ability to spy themselves. You really think the FBI is cool with just any old government employee spying? That's the FBI's turf!
Read the independent investigation. There was not enough evidence of wrongdoing to prosecute. The school district got consent from the parents when they lent out the computers.
HAhaha, the black panthers? Intimidating white voters? Was anyone scared away? No. Two big black guys standing outside a polling place may scare the piss out of you but that doesn't make what they were doing illegal.
Besides, it was the Bush DOJ that dropped the case. Oopsie! That kinda blows your argument out of the water, now doesn't it, winger?
If you read the independent investigation I'd linked to, you would understand why your characterization of the case is ludicrous. Of course what was done was morally wrong, and the school district will likely lose the civil case, but they did not actually break the law because they obtained consent when they loaned the computers. Oh, shucks, your argument is once again shown to be full of holes. Better luck next time.
You and I seem to be the only ones who get the reference. Now I feel old.
Nice anti government rant. Too bad the facts don't fit. Here's the report from the independent investigation. http://www.lmsd.org/documents/news/100503_ballard_spahr_report.pdf The FBI investigated the case and found there was not enough evidence to convict anyone of criminal charges. Are you claiming the FBI is in cahoots with the Lower Marion School District? Are you honestly saying the FBI will not prosecute low level government employees because the FBI feels it is the right of any government employee to spy on citizens? Put down the Kool-Aid and take off the tinfoil hat.
Last millennium called, it wants it's critique of OSS back. It also wants its snowclones back, but it said I could use them this one last time because it's for a good cause.
Microsoft has been doing this once or twice a year since somewhere around 2003. Just wait, the latest turncoat from the open source community to get hired up for whatever craptastic OSS lab Microsoft is setting up this week as part of its never-ending propaganda campaign will come on here and want us all to submit questions, to which he will give misleading non-answers, just so the vile pigs at Redmond can go "We're trying to engage the community!"
As in, "Redmond expects that every developer will do his duty" and "Engage the community more closely."
There should be a detective show called "Johnny Monkey," because every week you could have a guy say "I ain't gonna get caught by no MONKEY," but then he would, and I don't think I'd ever get tired of that.
"We're going to Disney Land!" - NMAP Team
One thing developers like is to be tricked. For instance, I was going to take Fyodor to Disneyland, but instead I drove him to an old burned-out warehouse. “Oh, no,” I said, “Disneyland burned down.” He cried and cried, but I think that deep down he thought it was a pretty good joke. I started to drive over to the real Disneyland, but it was getting pretty late.
OSX LEOPARD: Ah yeah, I could do that, sir yes, I suppose I could. What I was going to do was ask him if he could ... you know, just give me minesweeper during the week, you know, something playable, but not Steam, which is a pain in the arse to be quite blunt, sir, excuse my French but ...
BRIAN: Did you say -- OSX Leopard? ... sixteen years behind the bell, and proud of it, thank you sir.
OSX LEOPARD: That's right, sir. (he salutes)
BRIAN: What happened?
OSX LEOPARD: I was cured, sir.
BRIAN: Cured?
OSX LEOPARD: Yes sir, a bloody miracle, sir. Bless you.
BRIAN: Who cured you?
OSX LEOPARD: Jobs did. I was hopping along, when suddenly he comes and cures me. One minute I'm a Leopard with no games, next moment me productivity's gone. Not so much as a by your leave.
And more importantly, how can you kill that which has no life?
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
But I was actually referring to a South park episode
And what drug are you on, exactly?? The drug war does NOT help the addict what so ever. The drug war helps maintain the government as the top dealer of all drugs.
Thus, the quotes around the word "help." Helping the addicts is the justification used, and if that justification works for the drug war (obviously, I don't think it does) then it should work for any other addiction as well. If we "help" one type of addict, we should help them all.
Especially those addicted to material consumption and consumerism. Why, we allow "pushers" to air advertisements that have been proven to "force" people to desire and purchase things they wouldn't have spent money on otherwise. We need to help these poor addicts of consumerism.
But of course, that would ruin our economy, now wouldn't it? You see, we have these puritanical ideals ingrained into our culture. Excess is bad. Taking too much, using too much, these are bad according to deep seated tenants of our culture. But our economy requires excess consumption, and so we excuse that type of addiction, but our puritanical ideals demand we punish excess consumption, and so we define certain types of consumption as automatically excessive and punish those in lieu of punishing all excess.
With our country's "War" on drugs, we have a society which perpetuates the idea that addiction is the fault of the dealer. The drug war is socialism for cops and addicts, it takes money from the general population and uses it to "help" a small class of people who are prone to addiction or can't find employment except as a state thug. If drug addicts can get this socialist "help,"why not other addicts? If drug dealers are to blame for addiction, why not video game publishers?
Much like this lawsuit, you're running into a chicken and egg problem...
Do you have no life because you post on Slashdot?
Or do you post on Slashdot because you have no life?
Ah, the great philosophical questions of our times...
And more importantly, how can you kill that which has no life?
So? My point was that it has never inconvenienced me, not that it never happened. I may have lost potential jobs due to the nefarious actions of invisible pink unicorns, too. You won't see me worrying about either one.
In the Soviet Union, as with most "people's revolutions" the rich corrupted the process very early on. Where brutality is required to win the revolution, the brutal lead the resulting nation.
I will admit that I am caught on the horns of dilemma regarding limited government. On the one hand, I'm actually an anarchist. Which doesn't mean what you think it means: an-archy means "no rulers" not "no government" which would be "anocracy," right? Well, at heart I want limited government, and state's rights. But I see too many states who would totally screw things up and drag the rest down with them if the federal government just stepped out of the way tomorrow.
Libertarians are a type of anarchist as well, but I strongly disagree with their focus, because it leads to bad government. You want to know what "bad government" is? Here it is in a nutshell:
Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defence of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.
--Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, Book 5
Obviously not every resume, but then again, I wouldn't work for anyone who had a problem with my politics, and I get enough offers that I can pick and choose, so I am not impacted by my political speech being public and non-anonymous. People are just as likely to read what I wrote and find it a reason to hire me as they are to find it a reason not to. There are lefty hippie businesses out there and they certainly wouldn't hire a teabagger.
You are right, of course, about the polarization and I do realize that Republicans and even Tea Partiers are not monsters bent on destroying the country. I'm just immensely frustrated with the level of dishonest, hate filled propaganda coming from the right wing media machine and I don't see any equivalent on the left. Fox News is whipping people into a violent, fear-fueled frenzy, telling them that the enemies of America have already carried out a coup. In the "war" that they are telling the base they are in, any tactic is acceptable, even murdering the "traitors." And we have seen right wingers driven to violence by the media, like that fellow who tried to attack the little non-profit that no one would ever have even heard of if Glenn Beck hadn't decided to vilify them.
Nothing like that call to violence has ever come out of the left wing media.
Turn around.