According to an article Schneier references, the one religious/ethnic group getting a pass on the full body molestation is.... wait for it.... Muslims!
Woohoo! That is just the cherry on top of the sundae.
Regardless of the psychology of sending people who may or may not die, the cost in human life is still there.
Statistically, our leaders know that thousands of the people they are deploying will die in the war zones. They may not know which ones, but the numbers don't lie.
Here's the quick ref for WCAG 2.0. I'm helping a client to become conformant. It's a pain just to read through the quick ref. It's a lot more than just alt tags.
I don't think we agree on what "proving the concept" means.
The Internet existed in 1970. You could send email with it. But it wasn't proven as a commercializable concept until 25 years later.
You're talking more about existing prior art of the pieces, not the proven concept of the smart phone.
For example, if the smart phone had continued on its current path, my mom wouldn't have one. She'd look at it just like she looked at my palm pilot years before: interesting, but unnecessary.
breaking up Microsoft and Apple would cripple computing for 5-10 years. Kind of like At&t. In a decade we would all be better off
Apple is the one company that's been driving innovation in mp3 players, smart phones, music distribution, and pretty-much in OSes. Android probably wouldn't exist if Apple hand't proven the smart phone concept.
How on earth do you even figure that Apple is bad for consumers? Consumers can leave them any time the value proposition isn't there.
It's not like Apple has key infrastructure locked up like AT&T did with the phone lines. It's not like Apple has government regulations backing up their position in the market place like AT&T did.
Consumers choose Apple over and over because they offer value greater than their competitors. Apple's competitors are forced to become better just to try to keep up and eventually compete. Eliminating Apple wouldn't be good for consumers in the short or long term.
What he does has value. If it didn't, no one would copy his photos. So rather than paying him for his efforts, you denigrate him for trying to make a living doing something that others obviously value? I mean, it's not like he's a big media company trying to use copyright law to beat the hell out of music downloading single mothers while not paying the musicians through corrupt accounting practices.
This guy is a one man show who is doing something positive that he expects to be paid for. Not paying him for his photos is like not paying a teacher for showing up every day to teach our kids, or not paying a software developer to write some company's for-profit code.
The world your philosophy would build is very dark and sad. I don't think you realize who the actual troll is in this discussion.
Hell if I know. The people who did it probably weren't stupid enough to post what they did to 4Chan.
In theory, I'd like to see them receive the same treatment. Being a different country and all, I don't see how you can draw much of a Republican vs Democrat parallel for the purposes of this discussion.
You should examine your recollections for signs of bias, then.
During the first half of W. Bush's presidency, I seem to recall a lot of brouhaha over the then minority Democrat's use of the filibuster and other Senate rules to stall the debate and appointment of Bush's judicial nominees.
It's pretty standard practice in American politics for the minority (one part of congress vs the other and the Presidency is still a minority) to oppose the will of the governing party in order to make it look bad.
Yeah, so everyone got it all wrong. The guy didn't track down her email account, guess her password, download some of her emails, post some of them, hand out the password to others, target her because she was a political figure he didn't like. Nope, none of that malicious, illegal stuff.
He was walking along the internet, minding his own business when whoops! He tripped and fell into her email account, knocking a few emails out by accident.
I'll agree that he was an idiot. I'll agree that he probably wasn't part of some dark left wing conspiracy. He was, however, from a political family, focused on a political candidate he didn't like, and trying to do her harm doing something that even an idiot would have to know is illegal.
The rest are all minor distinctions that he can clarify to people in prison.
Exposing the in-confidence email communications of a candidate can put some pretty out-of-context statements out there and cause a lot of damage to a campaign.
It subverts the public opinion of a candidate in an illegal way. Sorry, the ends don't justify the means.
Yeah, our democracy has trouble functioning. Adding more ethical breaches on top of the ones already there doesn't help at all.
I wouldn't have minded seeing O'Keefe do some prison time. He's a tool, but I don't see how this is a liberal/conservative issue. There were differences:
O'Keefe didn't actually bug the telephone. All they could actually pin on him was entering a federal building under false pretenses with the INTENT of doing more. It's pretty well established legally that intent is not punished the same as committing the crime. Admitting to the intention to tamper with the phones was probably a part of his plea deal. Otherwise that part of the charge would have been a bit circumstantial.
Kernell successfully hacked the account and released the email contents to the public. He compounded his problems by trying to hide evidence. No intent, all action.
Then as far as the sentences go, O'Keefe was sentenced to three years of probation, a fine, and a hundred hours of community service. Kernell has one year in a halfway house, not butt rape prison.
I'm a pretty serious libertarian when it comes to special treatment of government types. They shouldn't get special laws for themselves, special pensions, special healthcare, etc. There shouldn't be a government class that's above the non-government class.
I do, however, believe in the sanctity of the processes of democracy. Screw with a voting machine, vote twice, stop people from voting who have a legal right to, or otherwise break the law in trying to bring down a political candidate; and you should be lucky that you aren't tried for treason.
