Amtrak politely told them to go fuck off, that they already have their own security and don't need more.
And yet, Amtrak (itself a government agency) continues to ask your name, and to assert the right to check your ID at any time. They constantly remind passengers about it on the stations too.
More to the point, the commuter rail, buses, etc. aren't safe either. You can be asked to identify yourself — on pain of being denied boarding or worse. The dreaded "papers please" has materialized and history will record, that — as you've just observed — it happened during (in the middle of!) Obama's Presidency.
I have. Conductors do not have to ask for it, but may choose to — at their sole discretion. And you must comply or they can call police and kick you off the train at the next stop.
Commuter trains never ask for ID, nor would it really be possible for them to do so due to time constraints.
I would take that bet since these are anonymous and could be, and probably are, members of the alt right.
Wow... Do you really believe, your Left colleagues are all innocent of such sentiment? No, if you read the rest of the each comment — and other ones like it — you'll be disabused of your naivette. The constant references to genitalia and threats of rape are a dead give-away for your brethren — both "alt-" and mainstream Left.
But I do agree about it being impossible to verify. Which kinda invalidates the entire idea of "public feedback", does not it?
Technology my tail! What about things changed by our caring, loving, and omniscient government? When traveling — by air or train — without registering with authorities was possible? When being mistreated at the airport would cause the mistreater to be disciplined, rather than the victim — arrested?
When one could buy health insurance for about $140/month (just over $200 in today's money)? Remember?..
You already have that right — and always did. With very few exceptions, whatever you can legally see, hear, or otherwise perceive, you can record and even sell the recordings others.
Watch how quickly all tracking stops when such a law is passed.
programming tasks worth a fifth of the total marks were leaked repeatedly online.
But, but, but... Don't we all know, that information wants to be free? And that any attempts to censor anything are treated as damage and routed around?
Yes, usually it is up to the sellers to decide. But Gawker aren't the sellers any more — they are bankrupt and owned by their creditors, represented by the bankruptcy judge. It is the judge's duty to liquidate the property in a manner most profitable to the creditors. Hence my statement: whoever wants to thwart Thiel, has to offer more money.
You are not wrong here. Indeed, Thiel never accused Gawker of slandering anybody.
by outing him
WTF? Thiel was openly gay years before Gawker first heard of him... Get your alternative facts closer to reality.
the news was true.
"Revenge porn" is nearly always true as well — the videos and photos are unaltered. Is it Ok to do it? How about "doxing"?
His revenge campaign is petty and should be thwarted by all means available.
His revenge campaign is complete — he caused the assholes to run into the ground. He just wants to piss at their crash-site. To "thwart" him, you have to offer the Gawker's creditors a deal better than Thiel is offering. Pony up the cash, or shut up.
% fortune -m 'Joseph Stalin' %% (fortunes) A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.
-- Joseph Stalin %% Even God cannot change the past.
-- Joseph Stalin %% Gaiety is the most outstanding feature of the Soviet Union.
-- Joseph Stalin %% In the future, there will be fewer but better Russians.
-- Joseph Stalin
I'm not a rocket scientist. But it would seem, making contact with an interstellar rock — and even forcing it to change speed/direction enough to become a Moon's satellite — would be more achievable than a meaningful Mars expedition.
It does not have to be this one — according to an anonymous reply here, there are thousands of such objects passing through the Solar system on any given day. We could pick and choose something, that would only require an achievable delta-V to be caught...
No. For a dystopian surveillance State you need Collectivism, which "private-property religionists" oppose in all both of its incarnations: Fascism and Socialism.
It would seem, such "visitor" from outside of our Solar system would be a very interesting thing to study. Can we, perhaps, think up a way of capturing the next one somehow? Change the speed and direction of it just enough for it start orbiting the Moon, for example (too dangerous to mess with an Earth orbit, where a mistake can send it on our heads).
The source code is open for anyone and everyone. Indeed, it is open.
your license does not conform to the Open Source Initiative's definition
Yeah, if you use your own definition of a term, you can claim any fact to be true or false.
"No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups".
Except Nazis, right? It is Ok to discriminate against Nazis, is not it? That's what the whole TFA is about.
We are supposed to sympathize with the poor musicians and their conflict between earning a living, while discriminating against Nazis — while calling names and frowning upon anyone discriminating against other persons and groups, even if far more murderous and otherwise evil.
Some of the open-source software I wrote caries a modified BSD-license. There is a separate item banning any and all usage by persons owning a Che Guevara T-shirt or any other paraphernalia praising or otherwise glorifying the Communist mass-murderer.
stock music is 'a quick way for a talented musician to make a small buck.
As long as no one is forced to sign away their rights, there is nothing to see here.
There was much violence against the disagreeing citizenry during said conflict.
None of it to be praised — most of it to be ashamed of.
He has refused his Assent to Laws,
More bullshit. The revolutionaries had nothing against the particular king — George III — indeed, with the British monarchy what it was at the time, it made no sense to single out one person, who didn't even have all that much power.
