Of course, I suppose you could say the WBC are all mentally ill, blah blah. So was anyone who would advocate homosexuality not being a sin a few hundred years ago.
The difference, sir, is that I practice philosophy and am not so arrogant as to judge what someone says so quickly. And in this case, as with most all issues concerning freedom of speech, that the only reason you oppose it is based on personal feelings. An empathy to your fellow man.
A line has been crossed, sure. But a line drawn by whom? Of all the people in all the places there are seven billion different lines for innumerable things. Your line is clearly different from my line which is clearly different from the president's or a sorrowful parent of the of the recently deceased children. And this isn't fantasy (not that it would change my reasoning if it were).
There are places where hate speech is outlawed. A lot of places, actually. America is one of the few places where people can actually voice a dissenting opinion about virtually anything and not have a lawsuit over their head (or worse). Are you aware what is hate speech in Iran? Just go there and defame their holy prophet and see what becomes of you. Or perhaps go to North Korea and defame their great leader. The problem, sir, is that the person with the biggest stick gets to draw the line. And when someone doesn't agree with the the person with the big stick, well, they get whacked, usually resulting in deadness.
But nevermind this. These freedoms; of religion, of speech, are essential to our democracy. Without them, the minority is subject to the tyranny of the majority: a part turned against another part. Democracy cannot function if we are allowed at each others throats. So we enforce the true tolerance: allowing the speech and allowing the practice and wiping our hands clean of it. The law need not concern itself, so long as the rights of others have not been infringed upon.
Oh, and these rights. They don't extend to being offended. The law does not give a flying fuck if you're offended, or you don't want your children to see. Because that's the price of freedom. The real price, is that you have to accept the perceived good with the perceived bad. It's an all or nothing game.
And those fellows who don't agree, who would rather have their emotions run them amok and assault members of the WBC. They will be held accountable for their crimes, that crime being assault, possibly even hate crime (hows that for a stroke of irony).
You would destroy all of the freedoms so many have died for you to obtain -- if only because a group is using speech you deem unacceptable. Shame. Shame on you sir.
Hack into a foreign government's computer system and cause $800k worth of damage, violating international laws in the process? Extradition is blocked.
But if you're Richard O'Dwyer and do something completely legal in the UK and causing no direct monetary damage? Theresa May goes out of her way to bend over and let Uncle Sam do his dirty work.
The difference? One guy was looking for UFOs, the other had a website that had links to pirated content. Logic, right?
My feelings could be summed quite well by a lovable Tim Minchin
His asshole of a personality is going to benefit him, actually. He's got those psychopathic traits to succeed because he's willing to trample anyone who gets in his way. The fortunate thing for us is that the crummy FBI and the MPAA are the ones in his way.
They made a statement that they can't reveal the information under threat of national security, but they have to prove that this is actually the case... Without falling back on the same dumb one liner.
I hope the judge and parties involved are smart enough to see this.
I hope, sincerely, that the charges are dropped. Not only did they go out of their way to prosecute someone who did the right thing (which was the right thing, because we were killing civilians, which the military was trying to cover up). But now they're ignoring due process and the rights that he is granted, the rights that the same military purports to protect, strong arming some little guy who just wanted to do the right thing and serve his country.
I would like to see him get a presidential pardon and a full investigation into our military and how they're treating our prisoners. This is unacceptable of the United States's military. What you fight for doesn't fly out of the door just because it's convenient or you want it to. And they should pay the price for violating our most sacred of fundamental principles that have kept democracy alive.
At the very least, I hope to see the judge dismiss the charges with prejudice because the military ignored due process and violated the eighth amendment.
And to think I considered becoming an officer, pathetic. This is why I gave up on that pursuit, because for all of the honor and duty the military so proudly touts, it is failing to live up to those expectations. It's like they don't even know the meaning of the word. There is no honor in torture, and their duty left them when they abandoned our fundamental rights.
Ah yes, this is how it starts. It's for the children, we say. We put up cameras in the street. This is for the children. We allow unwarranted searches. This is for the children. We must stop all depraved content from poisoning our children's minds. And before we realize it, we are once again ensnared in tyranny.
How long before the state's power, unchecked, begins to run amok? How long before the safety of the children becomes the safety of the state? Not long, I'd wager. Enjoy your child's safety while it lasts. Because when it ends, it will not be the internet, child predators, and thieves that you will fear. No, dear parents and concerned citizens, it is from the government -- your government. You gave up freedom, now pay the price.
I implore you, dear people, while there is still time left. Remember, remember the fifth of November.