This guy broke the law trying to subvert the legitimate functioning of democracy. He gets no sympathy from me no matter how stupid I think that Sarah Palin is.
1. When you commit a crime in an attempt to make a presidential election go your way, you bring a lot of media attention to your doorstep. The justice system will usually make sure to prosecute you fully when everyone is watching.
2. Hacking your neighbor's email affects your neighbor and a few other people. Impacting a presidential election with your unlawful actions affects a nation. Shouldn't the impact of your crime play a role in punishment?
Kernell increased the notoriety of the crime himself by trying to interrupt a very public political campaign. Contrary to your assertion, it isn't like Sarah Palin singled him out and sent her hounds after him. I'd be surprised if she was involved at all in the event beyond turning over evidence and cooperating with law enforcement.
Kernell cranked the system up to 11 trying to take down a vice presidential candidate of the US... and got burned. You break the law trying to subvert a presidential election and you should get your ass handed to you.
You might have a point if some criminal stole Sarah Palin's car without knowing who it belonged to then SHE turned the spotlight on him... but that wasn't the case at all. Kernell broke the law in such a way that brought national media attention to it. He has no one to blame but himself for the falling dominoes that he set into motion.
Excellent point. People who claim that TARP and the stimulus had a positive or negative effect are mostly doing so based upon their political affiliation.
The fact that we had to sell our souls to have any effect whatsoever is why we're damned.
Until we have fundamental reforms to our election system, it will continue to happen.
Yes, because reforms to our election system will make people care about politics more than the NFL, Nascar, American Idol, the WWF, and Jesus. Cure stupid and you can reform our election system AND our government.
Calling it some minor inconvenience is like claiming that rape is just the rubbing of some woman's skin against her will. Sorry, you can't spin it that way. He violated the rights of others and he needs to pay for it.
He can go suck a cock in jail while he thinks about what he did.
This nation is going to shit because of all of the greed, irresponsibility, abject ignorance, and corruption - and people on the sidelines are whining because the criminals are being punished too harshly. We're so fucked.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, isn't that just a cop-out?
Their site served only one purpose and they neve made the slightest effort to discourage that use.
It's about like a money launderer for the mob claiming that he doesn't actually commit the crimes that the mob is responsible for.
The Pirate Bay's only purpose was to enable copyright infringement. The rest is just splitting hairs.
According to an article Schneier references, the one religious/ethnic group getting a pass on the full body molestation is.... wait for it.... Muslims!
Woohoo! That is just the cherry on top of the sundae.
Osama, you rascal, you really fucked us good.
Take a look at the Castle Project, which implements Active Record on top of nHibernate.
It's very nicely done.
Regardless of the psychology of sending people who may or may not die, the cost in human life is still there.
Statistically, our leaders know that thousands of the people they are deploying will die in the war zones. They may not know which ones, but the numbers don't lie.
Here's the quick ref for WCAG 2.0. I'm helping a client to become conformant. It's a pain just to read through the quick ref. It's a lot more than just alt tags.
The funny thing is that the government sends thousands of people every year on one way trips to the war zone.
I don't think we agree on what "proving the concept" means.
The Internet existed in 1970. You could send email with it. But it wasn't proven as a commercializable concept until 25 years later.
You're talking more about existing prior art of the pieces, not the proven concept of the smart phone.
For example, if the smart phone had continued on its current path, my mom wouldn't have one. She'd look at it just like she looked at my palm pilot years before: interesting, but unnecessary.
breaking up Microsoft and Apple would cripple computing for 5-10 years. Kind of like At&t. In a decade we would all be better off
Apple is the one company that's been driving innovation in mp3 players, smart phones, music distribution, and pretty-much in OSes. Android probably wouldn't exist if Apple hand't proven the smart phone concept.
How on earth do you even figure that Apple is bad for consumers? Consumers can leave them any time the value proposition isn't there.
It's not like Apple has key infrastructure locked up like AT&T did with the phone lines. It's not like Apple has government regulations backing up their position in the market place like AT&T did.
Consumers choose Apple over and over because they offer value greater than their competitors. Apple's competitors are forced to become better just to try to keep up and eventually compete. Eliminating Apple wouldn't be good for consumers in the short or long term.
What he does has value. If it didn't, no one would copy his photos. So rather than paying him for his efforts, you denigrate him for trying to make a living doing something that others obviously value? I mean, it's not like he's a big media company trying to use copyright law to beat the hell out of music downloading single mothers while not paying the musicians through corrupt accounting practices.
This guy is a one man show who is doing something positive that he expects to be paid for. Not paying him for his photos is like not paying a teacher for showing up every day to teach our kids, or not paying a software developer to write some company's for-profit code.
The world your philosophy would build is very dark and sad. I don't think you realize who the actual troll is in this discussion.
Hell if I know. The people who did it probably weren't stupid enough to post what they did to 4Chan.
In theory, I'd like to see them receive the same treatment. Being a different country and all, I don't see how you can draw much of a Republican vs Democrat parallel for the purposes of this discussion.
