Today's Assad merely inherited the position from his father — himself a dictator (and a rather brutal one too). For a Western mind, that's a shaky claim to "legitimacy"...
Libertines and Libertarians fighting the notion of "encryption is a weapon" are wrong. It certainly is a weapon — and their fight should be targeting attempts to take (all) weapons away from citizens instead. There is no meaningful difference between an "assault rifle" and strong encryption — both have ample legitimate purposes and both can be used to perpetrate heinous acts.
We all may want to study ISIS videos to learn both the actual techniques as well as how to better find and kill these assholes.
Sure. But police officers are much more expensive.
Many cities pay for them by shortening yellows to the point that they're unsafe.
Even if this really is a wide-spread problem, it does not detract from my point and is not too relevant either — a shortened yellow would be just as helpful to a human ticket-issuer as it is to a robotic one.
they are triggering for exceeding the lower speed limit even when it isn't applicable
A problem easily fixable with a software update.
These issues come up sufficiently frequently that it's best to just not allow the cameras at all.
By this logic, personal cars (and weapons) should be banned outright and all immigration closed — for just a few examples...
The computer doesn't lie about the speeding. People are afraid of these traps exactly because they work so well.
Absolutely! I, for one, welcome camera-based and other automatic enforcement of speeding and other traffic-laws (such as based on the toll-road receipts). The complaints against the particularly-effective enforcement techniques are misguided and stupid — the laws need to change instead.
I drove on a German "highway" in March. Compared to America's interstates, it is, actually, a pathetic road — mere two or three narrow lanes. But they don't have a speed-limit on many of them anyway... BMWs and Mercedeces were passing me like I was standing — because my rental Jetta could not exceed 200 km/h.
I don't know, why the Germans are so lucky in this regard, but for American elected officials and electorate to get to that, the laws have to apply equally to all — a heartless computer will not "go easy" on a big-busted girl or a resident of the same town (who may have influence on the local police department). It is not going to be racist — nor even accused of being such.
One's "prosecutorial discretion" is another's "selective enforcement" — whatever you call it, it is what allows bad laws to stay on the books... Once all citizens — however upstanding — start getting these tickets, the rising concern will up the limits and cause other sensible changes.
This was true before that Russian airliner went down in the Sinai, and ISIS so helpfully claimed responsibility.
Putin hasstagedterrorist acts against his own citizens before. I would not put too much credence into that airliner's disaster...
but now, w/ this Russian plane going down, ISIS kicked themselves up in the scheduler list.
Yes, and suddenly Putin no longer seems like such a bad guy, does he? I mean, invasion of a peaceful neighbor is soooo last year, we need to cooperate with Russia now, do we not?
230 Russian lives are a small price to pay for such a turn in the world's public opinion. Glory be to Mother Russia...
at least Putin struck back decisively against ISIS/ISIL in Syria.
Putin's, peace be upon him, strikes against ISIS are, at best, half-hearted and at worst a sham. He is not fighting against ISIS, he is fighting for Assad — a decades-long client of the USSR/Russia. Because of Russia's strikes against anti-Assad fighters, ISIS was, actually, been able to gain ground in Syria on several occasions.
Considering the post-tragedy rise of Le Pen and other European nationalists, who tend to be Putin's, peace be upon him, clients themselves, one may argue, Putin had a hand in the Paris-attack himself. Whether that's true or not, the sentiment such as yours certainly illustrates, how he benefited from it.
I have no love the Nobel Peace Prize winner we are saddled with — his foreign policy is as destructive as the internal ones — but praising Putin seems outright dumb. Obama will be gone in a year, Putin will remain a menacing danger for as long as he lives — and the asshole is fit, hale and healthy...
it's mostly that no one feels invested in it unless it happens to them
Given the wide scope of their earlier attacks — from Sarah Palin to Tunisian government — they do "feel invested" in whole lot of locations and happenings. It is just that the ISIS — easily the most evil organisation of the 21st century so far — that avoided their wrath despite having a large collection of very juicy online targets.
Whether it is racism or whatever, that Anonymous hasn't done anything until now — despite, evidently, having the necessary capabilities — is not showing them in good light. Better late than never, of course...
It sure passes the "don't let a crisis go to waste" smell test to me.
Well, of course! The Statist types always complain about encryption and anonymity (and personal weapons, BTW) making their jobs more difficult. They are sincere, and what they say is true. It is just that at normal times we can rationally resist their urging, while at the times of crisis our collective rationality weakens and we allow major freedom-infringements to happen...
