The purpose of gathering this information is to investigate and determine innocence or guilt only for the crime in question. Once innocence or guilt has been determined, you still need to keep the data for appeals. Once the appeals are over, should all of the evidence become public record (assuming it was introduced into evidence in court)?
What's objectionable to me is that the police gathers your biometric data for the purpose of investigating one crime and then says fuck it we're going to use it however we damn well want. Even if you were innocent, even if it was never introduced into evidence, even if the evidence was exculpatory.
That's like going to work for a company and receiving trade secrets, then when the job is over you tell them: 'fuck you I'll use these trade secrets however I want now'.
Step two will be to charge income tax if your bitcoins appreciate in value. Then other types of taxes. They will give it the same treatment as they give precious metals, just so there's no doubt that in their eyes FIAT money is the only money and the rest will be subject to additional taxation to discourage use as money.
If they removed the taxes on gold and silver, the dollar would collapse within a year.
To be fair.. It's not hard to find unflattering photos of people with fanny packs, bluetooth earlobes or geeky google glasses.
Just saying. If they had been flattering photos, it would have to have been some kind of astroturf.
True, since 1913 we've always had a spending problem. But the debt issue is worse than ever and here's why:
If interest rates were to rise to historically normal levels, I mean they were 15% in the 80's, the debt is now large enough that all of our money would go to paying the interest on this debt.
The debt is around $150k _per taxpayer_, while the average US _household_ income is $45,018.
As I pointed out in the original post, we now print money to cover 90% of our spending, something which we've *always* financed by selling bonds to the rest of the world. We're spending monopoly money and laying the foundation for a currency collapse that could be as great as the Weimar Republic's.
Clinton was not a fiscal conservative, he profited by accident from a HUGE tech and housing bubble that was fueled by the federal reserve's printing of money. Good god man, the nasdaq was over 5000 in 1999-2000.
When you make loans cheaper than they should be and spread money around, it ends up inflating bubbles in places where it should not go. It causes long term spending to bubble in inefficient ways. Then when the bubbles burst, you get a much needed correction.
Obama's policies are trying to prevent this correction and laying the foundation for the death of the dollar and all american wealth. Yes, he's doing what most of them have always done, but unfortunately there won't be many more after him doing this...
This would be funny if it wasn't tragic. I don't watch fox and I'm not a republican, this is merely your broken model of the universe failing to comprehend something it's been brainwashed not to think about.
Republican vs. democrat is the invisible cage that keeps you trapped inside your own mind. The illusion of choice.
Obama is a continuation of bush policy, which is a continuation of clinton policy, which is a continuation of bush policy.
We haven't had a president who went off script in a long time. Probably since JFK.
Yes, because you can ask the soviet union (USSR) how well price fixing works and how it doesn't ever lead to shortages and black markets.
Come to think of it, you can ask the USA right now how well their price fixing of money is working. Yes let's print $90,000,000,000.00 per month to loan money to ourselves because nobody else in the world thinks we're a responsible borrower who will pay back our debt.
And honestly it's like Obama says: "Raise the debt ceiling because we have to let the world know that we can definitely pay our debt, if they lend us the money to do it"
The bill stalled last year against White House plans to veto it.
Bull-Fucking-shit.
You might recall a bill called the NDAA of 2012. The NDAA is passed every year to authorize funding of military action and this one was a real doozy because sneaked into this one was for the first time codified law that intends to allow the government to secretly and indefinitely detain anyone without ANY due process.
Some real fucked up communist shit, the Stazi would be proud of.
If you were paying attention you will also remember that the White House said for months it would veto this bill because of the indefinite detention sections. In the end, obama signed this piece of filth into law on new years eve, when Americans were more than nominally uncaring, unwatching and ignorant.
Shocked? Well hold on to your panties because it also became apparent that the White House was secretly pressuring the authors of the bill to include the indefinite detention section and telling them in secret that they would veto the bill if it came to them without indefinite detention or if there was clarification that excluded it's application to Americans. The exact opposite of what they were telling the public.
I warn you now. Do not put your faith in White House lies about using veto on authoritarian bills. They will sign them.
It seems to me that when a prominent person's views are so out of touch with reality as to be laughable, it falls to us to put up a worthy challenge to those views and encourage their re-examination.
Hypothesis:
there is no real conflict between religion and science
On the basis of immediate reaction, the hypothesis doesn't pass the smell test. To hold the hypothesis true is to ignore the fact that many religious people are angry with science and many
scientists are fed up with religious people and look upon them as enemies of reason (Refer to: Richard dawkins' awesome series).
