It's a giant FUD piece. It looks like someone is trying to limit solar for all the obvious reasons with legislation. The backlash against solar has already started with the electric companies tacking on all those extra fees onto people who install solar panels. Self sufficiency is an anathema to big business
He is owned by Time Warner, among others and is probably why we see him defending things like SOPA. And in regards to our privacy, he's busy defending the NSA. I am certain that the industries that support him expect a return on their investments.
That is the story the people that stole the money are telling. And it is totally, completely incredible. The money was hoarded and is stashed away in offshore banks and into the derivatives market. None of it went to any infrastructure. Those accounts can be zeroed out and the money returned to where it came from.
You're playing a shell game. The government controls its currency, and with a flip of the same switch that took that money out, they can put it back. But right now they are just handing it over to Wall Street. The money is being stolen from right under our nose, with the thieves lying right to your face. Don't repeat their lies.
Yes, they did. They just gave it a different name, and didn't discuss it publicly. The unwritten "agreement" is that strong encryption will not be available to the public. And people were no smarter then either. They still overwhelmingly voted for republicans and democrats, who were just as crooked then as now. So the trust issue is moot. The only difference is that they had to act more covertly until they got their "Pearl Harbor". I can assure you nothing has changed aside from the subtle change in submissiveness and the rate of decline.
I sincerely hope they learned something.
We won't know until November, but all indications are it will be business as usual. I see the propaganda the Americans call "news", and with 90% reelection rates I can only expect the worst.
From that, it is simple arithmetic to see that we don't have the money to pay those people as promised.
No, the money is/was there, but now it is being offshored into out of reach bank accounts, just like Detroit(and other) pension funds. Your "math" is bogus. The government has an obligation to put that money back and zero out those shady accounts. Then Social Security will remain solvent for a very long time.
I'll still vote Democrat because they are "less evil"...
The state and its corporate masters appreciate your loyalty to the Party which will provide a "safe and secure society which I assure you will last for ten thousand years"
...people were smart enough in the 90s to not let them do it.
They weren't smart enough to vote the bums out, and now we have what we have because of it. And just because they "didn't let them do it", it doesn't mean they didn't do it anyway. The spy agencies were just as corrupt then as they are now. The only difference between then and now is that it can be done in broad daylight because... terrorism. The submissive population has been fairly constant.
...spook-proof communications network (barring wiretapping warrants, of course)...
Wait a minute. Are you saying there should be built in backdoors to accommodate them?
And the 90s? What leads you to believe it was better then, when the democrats were pushing for clipper chips, V-chips, and other restrictions on encryption? I say we have it much better now, now that we have confirmed the government is running outlaw spy agencies, and that might provide the above mentioned incentives to actually do something about it. However, trust has now gone out the window. Everybody is suspect, pretty much the way the authorities want it. And republicans and democrats will continue to dominate the narrative.
Since they're doing it anyway (surely you're not going to believe their denials still, are you?), let it be public and provide incentive to build more resistant electronics.
Then maybe the whole thing is intentional. After all, the voters, in their conditioned helplessness, aren't going to elect anybody to stop it, so what "damage" is the NSA going to suffer? Smooth everything over with a little PR, and it's back to business as usual. In fact nothing has changed except increased chatter on the internet.
In relation to the love of money to my previous reply, it's not the billionaires that need to be controlled. It's the people who do their dirty work for them that need to be controlled, but through self control. Don't go after the people who offer the money. Nail the ones who take it.
And remember, no law means no law, and unless specifically stated, there are no exceptions.
The Amendment present no exceptions. And the voters, if they believe in free will can ignore the campaigns and the money, and vote for somebody else. The ballot even has space for write ins. Money is not the problem. It is the desire for it. That is where its value is derived.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a giant FUD piece. It looks like someone is trying to limit solar for all the obvious reasons with legislation. The backlash against solar has already started with the electric companies tacking on all those extra fees onto people who install solar panels. Self sufficiency is an anathema to big business
Settlements for civil law and plea bargaining for criminal law. Both for the sole purpose of expediency, and intimidation and abuse.
Nothing but a kill switch for the authorities to use. Make everything you own electronic, and a convenient EMP will shut it all down.
*cough* - //a.fsdn.com/
I couldn't finish the clip, but it just goes to show you can't trust what people say when they'll say anything for the right price.