Rolling them back is hard, because the things like having to present an ID or even submit to a pat-down are not too tedious and the burden never reaches a crisis level of its own, despite occasional trouble-making by some prominent figures.
Saying lie detectors work is like a soldier using his finger as a gun.
Now that may be a valid argument, but that's not, what the write-up says (haven't read TFA, sorry). The write-up repeatedly mentions only the sophisticated adversaries.
offers no methodology for detecting sophisticated countermeasures (such as any actual spy, saboteur, or terrorist might be expected to use)
It may not work against sophisticated countermeasures, but it may still detect unsophisticated ones.
The argument implied by the write-up is like trying to say, soldiers should dispense with personal weapons altogether, because they can't penetrate the armour of some of their targets anyway.
Let me point out that you've cited Breitbart articles here.
First of all, clearly, you have heard of Breitbart. And second, the articles there contain attributed (rather than anonymous) quotes.
Sadly, reading comprehension really is a big problem for you. Maybe, you should stick to martial arts exclusively — if illiterate peasants could do it in China, you should be able to as well. But leave teaching to someone more capable.— so the healing may begin...
You're pretty fuckin' dense if you think anything is wrong with that blog post on calling black people "articulate".
Said the man, oops, the person, whose idea of "articulating" a point is to add curse-words to his/her/its/their speech.
isn't he the excuse you trot out for being allowed to say the n-word?
I don't need no negro's permission to say "negro", thank you very much. The word simply means "black" — as in "Negro Lives Matter" — and, incidentally, that's exactly, how Blacks are called in Ukrainian, Russian, and a whole host of other languages. It is perfectly neutral.
right-wingers need to keep their damn mouths shut when it comes to social justice issues
Oh, wow, maybe, you are articulate, after all! In one phrase you managed to violate all the rules:
against groupsplaining — a general term you haven't heard of yet, but should have no difficulty understanding
I'm going on a hunger strike in protest — until Slashdot editors apologize and resign for fostering an environment, which allowed you to mentally-rape me with your angry speech. Safe Zone! Safe Zone! Safe Zone!!! Please don't hate...
Darling, Slashdot is one of those forums, where ideas and arguments slightly bigger than what would fit on a bumper-sticker — or even a Tweet — are welcome. I suggest, you use that feature of the site next time you have something to say.
Maybe, if I emphasize the important part, you'll be able to pick it up... Here you go, you missed this part the first time: an article on some unknown blog, which cites anonymous "experts" is hardly credible...
If even the staunchly illiberal publications like New York Times and The Atlantic complain about there being too many grievances, it must, indeed, be a real problem.
A problem, they helped facilitate, I might add. Because, when people are simply pursuing happiness, one can get a (sorely mistaken!!) impression, everything is right in the land of Capitalism — so, if causes for real complaints are gone, we must dig deeper to rouse up new ones. Somebody complimented your demeanour? They must be RACIST!.. Girls learn belly-dancing — to stay fit and please their boyfriends? They are appropriating! And so on.
"ISIS isn't necessarily evil. It is made up of people doing what they think is best for their community. Violence is not the answer, though."
Kimmel's views have no place in our party.
Oh, the pompous Democratic assholes — the above-quoted view was perfectly in line with the party's (including government officials) thinking until last Friday.
Maybe, not all of the party, but hardly a far fringe — the man was endorsed by the same Star Tribune, which is now reporting on his dropping out. The whole idea, that evil is relative (unless it is Hitler or Bush) and that we don't really have enemies in the world — only friends, whose grievances we haven't accommodated just yet — is firmly planted in the Democratic party today. Mr. Kimmel's attempts to stop "othering" ISIS were perfectly in accordance with the opinions prevailing on the Left. The Left, which temporarily retreated into their "Healing Zone", but who will emerge from there with counter-arguments on how ISIS are different from Islam, and how murdering infidels is really "unislamic" — pretending to believe, they know the opinions and customs of ISIS' target-audience better than ISIS knows them themselves.
No, Mr. Kimmel's views do have a nice and comfortable place in the Democratic party — complete with a "Safe Zone" too — it was just silly of him to underline that point at such inopportune time. Should've waited a month or two...
Now what the attacks on Paris has to do with this, I'm at a complete loss to understand.