Had there been no conflict between religion and science, there would be no
Scopes
Trial, or Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District
On a more basic level, if you try an analagous approach to first principles, you can reduce science to the basic approach of using observable facts and reason to understand the universe while religion is opposed to reason
and opposed to learning. Religion is about dogma, authority, servitude and obedience. Damn the facts, who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?
Science and religion are not only incompatible, they are constantly in conflict. If you were to make a list of all the types of subjects and specific instances where science and religion are completely at odds, it would be a very
extensive list. You would have to categorize this by 'which' religion as well. For example, I'm pretty sure the religions of Zeus and Thor would constantly butt heads with scientists who study lightning clouds and effects while
christian scientists would always be at odds with modern medical science (clue: they avoid it because only god can cure you).
In fact I believe that the hypothesis can be rejected at this point because it fails to specify exactly which interpretation of which religion it seeks to characterize as not being in conflict with science. You can make
a good argument that all science can be put under one umbrella, but try putting the Baptists of Danbury Conneticut in the same town as the Congregationalists of Danbury Conneticut and
you've got a problem mate.
Ultimately I think religion and science have different purposes. Religion is here to comfort you, keep you in line, fulfill the human needs for community and superstition. It's very discomforting to not know why the volcano erupted or locusts ate your crops causing you to starve, or why the sun and moon do what they do on a daily basis. Religion is a cop-out. It's what you tell an annoying child who repeatedly and recursively asks why? It's what you tell yourself because not knowing the answer is frightening. It's the universe anthropomorphized. It's the zealot who claims to know truths without putting in the hard work of actually discovering them.
Science is to create and develop the best models you can to approximate truth. It doesn't care how you feel about the truth, it's designed to ignore personal bias. By definition this is going to offend religious people. It doesn't comfort them, it doesn't confirm their biases. Religions people don't care that science works. The turing computers in their craniums running on a hardware made of meat is clearly most concerned with itself so they want the universe to be so.
And the universe is not primarily concerned with them. The universe is old beyond their comprehension, scales of magnitude beyond their comprehension, the earth is old beyond their comprehension. Evolution occurs on timescales beyond their comprehension. 99.8% of all species on the planet went extinct without heaven lifting a finger.The human race has had some close calls with extinction. Man has created tens of thousands of religions all of w
Ya. Like the government doesn't already illegally copy and store all our data they can get their hands on. And then tries to imprison the whistleblowers that let us know they were conducting these illegal acts. I can think of no one better to host my wifi sessions *rolls eyes*.
A strategy like that can only help to cut out the middleman and increase data availability. (your private data, availability to the fascist nutters.)
I'm more interested in how long it takes someone to figure out the gold standards for privacy online in today's environment and make a debian distro that enables fine grained control of these standards with ease.
When are we going to build an encrypted network on top of the internet and just cut out the government clowns?
Slashdot Mirror
Come to think of it, there have been some very peculiar incidents recently.
Supreme court justices changing their mind about which way to vote.
The head of the CIA and other officers resigning because of affairs where the government admits reading their personal email without a warrant.
Journalists being spied on.
Fuck, they caught Elliott Spitzer with that call girl and then couldn't explain how they stumbled on him....
Are you sure none of these incidents involved the illegal spying? The eye of Sauron stings a bit when it focuses on you doesn't it?
The purpose of gathering this information is to investigate and determine innocence or guilt only for the crime in question. Once innocence or guilt has been determined, you still need to keep the data for appeals. Once the appeals are over, should all of the evidence become public record (assuming it was introduced into evidence in court)?
What's objectionable to me is that the police gathers your biometric data for the purpose of investigating one crime and then says fuck it we're going to use it however we damn well want. Even if you were innocent, even if it was never introduced into evidence, even if the evidence was exculpatory.
That's like going to work for a company and receiving trade secrets, then when the job is over you tell them: 'fuck you I'll use these trade secrets however I want now'.
Yeah, it's a great stepping stone on the way to a contact lens display.
They get the jokes if you stop and explain the jokes to them.
Comparing Global Warming to Racism is already dumb. Equating the two is going Full Retard mode.
Maybe you should know that the big banks who do HFT also co-locate inside the exchanges and front run orders making hundreds of billions per year.
Also, you might want to know that if the market crashes and restarts like today the big banks can get their losing trades reversed and you can't.
All the profit they're making has to come from somewhere. Are you so certain it doesn't come out of your pocket?
You know what this is? This is economics sending you a message. Let's see if you receive it.