- Count de Monet.. Where did Sanger's come from?
Eh, I guess you're not interested.
He is owned by Time Warner, among others and is probably why we see him defending things like SOPA. And in regards to our privacy, he's busy defending the NSA. I am certain that the industries that support him expect a return on their investments.
He also defends the NSA and SOPA. He looks like a regular politician to me
That is the story the people that stole the money are telling. And it is totally, completely incredible. The money was hoarded and is stashed away in offshore banks and into the derivatives market. None of it went to any infrastructure. Those accounts can be zeroed out and the money returned to where it came from.
And stay away from the partisan kool-aid :-)
You're playing a shell game. The government controls its currency, and with a flip of the same switch that took that money out, they can put it back. But right now they are just handing it over to Wall Street. The money is being stolen from right under our nose, with the thieves lying right to your face. Don't repeat their lies.
No, they didn't do it anyway.
Yes, they did. They just gave it a different name, and didn't discuss it publicly. The unwritten "agreement" is that strong encryption will not be available to the public. And people were no smarter then either. They still overwhelmingly voted for republicans and democrats, who were just as crooked then as now. So the trust issue is moot. The only difference is that they had to act more covertly until they got their "Pearl Harbor". I can assure you nothing has changed aside from the subtle change in submissiveness and the rate of decline.
I sincerely hope they learned something.
We won't know until November, but all indications are it will be business as usual. I see the propaganda the Americans call "news", and with 90% reelection rates I can only expect the worst.
Then exactly how in the hell are we going to have enough young people to send off to fight in wars and die?
Clones
From that, it is simple arithmetic to see that we don't have the money to pay those people as promised.
No, the money is/was there, but now it is being offshored into out of reach bank accounts, just like Detroit(and other) pension funds. Your "math" is bogus. The government has an obligation to put that money back and zero out those shady accounts. Then Social Security will remain solvent for a very long time.
Philip Morris commercial...
democrats/republicans = good cop/bad cop...
I'll still vote Democrat because they are "less evil"...
The state and its corporate masters appreciate your loyalty to the Party which will provide a "safe and secure society which I assure you will last for ten thousand years"
...people were smart enough in the 90s to not let them do it.
They weren't smart enough to vote the bums out, and now we have what we have because of it. And just because they "didn't let them do it", it doesn't mean they didn't do it anyway. The spy agencies were just as corrupt then as they are now. The only difference between then and now is that it can be done in broad daylight because... terrorism. The submissive population has been fairly constant.
Do you know how fat the program would have to be to fit in every country's law books?
...spook-proof communications network (barring wiretapping warrants, of course)...
Wait a minute. Are you saying there should be built in backdoors to accommodate them?
And the 90s? What leads you to believe it was better then, when the democrats were pushing for clipper chips, V-chips, and other restrictions on encryption? I say we have it much better now, now that we have confirmed the government is running outlaw spy agencies, and that might provide the above mentioned incentives to actually do something about it. However, trust has now gone out the window. Everybody is suspect, pretty much the way the authorities want it. And republicans and democrats will continue to dominate the narrative.
We've been living with that since John Mitchell was AG, and most likely long before that even. SNAFU
Since they're doing it anyway (surely you're not going to believe their denials still, are you?), let it be public and provide incentive to build more resistant electronics.
Then maybe the whole thing is intentional. After all, the voters, in their conditioned helplessness, aren't going to elect anybody to stop it, so what "damage" is the NSA going to suffer? Smooth everything over with a little PR, and it's back to business as usual. In fact nothing has changed except increased chatter on the internet.
Sorry for second reply:
In relation to the love of money to my previous reply, it's not the billionaires that need to be controlled. It's the people who do their dirty work for them that need to be controlled, but through self control. Don't go after the people who offer the money. Nail the ones who take it.
And remember, no law means no law, and unless specifically stated, there are no exceptions.
The Amendment present no exceptions. And the voters, if they believe in free will can ignore the campaigns and the money, and vote for somebody else. The ballot even has space for write ins. Money is not the problem. It is the desire for it. That is where its value is derived.
And the EFF and ACLU approve?? Very sad. That the voters approve is sadder still.
The male prisoners will complain it's too hot. The females will complain it's too cold. Only the youngest will get it just right.