No. The revolution was against the ruling regime — for all the enumerated reasons. The King, whoever he was, was merely a symbol of it.
On contrast, the "Antifa" today are perfectly content with the regime overall — indeed, they'd like it to be more oppressive (and Fascist): higher taxes, more mandates, more regulations. They don't hate the President, as Americans hated the King. Indeed, had it been President Clinton, they would've loved it... They just hate Trump — the one person.
Just who is this omniscient and benevolent "We" here? Why TF is this blatant power-grab of other people's property not flamed to death by the outraged Slashdotters? Where are the supposed "anti-Fascists", when Fascism is marching on in the guise of "sensible regulations"?
Facebook is not a government agency to merit the concern of taxpayers — it is a business. They are neither vitally important for human survival (like food or medicine), nor are they poisoning rivers, etc. — so the usual excuses to "sensibly regulate" do not apply. Unless you are a stock-holder, back off!
You are trying to state that the etymology of the word fascism is it's definition, which is inaccurate.
Of course, it is inaccurate to define terms by the mere etymology. And yet, that's exactly what you did, when you define "Antifa" as simply "anti-Fascist" — a statement I ridiculed so successfully.
Maybe, in time, there will be a separation of nonviolent anti-fascists
It is not just their violence (the forcible suppression of opposition), that makes them pro-Fascism. They are all, to a man, collectivist and see nothing wrong in expansion of government and its ever wider control of industry and commerce. They may not be nationalistic, but this part of the definition you offered is not, actually, present in the dictionary one.
And that is, what various people in this thread have been telling you and others. "Antifa", contrary to the word's etymology, means "Fascists".
The violence of the revolutionaries was aimed at the king's soldiers, not the fellow civilians disagreeing.
against the God-anointed King.
No, it was not against the King — it was for Independence. For self-government. The so-called "Antifa" aren't opposing the Federal government at all — they're happy to see its power expand (which, accidentally, makes them Fascist). They simply don't like the current President, that's all.
But I suppose that was OK.
Whether that was Ok or not, thanks for conceding, that the violence of today's "Antifa" is not accidental, but pervasive and systematic, and encouraged by the rest of the organization.
And "fascism" simply refers to "fasces" — or "bundles". Are you sure, you want to argue over semantics?
I very much hope that they do so within the bounds of the law.
Your hope is misplaced — whatever the word "antifa" means or is supposed to mean, the organization(s) calling themselves or known as "Antifa" today are violent by nature, admit being violent, and are proud of the violence.
Slashdot Mirror
And yet, Amtrak (itself a government agency) continues to ask your name, and to assert the right to check your ID at any time. They constantly remind passengers about it on the stations too.
More to the point, the commuter rail, buses, etc. aren't safe either. You can be asked to identify yourself — on pain of being denied boarding or worse. The dreaded "papers please" has materialized and history will record, that — as you've just observed — it happened during (in the middle of!) Obama's Presidency.
I have. Conductors do not have to ask for it, but may choose to — at their sole discretion. And you must comply or they can call police and kick you off the train at the next stop.
Just you wait.
Wow... Do you really believe, your Left colleagues are all innocent of such sentiment? No, if you read the rest of the each comment — and other ones like it — you'll be disabused of your naivette. The constant references to genitalia and threats of rape are a dead give-away for your brethren — both "alt-" and mainstream Left.
But I do agree about it being impossible to verify. Which kinda invalidates the entire idea of "public feedback", does not it?
Technology my tail! What about things changed by our caring, loving, and omniscient government? When traveling — by air or train — without registering with authorities was possible? When being mistreated at the airport would cause the mistreater to be disciplined, rather than the victim — arrested?
When one could buy health insurance for about $140/month (just over $200 in today's money)? Remember?..
According to you and yours, there is a White supremacist in the Oval Office. It does not mean, what you think it means...
That said, I strongly doubt, any of those people "supremacists" have ever told Pai anything like
... or any of the other well-reasoned and sensible arguments collected here.
All I know about Net Neutrality I learned from Cher and other entertainers via Twitter. And I am outraged.
You already have that right — and always did. With very few exceptions, whatever you can legally see, hear, or otherwise perceive, you can record and even sell the recordings others.
Watching...
To sincerely feel this sentiment, one must actually be a Liberal — not an Authoritarian masquerading as such...
Hello? Police? I'd like to report a homophobic verbal assault...
Right here, in this thread there is duke_cheetah2003, who sees nothing wrong in banning "hate speech".
Actually, the Illiberal snowflakes pictured here would do exactly that, given a chance.
But, but, but... Don't we all know, that information wants to be free? And that any attempts to censor anything are treated as damage and routed around?
Yes, usually it is up to the sellers to decide. But Gawker aren't the sellers any more — they are bankrupt and owned by their creditors, represented by the bankruptcy judge. It is the judge's duty to liquidate the property in a manner most profitable to the creditors. Hence my statement: whoever wants to thwart Thiel, has to offer more money.