I'd imagine something like quantum cryptology could help protect users, also encrypt all of the data we keep, if we do keep any. But I think the best method is just to use technology that is fundamentally impossible to track. I also imagine there could be a number of legal and technical hurdles we could throw at any unforeseen FBI raid. Like hidden security cameras that record everything they do in wonderful clarity, so that there is evidence of any mishaps.
But since IP is insufficient to actually warrant criminal action to begin with, we could countersue because they have no basis -- and indeed, since it would be a US company, sue for damages of loss profits incurred by the FBI.
I'm not trying to out Texans as the bad guys here, really.
There does seem to be this issue of how the federal government is the bad guy out to get everyone though. I do question it. And with this latest move Texas hasn't quite been trying to solve problems. Telling the feds to fuck off just isn't a good strategy for anyone. I don't know how that's going to work, especially when the person being pushed around is so, so much bigger. It's like some farmer with a shotgun yelling at a tank to get off his lawn and threatening to shoot if it doesn't.
This could have been resolved diplomatically. Texas could have tried to open talks with OSCE or Hilary Clinton about how they're concerned it may interfere with voters. Maybe they could have come to a compromise and have US citizens observe instead if it's a foreign presence thing, or perhaps train someone from Texas specifically on what the observers are allowed and aren't allowed to do. Maybe even make further compromises with OSCE so they can observe in a more limited fashion that the Texan government would be comfortable with.
An arrogant attitude won't go far towards resolving this, or any, problem. Imagine how much easier it would be for Iran to get nuclear power if they fully cooperated with the US and UN. But they've got their heads so far up their ass (supposing they are trying to do what they said they are, which is admittedly a dubious claim) that it just makes us more suspicious and makes it harder on them.
The reason Texas has been targeted specifically is because of its history of voter abuse.
I know Texas likes to toot it's own horn about how they're all big and tough and don't need no nobody, but really they're really ruining the US's image by doing this and being defiant pricks for no reason. Everyone likes to point out how terrible the federal government is, but that's turning a blind eye to how much worse state governments are.
Okay well maybe if it were a local election, or state only election, they could get away with this. But we're talking about a presidential elections, the future of the national government rests on this. So no, Texas can't just isolate themselves: they're beholden to the federal government in this matter. And it's definitely of concern to the UN who the next president of the entire US will be, so it isn't like this is some trivial matter.
First, thorium fuel cycle reactors, by nature of design, can't meltdown. They have far less waste than conventional reactors because and upwards of 90%+ can be recycled. Those are some serious advantages over conventional reactors that help eliminate many problems.
The part about penning traps was added in hope of giving any physicists a chuckle. Clearly we need dilithium to power our lightsabers before we ever use a slipstream.
Before the rage tides of, "blah blah nuclear is good," comes in I'll point out why this is a good thing. I agree completely that nuclear is good.
For starters the natural gas is cheaper, which is great while we transition, but it's important not to go comfortable on our cushion or cheap electricity. The reactor is, more or less, outdated technology. We need to phase out these older, more dangerous nuclear reactors in favor of thorium reactors. I hope you fellas start writing to your senators and representatives about the importance of investing in thorium cycle reactors. "Clean" coal, wind, solar, hydroelectric... They're all great to invest in, but none of them are as technology feasible right now as these new nuclear reactors. We have the ability, gentlemen, in our generation, to usher in an era of clean, safe, and cheap nuclear power.
It's this and then we look to fusion as the next innovation. And after that, penning traps and black holes. But more on that later.
Addictive and dangerous substances such as those found in more powerful ADHD medicines should not be ethically given out to those who do not require it. It is dangerous and may contribute to widespread misuse and abuse.
Safer forms of mind-enhancing chemicals, like caffeine, may be ethically used. Additional therapies like electrostimulation may also be used to increase brain performance. Learning to make our minds work better is not a bad thing, but creating a society where one is forced to play with a dangerous substance to get an edge is ethically questionable at best.
Slashdot Mirror
Inappropriate in your eyes, you mean.
Of course, I suppose you could say the WBC are all mentally ill, blah blah. So was anyone who would advocate homosexuality not being a sin a few hundred years ago.
The difference, sir, is that I practice philosophy and am not so arrogant as to judge what someone says so quickly. And in this case, as with most all issues concerning freedom of speech, that the only reason you oppose it is based on personal feelings. An empathy to your fellow man.
