I had a personal experience involving a company that had to give their workers special "bonuses" during every crunch time or they would just basically lay down on the job.
Sounds fair to me. Why should they work extra hard to reach your deadline if they're not going to get any extra benefit from meeting the deadline? Not everyone sells their soul to their employer like we have to in America, nor should they. If you don't like it, plan better so that there is no crunch time.
All those words and you didn't answer a simple technical question. We can agree that it's illegal for the NSA to read the communications of an American citizen, even an American citizen abroad. When the NSA is filtering internet traffic, how does it know which packets to discard without reading them first?
Claiming that you can listen to foreigners without also listening to Americans is so technically implausible it's ludicrous on its face.
Where did I make that claim?
When you claimed that 1) it was illegal for the NSA to listen to the communications of American citizens. and 2) that the NSA obeyed the law. From that, we can deduce that the NSA does not listen to the communications of American citizens. But we know that the NSA does listen to the communications of foreigners.
Therefore simple logic tells us that the NSA has a magical device that can distinguish the nationality of the sender of packets without reading them. That, or we are being lied to. Which is it?
We know far more, in far more detail, and far more quickly, about the activities of government than at any other time in our nation's history, and in the history of humanity, and that trend is not reversing. Since I know you're a thoughtful and intelligent person, I am literally stunned and flabbergasted that you cannot see this.
Which is a perfect example of how the rich and powerful live by a different set of laws. If I put a root kit on Sony's computer, you'd better believe I'd have felony charges filed against me. If Sony puts a root kit on my computer, all they have to do is pay off some state AGs.
Right now, this very second, government and law enforcement have all sorts of powers they can abuse
Indeed. We should minimize those powers where we can, and apply as much oversight as possible where we can't.
At the same time, intelligence operations require secrecy in order to be successful. Sun Tzu said this millennia ago,
Secrecy is an effective tactic against the American people, as well as foreign enemies. Allowing secrecy leaves you vulnerable to the enemy within, who is always the more dangerous enemy.
Ask yourself if it really makes sense that hundreds, if not thousands, of professional civilian and military members of our government have so little regard for their fellow citizens that they are systematically violating both the letter and spirit of law and the Constitution, not just once or twice or a handful of times, but every single day, with respect to every single American
Four words: The War On Drugs.
Yes, it is extremely plausible that not just thousands, but tens or hundreds of thousands are complicit in a wide spread violation of the Constitution. It's been occuring in the open for decades, why would I believe it's not happening in secret?
Basically what you're saying is, you'd prefer to believe, without proof, allegations that the NSA is illegally dragnet-spying on ALL Americans,
As a technical matter, how does the wiretap apparatus distinguish American packets from foreign packets without reading the American packets?
Claiming that you can listen to foreigners without also listening to Americans is so technically implausible it's ludicrous on its face.
And we exist in a political culture that distrusts two things most of all: power and secrecy.
That you can even claim this with a straight face is proof that you are completely disingenouous. We have the most powerful, and most secretive government the United States has ever had. And there is ZERO political momentum in the other direction.
If it came down to the government ordering the US military to "occupy" US cities and towns, round people up into camps, and basically carry out a "government takeover" and provide armed pacification and suppression against civilians, they would refuse, arrest the ones issuing the orders, and even launch an assault on government-loyalist positions if need be if things were that bad.
Unless the citizens in question were Japanese, or Arab or Persian in the modern case.
People who join the military aren't critical thinkers. Either they don't realize that they are nothing more than a tool for corporate power, or they don't care. Otherwise they wouldn't have joined the military. Why would they suddenly get a clue?
Microsoft is abusing its monopoly in desktop operating systems to create barriers to entry for other operating systems. The boring technical detail of how it's done is irrelevant.
The wifi routers and Google's hotspot were also privately owned. In both cases we're talking about private entities intercepting EM radiation that is public, but not intended for that entity. Either both are OK or neither is OK. Allowing one and not the other is an indefensible double standard.
Slashdot Mirror
Ron Paul doesn't care about civil liberties. He just thinks civil liberties should be violated at the state, not federal, level.
Of course it is. Joss Whedon is terrible.
And, so? Doesn't Iran have the right to enrich its own fuel? Even if it's just a matter of national pride?
He is not a ravaging lunatic or a islamist madman, he's just a populist. That's all there is.
Those are not mutually exclusive characterizations.
Why doesn't Iran have the right to generate their own nuclear power? What makes Iran any more a "rogue state" than the US?
I had a personal experience involving a company that had to give their workers special "bonuses" during every crunch time or they would just basically lay down on the job.
