Welcome to the wonderful world of Soviet indoctrination. The system is flawless. The problem is the human in the system. We need to eliminate the problem.
"We want to find out the full name of who is at fault -- and we will."
Reminds me of the old joke of Putin allegedly saying "If we had search WMDs in Iraq, we would have found some!"
Like every good programmer knows, if you're searching for something, put one of the thing you search at the end of your dataset yourself so your program terminates correctly.
That's when you have to "mod" it yourself and simply ignore it, and discuss matters with others who have something more worthwhile to say. I stopped trying to respond to everyone long ago. Especially if it dissolves into meaningless drivel and ad-hominem attacks it's simply not worth my time.
I have no idea why I have to think about the two preppers where one describes in minute detail what he's going to stockpile and how he's going to build his own bunker and whatnot while the other one said when asked what he's gonna prepare: "A shotgun. And his address".
The problem with having something someone else does not is to keep it. Especially if the one not having it is facing the choice of getting it or dying trying. Having no alternative than taking it from you makes one very motivated killer and you a very hard to defend target.
Where I live, job perks start way above this. The four things you mention are mandatory. Just try to deprive your workers of paycheck, insurance, bathrooms or natural light and you will see your office shut down.
Modded troll doesn't mean gone, that's the whole point I was trying to make. Yes, someone with mod points might not like your opinion but it will still prevail and people who don't just go for the karma-whoring +5 comments (which are actually the people I'm interested in reading my comments) will still read it.
It's not a popularity contest. I don't have to convince anyone, and that's actually not really my goal. My goal is to state my opinion and get opinions to it from others. Feedback. Is what I say valid or is it bullshit? I can't change anyone but myself, so my goal is to be the best me that I can possibly be.
Pretty much this, yes. I had a similar discussion with my father recently that ended in "Dad? I'm responsible for the IT-security of a large international corporation, my job literally is to know IT-security. You decide to get your security information from a journalist whose job it is to keep you sitting through the ad block to hear the rest of his drivel. Ponder for a moment who you think knows more about how to secure your damn computer."
And him storming out with a "I was just saying, jeesh, can't I say anything anymore!"
It doesn't matter whether your beard starts turning grey, for your dad, you're still the little boy. Forever.
What power? Since you can only moderate in the way the owner of the board wants, there is no power.
That kind of power is like riding a raging bull. Sure, everyone's afraid and runs from you, but in the end, nobody gives a shit about you. Everyone's running from the bull.
And it's also the bull that says where you're going.
Personally, I think that many people prefer to live in an echo chamber where they see their own views reflected by those around them. That can be the case in boards and forums where those with conflicting opinions (conflicting with those of board ops) can easily be eliminated. Finding unbiased boards that actually allow a sensible exchange of diverging ideas has become rare. On many of the more insane ones, "diverging idea" already means "didn't drink the whole jug of kool-aid alone".
And that's sad. I mean, let's be honest here, we often found ourselves on the opposite ends of opinions. And yes, I do enjoy it. I already know my opinion, I don't need anyone else to have the same. That doesn't help me, it's great to feel supported, but in the end, it's not going to allow me to see a different angle. And I have to verify my view against that presented by another one. That's not always comfortable, because it just might give one input one didn't consider when forming an opinion.
But it sure leads to a better view of the whole picture.
And yes, that also means dealing with fringe views like religious nuts or nazis. Although, I have to admit, that's more a guilty pleasure of mine rather than trying to get sensible input, because usually what I take from a conversation with one of them is "Well, I might not have everything right. But at least I'm not THAT wrong."
It's a bit like watching afternoon TV with dysfunctional families.
There is no such thing as a "government only" backdoor. At the very least, it's not YOUR government-only for long. Backdoors allowing decryption of data are the holy grail of espionage. You think actors like North Korea would have any qualms of hijacking your wife and kids if you're holder of such a key to get you to hand it over? Not that they survive, mind you, you're killed alongside them but the key is in the hands of NKor afterwards. And that key is the key to your companies' trade secrets, their R&D, their development and yes, your cutting edge weapon technology.
Aside of that direct damage to your economy, there's the indirect one. Because no company on this planet will store their data with you. They'll send that data abroad. If need be, to Iran or even China, if that's the last place where it's safe from your laws. You are essentially destroying your data storage industry with such a law.
