Ah, but everyone has their own viewpoint and it always colors their interpretation of the facts.
Sorry, but facts aren't facts without a great deal of evidence supporting them. You can't just claim that your personal belief (religion, for example) is a fact because you said so. That has nothing to do with viewpoints or opinions. That doesn't, however, mean that individuals won't block out evidence that supports a belief other than their own...
Actual parenting (which doesn't include being a paranoid idiot that constantly locks their child inside a bubble).
Sort of like current Western governments give you a fair deal of freedom (yes, they still do) but watch you closely anyway.
In other words, make all of your citizens into potential criminals, violate their privacy, and then pretend to have their best interests at heart. No.
But this is a thoroughly minority opinion, because people don't see that as a restriction or potential restriction
Restriction? No. But it is, however, something that could easily be abused. Secretly monitoring them will likely cause them to trust you even less (note the word "secretly").
clearly, otherwise everyone would be lying in the streets in a mass exercise of civil disobedience
Wait, what? Even if most people disagreed with it, that wouldn't necessarily mean that they'd protest it. In fact, more often than not, people do absolutely nothing.
This seems like a half-ass solution to a problem arising from the sadly typical "both parents work, no one actually raises their own kids any more" society we have now.
I still don't understand why people feel that they must have children. Not only does it contribute to the ever growing problem of overpopulation, but the fact that a startling number parents have children regardless of the fact that they don't have any time to raise them only worsens matters.
You almost sound like you're complaining. Every good parent knows that they should indoctrinate their children with their own pointless personal beliefs instead of relaying actual facts! They can question authority... as long as that authority figure isn't me.
But... I thought that education was bad! They need to be able to happily live in their little bubbles thinking that society has no bad qualities. Banning/censoring/nannying is so much easier...
But if you add up all of the things that happen on a regular basis, you have quite a long list. Corporations obviously bribing politicians, politicians pushing for censorship and control (such as the USA PATRIOT Act, DMCA, ACTA, anti-net neutrality legislation, and internet kill switches), corporations working so closely with the government in some cases (such as what happened with Wikileaks), corporations running obvious and noticeable monopolies (I speak of ISPs, of course), and corporations attempting to ruin services for everyone to maximize their profit (such as lobbying for anti-net neutrality legislation). We really are in trouble, I think.
I like how in those laws they mention things such as "reasonable" and "artistic." That's just what we need. Laws that are subjective beyond belief used in situations where there are no real victims.
That being said I'm even more old fashioned to say that there is no humor IMO when it comes to threading on the edge of these things.
Some people disagree. Also, saying words to someone definitely doesn't make you a sex offender. But, then again, the constitution is now irrelevant (in no small part due to the "protect the children" imbeciles that wish to keep children in little bubbles and 'protect' them from harmless things such as naughty words and every form of entertainment in existence).
I think its a very good sign that when in doubt the justice system acts and hauls your ass in.
Yeah! That's definitely a good thing.
"Has this person done anything wrong?" "I don't know." "Well, I don't like what he's doing, so let's just take them down!"
This could never be abused! Ever.
don't get involved with explicit material in combination with minors.
Explicit material? Do you mean harmless words that almost the entirety of society has been socially conditioned to believe are bad? Also, "explicit" and "offensive" are extremely subjective. I'd rather not be subject to such subjective laws, as those are easily abused.
Let me check. Video games? They likely want them banned/censored. Naughty words, television, comic books, books, music, and pretty much every form of entertainment? They likely want those banned/censored for the children, too.
You're practicing murder. So, yes. Besides, stepping on clay offends me, and as everyone knows, the constitution was made to protect you from things that offend you...
Protect them from naughty words, video games, television, movies, comic books, music, and pretty much all forms of entertainment in existence. And yet, even with all of this meaningless 'protection', I still don't feel as though I've locked them in a small enough bubble yet. What should we ban/censor next? After all, saying naughty words is bad because naughty words are bad (because I said so). Even though they're just words with meanings like every other word and they won't really hurt them unless they themselves be hurt by them (and as everyone knows, your constitutional rights are being violating if you get offended by something), they mustn't be allowed to hear them! What a great plan! Forget freedom of speech (speech that offends others is clearly prohibited, even though that is extremely subjective and the constitution mentions nothing about that)! This guy's just... a terrorist and a pedophile!