Sounds fair to me. Why should they work extra hard to reach your deadline if they're not going to get any extra benefit from meeting the deadline? Not everyone sells their soul to their employer like we have to in America, nor should they. If you don't like it, plan better so that there is no crunch time.
All those words and you didn't answer a simple technical question. We can agree that it's illegal for the NSA to read the communications of an American citizen, even an American citizen abroad. When the NSA is filtering internet traffic, how does it know which packets to discard without reading them first?
When you claimed that 1) it was illegal for the NSA to listen to the communications of American citizens. and 2) that the NSA obeyed the law. From that, we can deduce that the NSA does not listen to the communications of American citizens. But we know that the NSA does listen to the communications of foreigners.
Therefore simple logic tells us that the NSA has a magical device that can distinguish the nationality of the sender of packets without reading them. That, or we are being lied to. Which is it?
Yeah, this guy would tend to agree with you.
So, how many people have retweeted the tweet that got this guys account banned? How many of them have been banned?
It wasn't boring. It was the goofiest shit I've seen in my life, but it wasn't boring.
I wouldn't know, I don't have an account.
If you don't have javascript, you're a bot?
Play retro games instead. Cheaper, less bullshit, and just as fun. Arguably more so.
Play King's Bounty instead. Much, much better game.
Which is a perfect example of how the rich and powerful live by a different set of laws. If I put a root kit on Sony's computer, you'd better believe I'd have felony charges filed against me. If Sony puts a root kit on my computer, all they have to do is pay off some state AGs.
Don't car dealers keep a copy of the code necessary to recreate your key in a database accessible by VIN?
Right now, this very second, government and law enforcement have all sorts of powers they can abuse
Indeed. We should minimize those powers where we can, and apply as much oversight as possible where we can't.
At the same time, intelligence operations require secrecy in order to be successful. Sun Tzu said this millennia ago,
Secrecy is an effective tactic against the American people, as well as foreign enemies. Allowing secrecy leaves you vulnerable to the enemy within, who is always the more dangerous enemy.
Ask yourself if it really makes sense that hundreds, if not thousands, of professional civilian and military members of our government have so little regard for their fellow citizens that they are systematically violating both the letter and spirit of law and the Constitution, not just once or twice or a handful of times, but every single day, with respect to every single American
Four words: The War On Drugs.
Yes, it is extremely plausible that not just thousands, but tens or hundreds of thousands are complicit in a wide spread violation of the Constitution. It's been occuring in the open for decades, why would I believe it's not happening in secret?
Basically what you're saying is, you'd prefer to believe, without proof, allegations that the NSA is illegally dragnet-spying on ALL Americans,
As a technical matter, how does the wiretap apparatus distinguish American packets from foreign packets without reading the American packets?
Claiming that you can listen to foreigners without also listening to Americans is so technically implausible it's ludicrous on its face.
And we exist in a political culture that distrusts two things most of all: power and secrecy.
That you can even claim this with a straight face is proof that you are completely disingenouous. We have the most powerful, and most secretive government the United States has ever had. And there is ZERO political momentum in the other direction.
If it came down to the government ordering the US military to "occupy" US cities and towns, round people up into camps, and basically carry out a "government takeover" and provide armed pacification and suppression against civilians, they would refuse, arrest the ones issuing the orders, and even launch an assault on government-loyalist positions if need be if things were that bad.
Unless the citizens in question were Japanese, or Arab or Persian in the modern case.
People who join the military aren't critical thinkers. Either they don't realize that they are nothing more than a tool for corporate power, or they don't care. Otherwise they wouldn't have joined the military. Why would they suddenly get a clue?
A shotgun is also a much better home defense weapon than a pistol because bird shot would not endanger people in an adjacent room.
Bird shot would barely endanger a 80 year old man shot in the face at close range.
Aww. Poor Mark Zuckerberg has to pay taxes.
Microsoft is abusing its monopoly in desktop operating systems to create barriers to entry for other operating systems. The boring technical detail of how it's done is irrelevant.
He's already sold over a billion dollars worth of Facebook stock. Zuckerberg is a billionaire in cash money.
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Why should it be legal to intercept 600nM photons but not 125mM photons? It's the same damn thing.
Zuckerberg is a billionaire. He has no problems worth worrying about. If he doesn't like what he's doing, he can quit and buy a tropical island.
The wifi routers and Google's hotspot were also privately owned. In both cases we're talking about private entities intercepting EM radiation that is public, but not intended for that entity. Either both are OK or neither is OK. Allowing one and not the other is an indefensible double standard.