You should examine your recollections for signs of bias, then.
During the first half of W. Bush's presidency, I seem to recall a lot of brouhaha over the then minority Democrat's use of the filibuster and other Senate rules to stall the debate and appointment of Bush's judicial nominees.
It's pretty standard practice in American politics for the minority (one part of congress vs the other and the Presidency is still a minority) to oppose the will of the governing party in order to make it look bad.
Yeah, so everyone got it all wrong. The guy didn't track down her email account, guess her password, download some of her emails, post some of them, hand out the password to others, target her because she was a political figure he didn't like. Nope, none of that malicious, illegal stuff.
He was walking along the internet, minding his own business when whoops! He tripped and fell into her email account, knocking a few emails out by accident.
I'll agree that he was an idiot. I'll agree that he probably wasn't part of some dark left wing conspiracy. He was, however, from a political family, focused on a political candidate he didn't like, and trying to do her harm doing something that even an idiot would have to know is illegal.
The rest are all minor distinctions that he can clarify to people in prison.
Exposing the in-confidence email communications of a candidate can put some pretty out-of-context statements out there and cause a lot of damage to a campaign.
It subverts the public opinion of a candidate in an illegal way. Sorry, the ends don't justify the means.
Yeah, our democracy has trouble functioning. Adding more ethical breaches on top of the ones already there doesn't help at all.
Yeah, he could have just stuck with that last line and been okay. His sig is very true too.
I wouldn't have minded seeing O'Keefe do some prison time. He's a tool, but I don't see how this is a liberal/conservative issue. There were differences:
O'Keefe didn't actually bug the telephone. All they could actually pin on him was entering a federal building under false pretenses with the INTENT of doing more. It's pretty well established legally that intent is not punished the same as committing the crime. Admitting to the intention to tamper with the phones was probably a part of his plea deal. Otherwise that part of the charge would have been a bit circumstantial.
Kernell successfully hacked the account and released the email contents to the public. He compounded his problems by trying to hide evidence. No intent, all action.
Then as far as the sentences go, O'Keefe was sentenced to three years of probation, a fine, and a hundred hours of community service. Kernell has one year in a halfway house, not butt rape prison.
I'm a pretty serious libertarian when it comes to special treatment of government types. They shouldn't get special laws for themselves, special pensions, special healthcare, etc. There shouldn't be a government class that's above the non-government class.
I do, however, believe in the sanctity of the processes of democracy. Screw with a voting machine, vote twice, stop people from voting who have a legal right to, or otherwise break the law in trying to bring down a political candidate; and you should be lucky that you aren't tried for treason.
This guy broke the law trying to subvert the legitimate functioning of democracy. He gets no sympathy from me no matter how stupid I think that Sarah Palin is.
Probably not.
1. When you commit a crime in an attempt to make a presidential election go your way, you bring a lot of media attention to your doorstep. The justice system will usually make sure to prosecute you fully when everyone is watching.
2. Hacking your neighbor's email affects your neighbor and a few other people. Impacting a presidential election with your unlawful actions affects a nation. Shouldn't the impact of your crime play a role in punishment?
I completely don't understand your viewpoint.
Kernell increased the notoriety of the crime himself by trying to interrupt a very public political campaign. Contrary to your assertion, it isn't like Sarah Palin singled him out and sent her hounds after him. I'd be surprised if she was involved at all in the event beyond turning over evidence and cooperating with law enforcement.
Kernell cranked the system up to 11 trying to take down a vice presidential candidate of the US... and got burned. You break the law trying to subvert a presidential election and you should get your ass handed to you.
You might have a point if some criminal stole Sarah Palin's car without knowing who it belonged to then SHE turned the spotlight on him... but that wasn't the case at all. Kernell broke the law in such a way that brought national media attention to it. He has no one to blame but himself for the falling dominoes that he set into motion.
Excellent point. People who claim that TARP and the stimulus had a positive or negative effect are mostly doing so based upon their political affiliation.
The fact that we had to sell our souls to have any effect whatsoever is why we're damned.
Until we have fundamental reforms to our election system, it will continue to happen.
Yes, because reforms to our election system will make people care about politics more than the NFL, Nascar, American Idol, the WWF, and Jesus. Cure stupid and you can reform our election system AND our government.
Yes, they're all idiots.
Right wingers are guilty of their own particular sins, but I find the left to be especially virulent by trying to shout the opposition down.
Yeah, reminds me of this image depicting humorous oppression of the majority
Speaking of harsh sentences... that one is in all caps.
Calling it some minor inconvenience is like claiming that rape is just the rubbing of some woman's skin against her will. Sorry, you can't spin it that way. He violated the rights of others and he needs to pay for it.
He can go suck a cock in jail while he thinks about what he did.
This nation is going to shit because of all of the greed, irresponsibility, abject ignorance, and corruption - and people on the sidelines are whining because the criminals are being punished too harshly. We're so fucked.