Step two will be to charge income tax if your bitcoins appreciate in value. Then other types of taxes. They will give it the same treatment as they give precious metals, just so there's no doubt that in their eyes FIAT money is the only money and the rest will be subject to additional taxation to discourage use as money.
If they removed the taxes on gold and silver, the dollar would collapse within a year.
Unless you can just recompile your OS and all your software with a new version of GCC...
Is it like the galaxy nexus, I can do anything I want with it, or is it like most other phones: Locked and useless?
To be fair.. It's not hard to find unflattering photos of people with fanny packs, bluetooth earlobes or geeky google glasses.
Just saying. If they had been flattering photos, it would have to have been some kind of astroturf.
As some wise men once said
Data are not information, information is not knowledge, knowledge is not understanding and understanding is not wisdom.
VPN logs are data.
Apple lets you sue..whatever you like
Oh Freudian slips how I love thee.. .
You don't need to present a reason to drive.
Oh yes, the smarty pants in the wild... how quaint.
Solve this: Harvard Entrance Exam 1899
True, since 1913 we've always had a spending problem. But the debt issue is worse than ever and here's why:
Clinton was not a fiscal conservative, he profited by accident from a HUGE tech and housing bubble that was fueled by the federal reserve's printing of money. Good god man, the nasdaq was over 5000 in 1999-2000.
When you make loans cheaper than they should be and spread money around, it ends up inflating bubbles in places where it should not go. It causes long term spending to bubble in inefficient ways. Then when the bubbles burst, you get a much needed correction.
Obama's policies are trying to prevent this correction and laying the foundation for the death of the dollar and all american wealth. Yes, he's doing what most of them have always done, but unfortunately there won't be many more after him doing this...
This would be funny if it wasn't tragic. I don't watch fox and I'm not a republican, this is merely your broken model of the universe failing to comprehend something it's been brainwashed not to think about.
Republican vs. democrat is the invisible cage that keeps you trapped inside your own mind. The illusion of choice.
Obama is a continuation of bush policy, which is a continuation of clinton policy, which is a continuation of bush policy.
We haven't had a president who went off script in a long time. Probably since JFK.
Yes, because you can ask the soviet union (USSR) how well price fixing works and how it doesn't ever lead to shortages and black markets.
Come to think of it, you can ask the USA right now how well their price fixing of money is working. Yes let's print $90,000,000,000.00 per month to loan money to ourselves because nobody else in the world thinks we're a responsible borrower who will pay back our debt.
And honestly it's like Obama says: "Raise the debt ceiling because we have to let the world know that we can definitely pay our debt, if they lend us the money to do it"
Who the hell links to an article about the ACLU's work, without Linking directly to the work in question instead
The bill stalled last year against White House plans to veto it.
Bull-Fucking-shit.
You might recall a bill called the NDAA of 2012. The NDAA is passed every year to authorize funding of military action and this one was a real doozy because sneaked into this one was for the first time codified law that intends to allow the government to secretly and indefinitely detain anyone without ANY due process.
Some real fucked up communist shit, the Stazi would be proud of.
If you were paying attention you will also remember that the White House said for months it would veto this bill because of the indefinite detention sections. In the end, obama signed this piece of filth into law on new years eve, when Americans were more than nominally uncaring, unwatching and ignorant.
Shocked? Well hold on to your panties because it also became apparent that the White House was secretly pressuring the authors of the bill to include the indefinite detention section and telling them in secret that they would veto the bill if it came to them without indefinite detention or if there was clarification that excluded it's application to Americans. The exact opposite of what they were telling the public.
I warn you now. Do not put your faith in White House lies about using veto on authoritarian bills. They will sign them.
It seems to me that when a prominent person's views are so out of touch with reality as to be laughable, it falls to us to put up a worthy challenge to those views and encourage their re-examination.
Hypothesis:
there is no real conflict between religion and science
Ya. Like the government doesn't already illegally copy and store all our data they can get their hands on. And then tries to imprison the whistleblowers that let us know they were conducting these illegal acts. I can think of no one better to host my wifi sessions *rolls eyes*.
A strategy like that can only help to cut out the middleman and increase data availability. (your private data, availability to the fascist nutters.)
I'm more interested in how long it takes someone to figure out the gold standards for privacy online in today's environment and make a debian distro that enables fine grained control of these standards with ease.
When are we going to build an encrypted network on top of the internet and just cut out the government clowns?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/28/pentagon-cyber-security-expansion-stuxnet
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/29/obama-guantanamo-pentagon-cyber-yemen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Kp_8j13DiiY
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/28/pentagon-cyber-security-expansion-stuxnet
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/29/obama-guantanamo-pentagon-cyber-yemen