A line has been crossed, sure. But a line drawn by whom? Of all the people in all the places there are seven billion different lines for innumerable things. Your line is clearly different from my line which is clearly different from the president's or a sorrowful parent of the of the recently deceased children. And this isn't fantasy (not that it would change my reasoning if it were).
There are places where hate speech is outlawed. A lot of places, actually. America is one of the few places where people can actually voice a dissenting opinion about virtually anything and not have a lawsuit over their head (or worse). Are you aware what is hate speech in Iran? Just go there and defame their holy prophet and see what becomes of you. Or perhaps go to North Korea and defame their great leader. The problem, sir, is that the person with the biggest stick gets to draw the line. And when someone doesn't agree with the the person with the big stick, well, they get whacked, usually resulting in deadness.
But nevermind this. These freedoms; of religion, of speech, are essential to our democracy. Without them, the minority is subject to the tyranny of the majority: a part turned against another part. Democracy cannot function if we are allowed at each others throats. So we enforce the true tolerance: allowing the speech and allowing the practice and wiping our hands clean of it. The law need not concern itself, so long as the rights of others have not been infringed upon.
Oh, and these rights. They don't extend to being offended. The law does not give a flying fuck if you're offended, or you don't want your children to see. Because that's the price of freedom. The real price, is that you have to accept the perceived good with the perceived bad. It's an all or nothing game.
And those fellows who don't agree, who would rather have their emotions run them amok and assault members of the WBC. They will be held accountable for their crimes, that crime being assault, possibly even hate crime (hows that for a stroke of irony).
You would destroy all of the freedoms so many have died for you to obtain -- if only because a group is using speech you deem unacceptable. Shame. Shame on you sir.
Hack into a foreign government's computer system and cause $800k worth of damage, violating international laws in the process? Extradition is blocked.
But if you're Richard O'Dwyer and do something completely legal in the UK and causing no direct monetary damage? Theresa May goes out of her way to bend over and let Uncle Sam do his dirty work.
The difference? One guy was looking for UFOs, the other had a website that had links to pirated content. Logic, right?
My feelings could be summed quite well by a lovable Tim Minchin
We're the higher leadership, not those senators and house members.
His asshole of a personality is going to benefit him, actually. He's got those psychopathic traits to succeed because he's willing to trample anyone who gets in his way. The fortunate thing for us is that the crummy FBI and the MPAA are the ones in his way.
That's circular reasoning.
They made a statement that they can't reveal the information under threat of national security, but they have to prove that this is actually the case ... Without falling back on the same dumb one liner.
I hope the judge and parties involved are smart enough to see this.
It was destructive to legitimate file sharing too.
And illegal, very illegal.
They may obtain said text messages with a warrant obtained legally.
This is how we do things in America. We are not a police-state. We are not a military-state.
Deal with it.
I hope, sincerely, that the charges are dropped. Not only did they go out of their way to prosecute someone who did the right thing (which was the right thing, because we were killing civilians, which the military was trying to cover up). But now they're ignoring due process and the rights that he is granted, the rights that the same military purports to protect, strong arming some little guy who just wanted to do the right thing and serve his country.
I would like to see him get a presidential pardon and a full investigation into our military and how they're treating our prisoners. This is unacceptable of the United States's military. What you fight for doesn't fly out of the door just because it's convenient or you want it to. And they should pay the price for violating our most sacred of fundamental principles that have kept democracy alive.
At the very least, I hope to see the judge dismiss the charges with prejudice because the military ignored due process and violated the eighth amendment.
And to think I considered becoming an officer, pathetic. This is why I gave up on that pursuit, because for all of the honor and duty the military so proudly touts, it is failing to live up to those expectations. It's like they don't even know the meaning of the word. There is no honor in torture, and their duty left them when they abandoned our fundamental rights.
2081: Grad student enrollment drops to dangerously low levels.
It better not have rounded corners or else Apple may try to sue.
Sure.
A real revolution.
Yeah, but that alchemy thing >_>
Einstein wasn't religious.
Newton was, but I think most people would be comfortable labeling him delusional :P
Ah yes, this is how it starts. It's for the children, we say. We put up cameras in the street. This is for the children. We allow unwarranted searches. This is for the children. We must stop all depraved content from poisoning our children's minds. And before we realize it, we are once again ensnared in tyranny.
How long before the state's power, unchecked, begins to run amok? How long before the safety of the children becomes the safety of the state? Not long, I'd wager. Enjoy your child's safety while it lasts. Because when it ends, it will not be the internet, child predators, and thieves that you will fear. No, dear parents and concerned citizens, it is from the government -- your government. You gave up freedom, now pay the price.