This whole subthread started, when it was implied, that the West in general — and the US in particular — aren't any better than ISIS and is equally outrage-worthy. This incident was offered as proof of that.
My point is, it proves the opposite. We are better, because the "collateral murder" incident is clearly an outrage to most of us — with Pentagon trying to hide it — while the Paris murders are something, the enemy is proud of and publicizes it as much as they can.
You broke the country, you bought it. Get your lazy arses back in there and finish the job.
The cooler heads here didn't want to leave Iraq so early, but we are saddled with a President — whom you awarded with a Nobel Peace Prize (a stupid act, which progressives still would not acknowledge as a mistake) — who does not think, there is true evil in the world... Or, if there is, it is his own country. You can blame us for electing him, but his victory was not without your help. Twice.
What would pharmaceutical companies charge for something like this?
If you can't afford it, just keep walking — you aren't any worse off than before.
What are the social implications?
Rich people begin to live (much) longer — CEOs, Senators, judges, and generals alike do not retire restricting career-growths of their underlings. Similar effects in families, with (grand)children never seeing the inheritance. Official retirement age raised (very) high.
A movement springs up denouncing the procedure as somehow unethical — while the Bible's long-living characters suddenly seem less implausible.
A separate movement springs up to demand "free" dosage for everyone — told, there is not enough for all, they demand none get it and proceed to destroy what little stock there is. Fortunately, a break-through — its development funded by the cash windfall from the millionaire "early adopters" — allows to produce enough of the stuff to add it to water supply (in developed countries).
Secret e-mails with government-officials discussing these very predictions and considerations are leaked and discussed by the media as awesome forethought by some and evil conspiracy by others.
Yet another movement begins to claim suffering from allergic and other mysterious-yet-painful reactions to the stuff and try to avoid it.
Something like that... Oh, and, of course, PROFIT!
You mean the crew lying to their chain of command isn't enough proof
For an untruth to be a lie, the speaker has to know the speech to be untruthful. Did the crew know, they hit reporters instead of insurgents?
OK, here's the rule then. Specifically 1.c.
Oh, sure. Do not target civilians. If you know, they are civilians. The whole point here is, they didn't know. People aiming video cameras at you are indiscernible from people aiming grenade-launchers at you. I thought, you'd cite some more obscure rule, that would've — if properly followed — helped them identify the civilians as such....
Now, the Paris killers knew perfectly well, their targets were unarmed civilians. And yet, they targeted them — for publicity. Their rules not only don't prohibit, but, evidently, encourage terrorism. That such murders actually help one's cause in their society is indisputable evidence, that it is worse than ours. Case closed.
Slashdot Mirror
The entire FA is about ISIS using encryption... They use it. It is true.
Today's Assad merely inherited the position from his father — himself a dictator (and a rather brutal one too). For a Western mind, that's a shaky claim to "legitimacy"...
Libertines and Libertarians fighting the notion of "encryption is a weapon" are wrong. It certainly is a weapon — and their fight should be targeting attempts to take (all) weapons away from citizens instead. There is no meaningful difference between an "assault rifle" and strong encryption — both have ample legitimate purposes and both can be used to perpetrate heinous acts.
We all may want to study ISIS videos to learn both the actual techniques as well as how to better find and kill these assholes.
Sure. But police officers are much more expensive.
Even if this really is a wide-spread problem, it does not detract from my point and is not too relevant either — a shortened yellow would be just as helpful to a human ticket-issuer as it is to a robotic one.
A problem easily fixable with a software update.
By this logic, personal cars (and weapons) should be banned outright and all immigration closed — for just a few examples...
Absolutely! I, for one, welcome camera-based and other automatic enforcement of speeding and other traffic-laws (such as based on the toll-road receipts). The complaints against the particularly-effective enforcement techniques are misguided and stupid — the laws need to change instead.
I drove on a German "highway" in March. Compared to America's interstates, it is, actually, a pathetic road — mere two or three narrow lanes. But they don't have a speed-limit on many of them anyway... BMWs and Mercedeces were passing me like I was standing — because my rental Jetta could not exceed 200 km/h.
I don't know, why the Germans are so lucky in this regard, but for American elected officials and electorate to get to that, the laws have to apply equally to all — a heartless computer will not "go easy" on a big-busted girl or a resident of the same town (who may have influence on the local police department). It is not going to be racist — nor even accused of being such.