You don't have the freedom to say sexual remarks to children.
If you're not paying attention to the constitution, that is. It clearly just says "freedom of speech." Speech doesn't hurt them in the least. How ridiculous.
It was meant to be a complaint against the government in general.
If anything, our public schools are terrible precisely because the people have far too much influence over them.
I guess I'll have to agree here. Giving too much power to either the government or the people would only result in the situation getting worse. There are some things that the people shouldn't really control, and given their ignorant attitudes on what qualifies as a good education (purely rote memorization, mandatory classes that are useless to most people, and belittlement of people who so much as question the school's authority), they probably shouldn't be in control of it. Of course, I'm not so sure the government would do any better...
Their brains aren't done cooking yet and they can't make decisions on what is good for them in the long-term.
What a stereotypical statement. Their brains may not be fully developed yet, but that doesn't make all of them (or even most) incapable of making intelligent decisions that have long term benefits. Assess the individual, not the group they are in.
For many of them, skipping geometry and going out under the bridge to smoke pot instead makes perfect sense.
The lack of choice in the 'educational' system probably has something to do with this. Sorry, but what? You desire to work in a profession that doesn't require knowledge about chemistry, biology, geometry, or most of the other pointless subjects that we force upon you? Too bad! You'll take them all anyway, even though forcing you to take it will increase the rate of failures, give you less time to learn about important subjects, and make the 'educational' system even less appealing! I mean, sure, you'll forget everything that you didn't use so quickly that if you wish to change your profession later on, you'll end up relearning it, anyway (making the original education a complete waste of time). However, you will still be forced to take all of these subjects. Why? Because we said so!
Until then, schools sometimes have the unenviable task of forcing kids to go to class for their own good.
Not when it violates their freedoms. Also, skipping classes a few times does not mean that you're an idiot, will end up a criminal, or any other such nonsense. They are dealing with a non-problem and escalating the situation to unbelievable levels.
This just sends the message that it is okay for your rights to be violated if you break some pointless, arbitrary rule, even when there is no basis for it. You questioned an authority figure? You skipped classes a few times to get away from the terrible 'educational' system? No more privacy for you!
And since most of society recognizes this
Even if "most of society" believed that, that wouldn't make it true.
Indoctrination and shutting them in bubbles isn't parenting. Especially worrying over nothing.
Freedom and privacy should be earned through good behavior.
Sorry, but no. I'd rather not have some person revoking my freedom and privacy just because they believe that their subjective idea about "good behavior" isn't being followed. You weren't absolutely obedient to authority in every single way? You didn't listen to every nonsensical law in existence? You questioned an authority figure? You skipped school a few times to get away from the terrible 'educational' system? No freedom or privacy for you, criminal!
but if the parents can't keep the kids in check it makes sense to work something out.
Not a nanny state. That's for sure. Also, treating children as potential criminals merely because they skipped classes to get away from the terrible 'educational' system is absolutely illogical.
they are wrong, but they have the right to be wrong
But they don't have the right for their wrong, unconstitutional ideas to be put into action. It's amazing what rights can be stripped away by taking advantage of fear.
They have little interest in actually responding properly to authority
How do you 'properly' respond to an authority figure? With absolute obedience? I'm not saying you should be unreasonable, but their situations are unknown.
in a decade when they're adults, if they have any more respect for the laws of society.
Well, we don't know that yet. So, there's really no need to attempt to predict future events and punish people based on said predictions. That's a bad idea.
but those outfitted with these tracking devices aren't exactly the types you're making them out to be.
I don't care what 'types' they are. An invasion of privacy is an invasion of privacy.
It's not working out at all. The people aren't controlling the government. Corporations and power hungry politicians are. Rarely do people get a real say.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, but everyone has their own viewpoint and it always colors their interpretation of the facts.
Sorry, but facts aren't facts without a great deal of evidence supporting them. You can't just claim that your personal belief (religion, for example) is a fact because you said so. That has nothing to do with viewpoints or opinions. That doesn't, however, mean that individuals won't block out evidence that supports a belief other than their own...