And in the end, you don't even accomplish anything with it. Because what will you get. A few felons with some trivial charges you can tack onto them. You will catch exactly zero terrorists with it. As soon as this becomes law, they will simply shift to the next variant of hiding from you. They have one asset you do not have: Manpower. They have access to cheap manpower. If everything fails, you'll see them use written messages transported via sneakernet again.
I know it's tempting to think that this is the way ahead. But at best it's useless. At worst, and way more likely, it's an economic disaster.
They are effective as long as there is something alive that keeps the carbon bound. For this to work, you have to keep that rainforest alive actually, something that we also don't really have a good track record of.
C'mon, you know the old joke. Press conference in the war room:
Speaker: We're gonna kill 100,000 Iraqi and two dentists. Journalist: Question: Why the two dentists? Speaker (to aide): See? Told you nobody's gonna ask about the Iraqi.
MCA was successful with AIX but it failed miserably in the PC market due to licensing and a similar EISA bus being introduced by competition that wasn't weighed down with patents and licensing fees.
IBM tried to regain control over the PC market but failed, simply because by the time they tried, they were about as well liked as MS is today, seen as an overbearing control freak trying to dictate what you can and cannot do with the systems they sell you.
OPEN architecture? Yes, with ISA, when they thought nobody would come and copy their stuff, but you might want to read up on MCA. And how IBM got punched on the nose for it.
One of the key features of usenet was exactly the absence of moderation. You could moderate (via killfile) if you so please, but you could choose yourself to do so, nobody forced it upon you.
Or with the words of another comedian "The CSU wants to kick everyone out that can't speak proper German? Fuck, where are all the Bavarians gonna go? And what about the CSU, there's asylum for war refugees but what country grants asylum to people fleeing from intelligence?"
The difference is that on Slashdot, all you really do is mod them down. You can still read all the app apps and all the GNAA, not to mention the cosmonaut Golden Girls.
No idea why anyone would, but you can.
The information is still there. That's the difference.
Slashdot Mirror
Welcome to the wonderful world of Soviet indoctrination. The system is flawless. The problem is the human in the system. We need to eliminate the problem.
"We want to find out the full name of who is at fault -- and we will."
Reminds me of the old joke of Putin allegedly saying "If we had search WMDs in Iraq, we would have found some!"
Like every good programmer knows, if you're searching for something, put one of the thing you search at the end of your dataset yourself so your program terminates correctly.
That's when you have to "mod" it yourself and simply ignore it, and discuss matters with others who have something more worthwhile to say. I stopped trying to respond to everyone long ago. Especially if it dissolves into meaningless drivel and ad-hominem attacks it's simply not worth my time.
I have no idea why I have to think about the two preppers where one describes in minute detail what he's going to stockpile and how he's going to build his own bunker and whatnot while the other one said when asked what he's gonna prepare: "A shotgun. And his address".
The problem with having something someone else does not is to keep it. Especially if the one not having it is facing the choice of getting it or dying trying. Having no alternative than taking it from you makes one very motivated killer and you a very hard to defend target.
Could you please hurry, I got the cement already mixed to close the hole you're about to leave there.
Where I live, job perks start way above this. The four things you mention are mandatory. Just try to deprive your workers of paycheck, insurance, bathrooms or natural light and you will see your office shut down.
Modded troll doesn't mean gone, that's the whole point I was trying to make. Yes, someone with mod points might not like your opinion but it will still prevail and people who don't just go for the karma-whoring +5 comments (which are actually the people I'm interested in reading my comments) will still read it.
It's not a popularity contest. I don't have to convince anyone, and that's actually not really my goal. My goal is to state my opinion and get opinions to it from others. Feedback. Is what I say valid or is it bullshit? I can't change anyone but myself, so my goal is to be the best me that I can possibly be.
It's fine when government and military do it.
Pretty much this, yes. I had a similar discussion with my father recently that ended in "Dad? I'm responsible for the IT-security of a large international corporation, my job literally is to know IT-security. You decide to get your security information from a journalist whose job it is to keep you sitting through the ad block to hear the rest of his drivel. Ponder for a moment who you think knows more about how to secure your damn computer."
And him storming out with a "I was just saying, jeesh, can't I say anything anymore!"
It doesn't matter whether your beard starts turning grey, for your dad, you're still the little boy. Forever.
What power? Since you can only moderate in the way the owner of the board wants, there is no power.
That kind of power is like riding a raging bull. Sure, everyone's afraid and runs from you, but in the end, nobody gives a shit about you. Everyone's running from the bull.
And it's also the bull that says where you're going.