One's "prosecutorial discretion" is another's "selective enforcement" — whatever you call it, it is what allows bad laws to stay on the books... Once all citizens — however upstanding — start getting these tickets, the rising concern will up the limits and cause other sensible changes.
Putin has staged terrorist acts against his own citizens before. I would not put too much credence into that airliner's disaster...
Yes, and suddenly Putin no longer seems like such a bad guy, does he? I mean, invasion of a peaceful neighbor is soooo last year, we need to cooperate with Russia now, do we not?
230 Russian lives are a small price to pay for such a turn in the world's public opinion. Glory be to Mother Russia...
Putin's, peace be upon him, strikes against ISIS are, at best, half-hearted and at worst a sham. He is not fighting against ISIS, he is fighting for Assad — a decades-long client of the USSR/Russia. Because of Russia's strikes against anti-Assad fighters, ISIS was, actually, been able to gain ground in Syria on several occasions.
Considering the post-tragedy rise of Le Pen and other European nationalists, who tend to be Putin's, peace be upon him, clients themselves, one may argue, Putin had a hand in the Paris-attack himself. Whether that's true or not, the sentiment such as yours certainly illustrates, how he benefited from it.
I have no love the Nobel Peace Prize winner we are saddled with — his foreign policy is as destructive as the internal ones — but praising Putin seems outright dumb. Obama will be gone in a year, Putin will remain a menacing danger for as long as he lives — and the asshole is fit, hale and healthy...
Given the wide scope of their earlier attacks — from Sarah Palin to Tunisian government — they do "feel invested" in whole lot of locations and happenings. It is just that the ISIS — easily the most evil organisation of the 21st century so far — that avoided their wrath despite having a large collection of very juicy online targets.
Whether it is racism or whatever, that Anonymous hasn't done anything until now — despite, evidently, having the necessary capabilities — is not showing them in good light. Better late than never, of course...
Did they really have to wait for ISIS to strike in Paris? The group's earlier:
was not enough? If Anonymous had this capability of hurting ISIS' (impressive) online propaganda, why did they not use it before the attack on Paris?
Well, of course! The Statist types always complain about encryption and anonymity (and personal weapons, BTW) making their jobs more difficult. They are sincere, and what they say is true. It is just that at normal times we can rationally resist their urging, while at the times of crisis our collective rationality weakens and we allow major freedom-infringements to happen...
Rolling them back is hard, because the things like having to present an ID or even submit to a pat-down are not too tedious and the burden never reaches a crisis level of its own, despite occasional trouble-making by some prominent figures.
And now those investigators are calling Slashdot editors with the same request? I doubt, they haven't heard of Streisand Effect...
Then how will the next concert be different from the one last Friday?
Something must be done. It just mustn't diminish the freedoms (including privacy), which the Western World has grown used to...
Whether that's true or not, the write-up makes no such claim. The argument they do make remains BS.
Now that may be a valid argument, but that's not, what the write-up says (haven't read TFA, sorry). The write-up repeatedly mentions only the sophisticated adversaries.
It may not work against sophisticated countermeasures, but it may still detect unsophisticated ones.
The argument implied by the write-up is like trying to say, soldiers should dispense with personal weapons altogether, because they can't penetrate the armour of some of their targets anyway.
First of all, clearly, you have heard of Breitbart. And second, the articles there contain attributed (rather than anonymous) quotes.
Sadly, reading comprehension really is a big problem for you. Maybe, you should stick to martial arts exclusively — if illiterate peasants could do it in China, you should be able to as well. But leave teaching to someone more capable.— so the healing may begin...
Said the man, oops, the person, whose idea of "articulating" a point is to add curse-words to his/her/its/their speech.
I don't need no negro's permission to say "negro", thank you very much. The word simply means "black" — as in "Negro Lives Matter" — and, incidentally, that's exactly, how Blacks are called in Ukrainian, Russian, and a whole host of other languages. It is perfectly neutral.
Oh, wow, maybe, you are articulate, after all! In one phrase you managed to violate all the rules:
I'm going on a hunger strike in protest — until Slashdot editors apologize and resign for fostering an environment, which allowed you to mentally-rape me with your angry speech. Safe Zone! Safe Zone! Safe Zone!!! Please don't hate...
Darling, Slashdot is one of those forums, where ideas and arguments slightly bigger than what would fit on a bumper-sticker — or even a Tweet — are welcome. I suggest, you use that feature of the site next time you have something to say.
