But destroying him also makes people get pissed off, and creates a martyr. Its just one more step in the direction of a revolution, at least in the US. It may not be on the level of the Hippies, but there are definitely revolutionary ideals coming out of the wood works more frequently these days. Look at the Tea Party. I hate them, but they are calling for a drastic reshaping of government due to various problems boiling up in government. Killing Assange will only give more ammunition and recruits to Pirate Parties and other fringe groups.
He also pissed off quite a few dictators and near-despots in his life. I understand his ultimate goal was to do something meaningful for space exploration, but he did screw over some powerful people and then GTFO of there.
What is legal is not necessarily what is right. Not to mention, your trash is considered public property so it can be searched at will by police or other investigators or even your neighbor, so that is an invalid point. I don't understand why we need permission from our government to do anything. They should need permission from us. By holding their actions secret, they jeopardize the very freedoms and the still_better_than_yours government you are shouting about on your soap box. Julian Assange may be a twat, and irresponsible with certain information, but our government is getting progressively more controlling and invasive in its peoples lives. Not to mention, special interests are hijacking our government from us. Or do you think its cool that Goldman Sachs, due to their government lackeys, got to buy loans at 70 percent what they are worth with a guarantee from the government that they would be compensated the whole 100 percent of the loan if it went default? They positioned themselves in government and guaranteed 30 percent profit at taxpayer expense. That is corruption and it is absolutely rampant in the US government.
Well, I would agree that some things are left better secret, but you should never hide your motives from the people you govern. Its very dangerous for us to allow our government to hide things from us. Its already proven to cause problems in history and recently.
They will paint him as a egotist, rapist, deviant and then people will think he was only after fame in an irresponsible "ungodly" way. I have no doubt the woman he supposedly "raped" will fabricate stories of sodomy and/or forced entry because she will get book deals and maybe some under the table reward. It basically will make the majority of the world think Mr. Assange is completely non-credible and leave a minority of people that think it was all a conspiracy. You realize that most people get their news from biased and controlled sources, and they believe everything these sources tell them. Doesn't matter if they are democrat or republican.
Exactly, next thing you know, tobacco companies will sue researchers and their publishers for violating their intellectual property if they expose that a certain brand of cigarettes has more benzene in it than another brand.
Government is completely different. If a government official wants to speak off the record to another government official, then your argument applies. However these are records that are kept of official diplomatic actions which may or may not affect the American people. We have a right to see them. A transparent government is absolutely necessary to avoid an outright police state.
They can't kill him. Conspiracy theories would fly out of control and people would genuinely believe he was killed by government. They will just paint him as a rapist and put him in prison for 10 or more years. Meanwhile the media will totally destroy his credibility by releasing personal information at strategic times.
Assange is a total twat, and it boggles my mind how he can do such a service to humanity with leaking of sensitive information that actually ends up showing whats really going on in government. When did government get the authority to keep its activities from the people? After all, the people are what made government.
Wait to generalize all of us. You are an ass hat. I guess its popular to hate America, but the world population that hates American people are a bunch of twats. Thats no different than me saying "African people are all smelly and they are stupid too, they deserve malaria outbreaks". There is a subset of us that really do not like what is happening and we vote and campaign against it, but nothing happens because people in power have 1. Made our education system a joke (so people do not have a brain to vote smart) 2. Stolen all of the money (and loaned it back to us) 3. Monopolized important parts of the economy 4. Made the US a police state with a perpetual war. Its the failure of our grandparents that we are paying for right now. Go eat shit.
To be fair, the US is a lot larger than most other countries with the infrastructure you speak of. However, that aside I agree with most of what you said. Its amazing that Republican people (like the pisswater guzzlers you speak of) continue to vote for politicians who don't give a shit about them and support/oppose measures that would actually benefit them the most. I think one major problem is the Baby boomers like my grandmother. She continues to believe this crap spouted out by Fox news and Glenn Beck, and supports anything Republicans say to her detriment. This will sound really bad, but I will rejoice the day the last Baby boomer is dead as they seem to be causing the majority of the problems these days, as they are a large voting population and they also are our politicians many times. I love my grandmother but god she is stupid when it comes to politics.
Well, revolutions were fought over these ideas, most turned out crappy, but one turned out pretty awesome for about 200 years. Thats the US. We used to have a lower disparity in wealth. There used to be a middle class that could buy homes with savings. Now there is only super rich, rich and a bunch of lower middle class to poor people. Since everyone is either like you or in a position of power nothing gets done about it. The real problem is people that gave up on achieving ideals.