Personally, I think that many people prefer to live in an echo chamber where they see their own views reflected by those around them. That can be the case in boards and forums where those with conflicting opinions (conflicting with those of board ops) can easily be eliminated. Finding unbiased boards that actually allow a sensible exchange of diverging ideas has become rare. On many of the more insane ones, "diverging idea" already means "didn't drink the whole jug of kool-aid alone".
And that's sad. I mean, let's be honest here, we often found ourselves on the opposite ends of opinions. And yes, I do enjoy it. I already know my opinion, I don't need anyone else to have the same. That doesn't help me, it's great to feel supported, but in the end, it's not going to allow me to see a different angle. And I have to verify my view against that presented by another one. That's not always comfortable, because it just might give one input one didn't consider when forming an opinion.
But it sure leads to a better view of the whole picture.
And yes, that also means dealing with fringe views like religious nuts or nazis. Although, I have to admit, that's more a guilty pleasure of mine rather than trying to get sensible input, because usually what I take from a conversation with one of them is "Well, I might not have everything right. But at least I'm not THAT wrong."
It's a bit like watching afternoon TV with dysfunctional families.
C'mon, say it like you mean it.
Also, I'll kill you for your blissful ignorance ! die die die, you capitalist commie infidel nazi chicken!!
Put your labels on the pile back in the corner, I'll ignore later.
Maybe it does help to not take death threats serious. Like, well, pretty much everything else on the internet.
There is no such thing as a "government only" backdoor. At the very least, it's not YOUR government-only for long. Backdoors allowing decryption of data are the holy grail of espionage. You think actors like North Korea would have any qualms of hijacking your wife and kids if you're holder of such a key to get you to hand it over? Not that they survive, mind you, you're killed alongside them but the key is in the hands of NKor afterwards. And that key is the key to your companies' trade secrets, their R&D, their development and yes, your cutting edge weapon technology.
Aside of that direct damage to your economy, there's the indirect one. Because no company on this planet will store their data with you. They'll send that data abroad. If need be, to Iran or even China, if that's the last place where it's safe from your laws. You are essentially destroying your data storage industry with such a law.
And in the end, you don't even accomplish anything with it. Because what will you get. A few felons with some trivial charges you can tack onto them. You will catch exactly zero terrorists with it. As soon as this becomes law, they will simply shift to the next variant of hiding from you. They have one asset you do not have: Manpower. They have access to cheap manpower. If everything fails, you'll see them use written messages transported via sneakernet again.
I know it's tempting to think that this is the way ahead. But at best it's useless. At worst, and way more likely, it's an economic disaster.
They are effective as long as there is something alive that keeps the carbon bound. For this to work, you have to keep that rainforest alive actually, something that we also don't really have a good track record of.
C'mon, you know the old joke. Press conference in the war room:
Speaker: We're gonna kill 100,000 Iraqi and two dentists.
Journalist: Question: Why the two dentists?
Speaker (to aide): See? Told you nobody's gonna ask about the Iraqi.
MCA was successful with AIX but it failed miserably in the PC market due to licensing and a similar EISA bus being introduced by competition that wasn't weighed down with patents and licensing fees.
IBM tried to regain control over the PC market but failed, simply because by the time they tried, they were about as well liked as MS is today, seen as an overbearing control freak trying to dictate what you can and cannot do with the systems they sell you.
OPEN architecture? Yes, with ISA, when they thought nobody would come and copy their stuff, but you might want to read up on MCA. And how IBM got punched on the nose for it.
Hello competitor!
Then again, there's plenty of jobs going around, there ain't really much competition. We're hiring, by the way. ;)
My hope is that they notice they have more to lose and hire people that know what to do.
Odd. One could assume they hate their kids as much as I do considering the state they plan to leave the planet to them.
One of the key features of usenet was exactly the absence of moderation. You could moderate (via killfile) if you so please, but you could choose yourself to do so, nobody forced it upon you.
No hatred for cultures that belong into Petri dishes because they make you nauseated is right. No matter the color the culture might have.
Or with the words of another comedian "The CSU wants to kick everyone out that can't speak proper German? Fuck, where are all the Bavarians gonna go? And what about the CSU, there's asylum for war refugees but what country grants asylum to people fleeing from intelligence?"
The difference is that on Slashdot, all you really do is mod them down. You can still read all the app apps and all the GNAA, not to mention the cosmonaut Golden Girls.
No idea why anyone would, but you can.
The information is still there. That's the difference.