Except my complaint about their bullshit is real while their bullshit is not. But why am I not surprised about your kind equating the incomparable?
70% of American 8th-graders aren't proficient in reading — obviously, the sorry state of affairs is a reflection of the quality of the teachers...
Maybe, if I emphasize the important part, you'll be able to pick it up... Here you go, you missed this part the first time: an article on some unknown blog, which cites anonymous "experts" is hardly credible...
If even the staunchly illiberal publications like New York Times and The Atlantic complain about there being too many grievances, it must, indeed, be a real problem.
A problem, they helped facilitate, I might add. Because, when people are simply pursuing happiness, one can get a (sorely mistaken!!) impression, everything is right in the land of Capitalism — so, if causes for real complaints are gone, we must dig deeper to rouse up new ones. Somebody complimented your demeanour? They must be RACIST!.. Girls learn belly-dancing — to stay fit and please their boyfriends? They are appropriating! And so on.
Oh, the pompous Democratic assholes — the above-quoted view was perfectly in line with the party's (including government officials) thinking until last Friday.
Maybe, not all of the party, but hardly a far fringe — the man was endorsed by the same Star Tribune, which is now reporting on his dropping out. The whole idea, that evil is relative (unless it is Hitler or Bush) and that we don't really have enemies in the world — only friends, whose grievances we haven't accommodated just yet — is firmly planted in the Democratic party today. Mr. Kimmel's attempts to stop "othering" ISIS were perfectly in accordance with the opinions prevailing on the Left. The Left, which temporarily retreated into their "Healing Zone", but who will emerge from there with counter-arguments on how ISIS are different from Islam, and how murdering infidels is really "unislamic" — pretending to believe, they know the opinions and customs of ISIS' target-audience better than ISIS knows them themselves.
No, Mr. Kimmel's views do have a nice and comfortable place in the Democratic party — complete with a "Safe Zone" too — it was just silly of him to underline that point at such inopportune time. Should've waited a month or two...
This whole subthread started, when it was implied, that the West in general — and the US in particular — aren't any better than ISIS and is equally outrage-worthy. This incident was offered as proof of that.
My point is, it proves the opposite. We are better, because the "collateral murder" incident is clearly an outrage to most of us — with Pentagon trying to hide it — while the Paris murders are something, the enemy is proud of and publicizes it as much as they can.
The cooler heads here didn't want to leave Iraq so early, but we are saddled with a President — whom you awarded with a Nobel Peace Prize (a stupid act, which progressives still would not acknowledge as a mistake) — who does not think, there is true evil in the world... Or, if there is, it is his own country. You can blame us for electing him, but his victory was not without your help. Twice.
If you can't afford it, just keep walking — you aren't any worse off than before.
Rich people begin to live (much) longer — CEOs, Senators, judges, and generals alike do not retire restricting career-growths of their underlings. Similar effects in families, with (grand)children never seeing the inheritance. Official retirement age raised (very) high.
A movement springs up denouncing the procedure as somehow unethical — while the Bible's long-living characters suddenly seem less implausible.
A separate movement springs up to demand "free" dosage for everyone — told, there is not enough for all, they demand none get it and proceed to destroy what little stock there is. Fortunately, a break-through — its development funded by the cash windfall from the millionaire "early adopters" — allows to produce enough of the stuff to add it to water supply (in developed countries).
Secret e-mails with government-officials discussing these very predictions and considerations are leaked and discussed by the media as awesome forethought by some and evil conspiracy by others.
Yet another movement begins to claim suffering from allergic and other mysterious-yet-painful reactions to the stuff and try to avoid it.
Something like that... Oh, and, of course, PROFIT!
For an untruth to be a lie, the speaker has to know the speech to be untruthful. Did the crew know, they hit reporters instead of insurgents?
Oh, sure. Do not target civilians. If you know, they are civilians. The whole point here is, they didn't know. People aiming video cameras at you are indiscernible from people aiming grenade-launchers at you. I thought, you'd cite some more obscure rule, that would've — if properly followed — helped them identify the civilians as such....
Now, the Paris killers knew perfectly well, their targets were unarmed civilians. And yet, they targeted them — for publicity. Their rules not only don't prohibit, but, evidently, encourage terrorism. That such murders actually help one's cause in their society is indisputable evidence, that it is worse than ours. Case closed.