OK, but what if they apply "actual parenting"
Actual parenting (which doesn't include being a paranoid idiot that constantly locks their child inside a bubble).
Sort of like current Western governments give you a fair deal of freedom (yes, they still do) but watch you closely anyway.
In other words, make all of your citizens into potential criminals, violate their privacy, and then pretend to have their best interests at heart. No.
But this is a thoroughly minority opinion, because people don't see that as a restriction or potential restriction
Restriction? No. But it is, however, something that could easily be abused. Secretly monitoring them will likely cause them to trust you even less (note the word "secretly").
clearly, otherwise everyone would be lying in the streets in a mass exercise of civil disobedience
Wait, what? Even if most people disagreed with it, that wouldn't necessarily mean that they'd protest it. In fact, more often than not, people do absolutely nothing.
This seems like a half-ass solution to a problem arising from the sadly typical "both parents work, no one actually raises their own kids any more" society we have now.
I still don't understand why people feel that they must have children. Not only does it contribute to the ever growing problem of overpopulation, but the fact that a startling number parents have children regardless of the fact that they don't have any time to raise them only worsens matters.
You almost sound like you're complaining. Every good parent knows that they should indoctrinate their children with their own pointless personal beliefs instead of relaying actual facts! They can question authority... as long as that authority figure isn't me.
But... I thought that education was bad! They need to be able to happily live in their little bubbles thinking that society has no bad qualities. Banning/censoring/nannying is so much easier...
But if you add up all of the things that happen on a regular basis, you have quite a long list. Corporations obviously bribing politicians, politicians pushing for censorship and control (such as the USA PATRIOT Act, DMCA, ACTA, anti-net neutrality legislation, and internet kill switches), corporations working so closely with the government in some cases (such as what happened with Wikileaks), corporations running obvious and noticeable monopolies (I speak of ISPs, of course), and corporations attempting to ruin services for everyone to maximize their profit (such as lobbying for anti-net neutrality legislation). We really are in trouble, I think.
I like how in those laws they mention things such as "reasonable" and "artistic." That's just what we need. Laws that are subjective beyond belief used in situations where there are no real victims.
That being said I'm even more old fashioned to say that there is no humor IMO when it comes to threading on the edge of these things.
Some people disagree. Also, saying words to someone definitely doesn't make you a sex offender. But, then again, the constitution is now irrelevant (in no small part due to the "protect the children" imbeciles that wish to keep children in little bubbles and 'protect' them from harmless things such as naughty words and every form of entertainment in existence).
I think its a very good sign that when in doubt the justice system acts and hauls your ass in.
Yeah! That's definitely a good thing.
"Has this person done anything wrong?"
"I don't know."
"Well, I don't like what he's doing, so let's just take them down!"
This could never be abused! Ever.
don't get involved with explicit material in combination with minors.
Explicit material? Do you mean harmless words that almost the entirety of society has been socially conditioned to believe are bad? Also, "explicit" and "offensive" are extremely subjective. I'd rather not be subject to such subjective laws, as those are easily abused.
The poor little FBI is having trouble spying on people (court order or not). Let's all show our love for them and help them out!
it's what the law says that matters.
The point is that he spoke of hypocrisy where there was none.
it's in seriously poor taste
To you, maybe. Some may disagree.
I don't recall claiming that I believe it's wrong to make a video/take a picture of people in a public place, even if the law says that it is.
Are these people INSANE?
Let me check. Video games? They likely want them banned/censored. Naughty words, television, comic books, books, music, and pretty much every form of entertainment? They likely want those banned/censored for the children, too.
My opinion? They certainly are!
You're practicing murder. So, yes. Besides, stepping on clay offends me, and as everyone knows, the constitution was made to protect you from things that offend you...
Protect them from naughty words, video games, television, movies, comic books, music, and pretty much all forms of entertainment in existence. And yet, even with all of this meaningless 'protection', I still don't feel as though I've locked them in a small enough bubble yet. What should we ban/censor next? After all, saying naughty words is bad because naughty words are bad (because I said so). Even though they're just words with meanings like every other word and they won't really hurt them unless they themselves be hurt by them (and as everyone knows, your constitutional rights are being violating if you get offended by something), they mustn't be allowed to hear them! What a great plan! Forget freedom of speech (speech that offends others is clearly prohibited, even though that is extremely subjective and the constitution mentions nothing about that)! This guy's just... a terrorist and a pedophile!