You are not wrong here. Indeed, Thiel never accused Gawker of slandering anybody.
WTF? Thiel was openly gay years before Gawker first heard of him... Get your alternative facts closer to reality.
"Revenge porn" is nearly always true as well — the videos and photos are unaltered. Is it Ok to do it? How about "doxing"?
His revenge campaign is complete — he caused the assholes to run into the ground. He just wants to piss at their crash-site. To "thwart" him, you have to offer the Gawker's creditors a deal better than Thiel is offering. Pony up the cash, or shut up.
% fortune -m 'Joseph Stalin'
%% (fortunes)
A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.
-- Joseph Stalin
%%
Even God cannot change the past.
-- Joseph Stalin
%%
Gaiety is the most outstanding feature of the Soviet Union.
-- Joseph Stalin
%%
In the future, there will be fewer but better Russians.
-- Joseph Stalin
I'm not a rocket scientist. But it would seem, making contact with an interstellar rock — and even forcing it to change speed/direction enough to become a Moon's satellite — would be more achievable than a meaningful Mars expedition.
It does not have to be this one — according to an anonymous reply here, there are thousands of such objects passing through the Solar system on any given day. We could pick and choose something, that would only require an achievable delta-V to be caught...
No. For a dystopian surveillance State you need Collectivism, which "private-property religionists" oppose in all both of its incarnations: Fascism and Socialism.
It would seem, such "visitor" from outside of our Solar system would be a very interesting thing to study. Can we, perhaps, think up a way of capturing the next one somehow? Change the speed and direction of it just enough for it start orbiting the Moon, for example (too dangerous to mess with an Earth orbit, where a mistake can send it on our heads).
The source code is open for anyone and everyone. Indeed, it is open.
Yeah, if you use your own definition of a term, you can claim any fact to be true or false.
Except Nazis, right? It is Ok to discriminate against Nazis, is not it? That's what the whole TFA is about.
We are supposed to sympathize with the poor musicians and their conflict between earning a living, while discriminating against Nazis — while calling names and frowning upon anyone discriminating against other persons and groups, even if far more murderous and otherwise evil.
Some of the open-source software I wrote caries a modified BSD-license. There is a separate item banning any and all usage by persons owning a Che Guevara T-shirt or any other paraphernalia praising or otherwise glorifying the Communist mass-murderer.
As long as no one is forced to sign away their rights, there is nothing to see here.
None of it to be praised — most of it to be ashamed of.
More bullshit. The revolutionaries had nothing against the particular king — George III — indeed, with the British monarchy what it was at the time, it made no sense to single out one person, who didn't even have all that much power.
No. The revolution was against the ruling regime — for all the enumerated reasons. The King, whoever he was, was merely a symbol of it.
On contrast, the "Antifa" today are perfectly content with the regime overall — indeed, they'd like it to be more oppressive (and Fascist): higher taxes, more mandates, more regulations. They don't hate the President, as Americans hated the King. Indeed, had it been President Clinton, they would've loved it... They just hate Trump — the one person.
Just who is this omniscient and benevolent "We" here? Why TF is this blatant power-grab of other people's property not flamed to death by the outraged Slashdotters? Where are the supposed "anti-Fascists", when Fascism is marching on in the guise of "sensible regulations"?
Facebook is not a government agency to merit the concern of taxpayers — it is a business. They are neither vitally important for human survival (like food or medicine), nor are they poisoning rivers, etc. — so the usual excuses to "sensibly regulate" do not apply. Unless you are a stock-holder, back off!
Of course, it is inaccurate to define terms by the mere etymology. And yet, that's exactly what you did, when you define "Antifa" as simply "anti-Fascist" — a statement I ridiculed so successfully.
It is not just their violence (the forcible suppression of opposition), that makes them pro-Fascism. They are all, to a man, collectivist and see nothing wrong in expansion of government and its ever wider control of industry and commerce. They may not be nationalistic, but this part of the definition you offered is not, actually, present in the dictionary one.
And that is, what various people in this thread have been telling you and others. "Antifa", contrary to the word's etymology, means "Fascists".
The violence of the revolutionaries was aimed at the king's soldiers, not the fellow civilians disagreeing.
No, it was not against the King — it was for Independence. For self-government. The so-called "Antifa" aren't opposing the Federal government at all — they're happy to see its power expand (which, accidentally, makes them Fascist). They simply don't like the current President, that's all.
Whether that was Ok or not, thanks for conceding, that the violence of today's "Antifa" is not accidental, but pervasive and systematic, and encouraged by the rest of the organization.
And "fascism" simply refers to "fasces" — or "bundles". Are you sure, you want to argue over semantics?
Your hope is misplaced — whatever the word "antifa" means or is supposed to mean, the organization(s) calling themselves or known as "Antifa" today are violent by nature, admit being violent, and are proud of the violence.