I implore you, dear people, while there is still time left. Remember, remember the fifth of November.
Naturally we plan for that very contingency.
I'd imagine something like quantum cryptology could help protect users, also encrypt all of the data we keep, if we do keep any. But I think the best method is just to use technology that is fundamentally impossible to track. I also imagine there could be a number of legal and technical hurdles we could throw at any unforeseen FBI raid. Like hidden security cameras that record everything they do in wonderful clarity, so that there is evidence of any mishaps.
But since IP is insufficient to actually warrant criminal action to begin with, we could countersue because they have no basis -- and indeed, since it would be a US company, sue for damages of loss profits incurred by the FBI.
So does anyone want to startup an ISP that protects its users privacy? Just think of all the people that would flock to it.
Out with the old, in with the new.
Lenovo's thinkpads can do that. So Ballmer is just out of the loop.
I'm not trying to out Texans as the bad guys here, really.
There does seem to be this issue of how the federal government is the bad guy out to get everyone though. I do question it. And with this latest move Texas hasn't quite been trying to solve problems. Telling the feds to fuck off just isn't a good strategy for anyone. I don't know how that's going to work, especially when the person being pushed around is so, so much bigger. It's like some farmer with a shotgun yelling at a tank to get off his lawn and threatening to shoot if it doesn't.
This could have been resolved diplomatically. Texas could have tried to open talks with OSCE or Hilary Clinton about how they're concerned it may interfere with voters. Maybe they could have come to a compromise and have US citizens observe instead if it's a foreign presence thing, or perhaps train someone from Texas specifically on what the observers are allowed and aren't allowed to do. Maybe even make further compromises with OSCE so they can observe in a more limited fashion that the Texan government would be comfortable with.
An arrogant attitude won't go far towards resolving this, or any, problem. Imagine how much easier it would be for Iran to get nuclear power if they fully cooperated with the US and UN. But they've got their heads so far up their ass (supposing they are trying to do what they said they are, which is admittedly a dubious claim) that it just makes us more suspicious and makes it harder on them.
The reason Texas has been targeted specifically is because of its history of voter abuse.
I know Texas likes to toot it's own horn about how they're all big and tough and don't need no nobody, but really they're really ruining the US's image by doing this and being defiant pricks for no reason. Everyone likes to point out how terrible the federal government is, but that's turning a blind eye to how much worse state governments are.
Okay well maybe if it were a local election, or state only election, they could get away with this. But we're talking about a presidential elections, the future of the national government rests on this. So no, Texas can't just isolate themselves: they're beholden to the federal government in this matter. And it's definitely of concern to the UN who the next president of the entire US will be, so it isn't like this is some trivial matter.
It seems I have been misunderstood.
First, thorium fuel cycle reactors, by nature of design, can't meltdown. They have far less waste than conventional reactors because and upwards of 90%+ can be recycled. Those are some serious advantages over conventional reactors that help eliminate many problems.
The part about penning traps was added in hope of giving any physicists a chuckle. Clearly we need dilithium to power our lightsabers before we ever use a slipstream.
You do not sound like someone very familiar with the neurophysiological effects of addiction. I suggest reading a textbook or two on the subject.
Before the rage tides of, "blah blah nuclear is good," comes in I'll point out why this is a good thing. I agree completely that nuclear is good.
For starters the natural gas is cheaper, which is great while we transition, but it's important not to go comfortable on our cushion or cheap electricity. The reactor is, more or less, outdated technology. We need to phase out these older, more dangerous nuclear reactors in favor of thorium reactors. I hope you fellas start writing to your senators and representatives about the importance of investing in thorium cycle reactors. "Clean" coal, wind, solar, hydroelectric... They're all great to invest in, but none of them are as technology feasible right now as these new nuclear reactors. We have the ability, gentlemen, in our generation, to usher in an era of clean, safe, and cheap nuclear power.
It's this and then we look to fusion as the next innovation. And after that, penning traps and black holes. But more on that later.
Addictive and dangerous substances such as those found in more powerful ADHD medicines should not be ethically given out to those who do not require it. It is dangerous and may contribute to widespread misuse and abuse.
Safer forms of mind-enhancing chemicals, like caffeine, may be ethically used. Additional therapies like electrostimulation may also be used to increase brain performance. Learning to make our minds work better is not a bad thing, but creating a society where one is forced to play with a dangerous substance to get an edge is ethically questionable at best.
Dope and paint the wood with flame retardant if it's such a concern.
Problem solved.