You don't have the freedom to say sexual remarks to children.
If you're not paying attention to the constitution, that is. It clearly just says "freedom of speech." Speech doesn't hurt them in the least. How ridiculous.
The moral of the story: if there's a few pirates, remove an advertised feature entirely and hurt its entire user base! Good going, Sony!
Reading the summaries is far too tiresome. The new fad is only reading the headline!
It was meant to be a complaint against the government in general.
If anything, our public schools are terrible precisely because the people have far too much influence over them.
I guess I'll have to agree here. Giving too much power to either the government or the people would only result in the situation getting worse. There are some things that the people shouldn't really control, and given their ignorant attitudes on what qualifies as a good education (purely rote memorization, mandatory classes that are useless to most people, and belittlement of people who so much as question the school's authority), they probably shouldn't be in control of it. Of course, I'm not so sure the government would do any better...
Their brains aren't done cooking yet and they can't make decisions on what is good for them in the long-term.
What a stereotypical statement. Their brains may not be fully developed yet, but that doesn't make all of them (or even most) incapable of making intelligent decisions that have long term benefits. Assess the individual, not the group they are in.
For many of them, skipping geometry and going out under the bridge to smoke pot instead makes perfect sense.
The lack of choice in the 'educational' system probably has something to do with this. Sorry, but what? You desire to work in a profession that doesn't require knowledge about chemistry, biology, geometry, or most of the other pointless subjects that we force upon you? Too bad! You'll take them all anyway, even though forcing you to take it will increase the rate of failures, give you less time to learn about important subjects, and make the 'educational' system even less appealing! I mean, sure, you'll forget everything that you didn't use so quickly that if you wish to change your profession later on, you'll end up relearning it, anyway (making the original education a complete waste of time). However, you will still be forced to take all of these subjects. Why? Because we said so!
Until then, schools sometimes have the unenviable task of forcing kids to go to class for their own good.
Not when it violates their freedoms. Also, skipping classes a few times does not mean that you're an idiot, will end up a criminal, or any other such nonsense. They are dealing with a non-problem and escalating the situation to unbelievable levels.
This just sends the message that it is okay for your rights to be violated if you break some pointless, arbitrary rule, even when there is no basis for it. You questioned an authority figure? You skipped classes a few times to get away from the terrible 'educational' system? No more privacy for you!
And since most of society recognizes this
Even if "most of society" believed that, that wouldn't make it true.
It's called parenting.
Indoctrination and shutting them in bubbles isn't parenting. Especially worrying over nothing.
Freedom and privacy should be earned through good behavior.
Sorry, but no. I'd rather not have some person revoking my freedom and privacy just because they believe that their subjective idea about "good behavior" isn't being followed. You weren't absolutely obedient to authority in every single way? You didn't listen to every nonsensical law in existence? You questioned an authority figure? You skipped school a few times to get away from the terrible 'educational' system? No freedom or privacy for you, criminal!
but if the parents can't keep the kids in check it makes sense to work something out.
Not a nanny state. That's for sure. Also, treating children as potential criminals merely because they skipped classes to get away from the terrible 'educational' system is absolutely illogical.
It sounds like you didn't completely submit to authority. Shame on you, terrorist!
they are wrong, but they have the right to be wrong
But they don't have the right for their wrong, unconstitutional ideas to be put into action. It's amazing what rights can be stripped away by taking advantage of fear.
They have little interest in actually responding properly to authority
How do you 'properly' respond to an authority figure? With absolute obedience? I'm not saying you should be unreasonable, but their situations are unknown.
in a decade when they're adults, if they have any more respect for the laws of society.
Well, we don't know that yet. So, there's really no need to attempt to predict future events and punish people based on said predictions. That's a bad idea.
but those outfitted with these tracking devices aren't exactly the types you're making them out to be.
I don't care what 'types' they are. An invasion of privacy is an invasion of privacy.
It's not working out at all. The people aren't controlling the government. Corporations and power hungry politicians are. Rarely do people get a real say.