If you are actually in process of robbing a bank, i.e. you have a gun to the tellers head and already demanded money from them, and you decide not to go through with it, you still attempted to rob the bank. If you already shot yourself in the head playing russian roulette and regretted it, then its too late because you already shot yourself in the head. If you already adopted the dog and had it in your house, then its too late because you already took the dog. Your analogies are stupid.
Yes. Spain may have went bankrupt, but the rest of the world flourished due to corn, potatoes, tobacco, etc. They accidentally stumbled upon a grand idea. Do something for humanity rather than yourself, as you wont be around forever.
No problem. My point was that some laws shouldn't be touched by modern developments. I.e. the right to bear arms. There are innumerable reasons to own a weapon to defend yourself beyond the fact that supermarkets have beef steaks. Likewise, this judge arbitrarily rules that a law protecting "innocent infringers" is no longer valid just because the internet was developed. It may make reproduction of the "infringed" material quicker, just like a bomb dropped on your head will kill you quicker than a.22 to the leg, but it doesn't mean that the original purpose of the law should not apply.
Im not blaming stock splits, I am pointing out a falsehood in the parent argument. You cannot compare Google and Microsoft stock without considering stock splits. This individual was saying "LOLZ, Google rulez because their stock is at 555.65!! Microsoft sukz because their stock is at 25.55". You are injecting arguments into my statements that don't exist.
default judgments can be lowered to $3.75 and half a bottle of Listerine".
No. I do not think rich people are stupid, and I do not think all of them lack empathy. I think most of them are ill equipped to make decisions for a populace composed of variable classes. Financial punishment is extremely relative. To me, 1000 dollars is a lot of money and would significantly impact my ability to provide for my family, to a hobo, half a bottle of Listerine is a lot of money. To someone making 200000 a year, 1000 dollars and half a bottle of Listerine may as well be a handful of pennies. They cannot be objective. Financial punishment is not a good way to punish in this case.
Slashdot Mirror
But destroying him also makes people get pissed off, and creates a martyr. Its just one more step in the direction of a revolution, at least in the US. It may not be on the level of the Hippies, but there are definitely revolutionary ideals coming out of the wood works more frequently these days. Look at the Tea Party. I hate them, but they are calling for a drastic reshaping of government due to various problems boiling up in government. Killing Assange will only give more ammunition and recruits to Pirate Parties and other fringe groups.
He also pissed off quite a few dictators and near-despots in his life. I understand his ultimate goal was to do something meaningful for space exploration, but he did screw over some powerful people and then GTFO of there.
What is legal is not necessarily what is right. Not to mention, your trash is considered public property so it can be searched at will by police or other investigators or even your neighbor, so that is an invalid point. I don't understand why we need permission from our government to do anything. They should need permission from us. By holding their actions secret, they jeopardize the very freedoms and the still_better_than_yours government you are shouting about on your soap box. Julian Assange may be a twat, and irresponsible with certain information, but our government is getting progressively more controlling and invasive in its peoples lives. Not to mention, special interests are hijacking our government from us. Or do you think its cool that Goldman Sachs, due to their government lackeys, got to buy loans at 70 percent what they are worth with a guarantee from the government that they would be compensated the whole 100 percent of the loan if it went default? They positioned themselves in government and guaranteed 30 percent profit at taxpayer expense. That is corruption and it is absolutely rampant in the US government.
Well, I would agree that some things are left better secret, but you should never hide your motives from the people you govern. Its very dangerous for us to allow our government to hide things from us. Its already proven to cause problems in history and recently.
They will paint him as a egotist, rapist, deviant and then people will think he was only after fame in an irresponsible "ungodly" way. I have no doubt the woman he supposedly "raped" will fabricate stories of sodomy and/or forced entry because she will get book deals and maybe some under the table reward. It basically will make the majority of the world think Mr. Assange is completely non-credible and leave a minority of people that think it was all a conspiracy. You realize that most people get their news from biased and controlled sources, and they believe everything these sources tell them. Doesn't matter if they are democrat or republican.
Exactly, next thing you know, tobacco companies will sue researchers and their publishers for violating their intellectual property if they expose that a certain brand of cigarettes has more benzene in it than another brand.
Government is completely different. If a government official wants to speak off the record to another government official, then your argument applies. However these are records that are kept of official diplomatic actions which may or may not affect the American people. We have a right to see them. A transparent government is absolutely necessary to avoid an outright police state.
They can't kill him. Conspiracy theories would fly out of control and people would genuinely believe he was killed by government. They will just paint him as a rapist and put him in prison for 10 or more years. Meanwhile the media will totally destroy his credibility by releasing personal information at strategic times.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochlocracy
I have a problem with every one of the things you said.
Legalize it.... Don't criticize it....
Assange is a total twat, and it boggles my mind how he can do such a service to humanity with leaking of sensitive information that actually ends up showing whats really going on in government. When did government get the authority to keep its activities from the people? After all, the people are what made government.
Wait to generalize all of us. You are an ass hat. I guess its popular to hate America, but the world population that hates American people are a bunch of twats. Thats no different than me saying "African people are all smelly and they are stupid too, they deserve malaria outbreaks". There is a subset of us that really do not like what is happening and we vote and campaign against it, but nothing happens because people in power have 1. Made our education system a joke (so people do not have a brain to vote smart) 2. Stolen all of the money (and loaned it back to us) 3. Monopolized important parts of the economy 4. Made the US a police state with a perpetual war. Its the failure of our grandparents that we are paying for right now. Go eat shit.
To be fair, the US is a lot larger than most other countries with the infrastructure you speak of. However, that aside I agree with most of what you said. Its amazing that Republican people (like the pisswater guzzlers you speak of) continue to vote for politicians who don't give a shit about them and support/oppose measures that would actually benefit them the most. I think one major problem is the Baby boomers like my grandmother. She continues to believe this crap spouted out by Fox news and Glenn Beck, and supports anything Republicans say to her detriment. This will sound really bad, but I will rejoice the day the last Baby boomer is dead as they seem to be causing the majority of the problems these days, as they are a large voting population and they also are our politicians many times. I love my grandmother but god she is stupid when it comes to politics.
Well, revolutions were fought over these ideas, most turned out crappy, but one turned out pretty awesome for about 200 years. Thats the US. We used to have a lower disparity in wealth. There used to be a middle class that could buy homes with savings. Now there is only super rich, rich and a bunch of lower middle class to poor people. Since everyone is either like you or in a position of power nothing gets done about it. The real problem is people that gave up on achieving ideals.
Seems to work for energy and phone companies who share the same cables.
Yes.
If you are actually in process of robbing a bank, i.e. you have a gun to the tellers head and already demanded money from them, and you decide not to go through with it, you still attempted to rob the bank. If you already shot yourself in the head playing russian roulette and regretted it, then its too late because you already shot yourself in the head. If you already adopted the dog and had it in your house, then its too late because you already took the dog. Your analogies are stupid.
Yes. Empathy means acknowledging how you routinely screw people over.
Yes. Spain may have went bankrupt, but the rest of the world flourished due to corn, potatoes, tobacco, etc. They accidentally stumbled upon a grand idea. Do something for humanity rather than yourself, as you wont be around forever.
No problem. My point was that some laws shouldn't be touched by modern developments. I.e. the right to bear arms. There are innumerable reasons to own a weapon to defend yourself beyond the fact that supermarkets have beef steaks. Likewise, this judge arbitrarily rules that a law protecting "innocent infringers" is no longer valid just because the internet was developed. It may make reproduction of the "infringed" material quicker, just like a bomb dropped on your head will kill you quicker than a .22 to the leg, but it doesn't mean that the original purpose of the law should not apply.
Yes. Its an attempt at discrediting a douche bag.
Haha. Nice try bozo. Your response was akin to a juvenile class clown's attempt at being the popular one in his science class.
Im not blaming stock splits, I am pointing out a falsehood in the parent argument. You cannot compare Google and Microsoft stock without considering stock splits. This individual was saying "LOLZ, Google rulez because their stock is at 555.65!! Microsoft sukz because their stock is at 25.55". You are injecting arguments into my statements that don't exist.
default judgments can be lowered to $3.75 and half a bottle of Listerine".
No. I do not think rich people are stupid, and I do not think all of them lack empathy. I think most of them are ill equipped to make decisions for a populace composed of variable classes. Financial punishment is extremely relative. To me, 1000 dollars is a lot of money and would significantly impact my ability to provide for my family, to a hobo, half a bottle of Listerine is a lot of money. To someone making 200000 a year, 1000 dollars and half a bottle of Listerine may as well be a handful of pennies. They cannot be objective. Financial punishment is not a good way to punish in this case.