TFA's a little short on detail, but why are they blocking violent content in the first place? I assume they have some reason to do so.
They do - it's because they are your betters. All they want is to keep you safe, and in order to do that they have to protect you. This is that.
And if that's the case, should it matter how old or famous the unacceptably violent work is?
I don't think that this should matter anyway, personally, but then again, I'm an American so I'm only used to my freedoms being suppressed in subtle ways.
Bottom line: if Hamlet fits their definition of inappropriate content, should they make explicit exceptions for particularly famous and important works, or should they evaluate the overall filtering/blocking objectives and rationale as well as the mechanisms and algorithms implementing those restrictions?
IMO we can "should" all day long...I think that they "should" realize that censorship is a waste of time that does more harm than good. They *won't* realize that, but I think that they *should*.
Why? They will just fail it. You would spend most of your time wiping the drool from their mouths while they stare at BO's picture. Liberal are vial creatures.
You think they're all test-tube babies or something? And you're calling THEM stupid?
Notice that they bitch about PRISM... but don't bother mentioning the UK's program, or any of the other monitoring programs run by various governments around the world. The US is hardly the only country doing it, but it's popular to bash on America and it draws attention away from their own spy programs. The purpose of "in-housing" the email is so it's easier for their own agencies to access.
That's because the only people that were in the dark about the various spying programs are the citizens, and most of the Governments have a vested interest in keeping ALL of the programs secret. No country is going to risk the "wrath" of the others when (so far) it's just the whistleblowers actually getting into trouble.
The only "solution" to avoid being tracked is to stay offline, stay off of the phone, and only conduct conversations face to face within a Faraday cage.
I would imagine that it would happen about the same way that Reservists in the States are treated. I had a coworker get sent to the middle east a few years ago, and when he got back the company had filled his position. When he returned, they "made" a position for him to keep him on the payroll and give him something to do until an appropriate "real" position became available.
Laying off 90% of the Sysadmins AND more transparency? Yeah, they'll be more "transparent" about the programs that we're aware of (which will slowly be phased out and disappear), while an entirely new staff succeeds at creating NEW secret programs that we'll hear about....never. They only need to be transparent about what we already know about (after all, how long has the DEA been cheating the system without getting busted?)...the shit that's secret they get to KEEP secret because nobody is going to ask about what they don't know.
This is just a plan to get the NSA/Government back to the same levels of douchery as they had 10 years ago. Your Freedoms are gone, and gone they will remain.
So which part of 'self-evident' makes you think that people need to be GIVEN their rights? The whole point to the Bill of Rights was to enumerate rights that human beings have, regardless of who they are or where they were born. Notice how it says that it's the Governments role to secure the people's rights (NOT to grant them).
Well, the initial stories said that Snowden had acquired the information and intentionally waited until after the last election to release it. The reasons that I remember being given were that Snowden had HOPED for some CHANGE in the Government and for some wacky reason thought that Obama would be the one to do it. Apparently the data was released after he determined that the hope and change thing wasn't gonna happen.
Right now it sounds to me a lot like blackmail - the documents will continue to be released as long as the US Gubmint starts acting like spoiled brats. We can see that this hasn't changed, so we can expect documents to continue to be released. If they're smart they'll break up the data from least to most damaging and release it in that order...the more the US resists decency, the worse their reputation will get until the Americans (or hell, other countries) get together to kick some ass.
You know what this is? Fear. This is the same fear that they've been jamming down our throats for years, and we finally have an indication that the tables can turn. These douchebags are AFRAID of the sexually inactive anarchists. I can't help but see this as a good trend.
If we could trust the NSA it would be one thing , but they shown us we can't.
This is where I see most people get tripped up. You're wrong. The fact that they want to spy on us at ALL proves that you're wrong. No Government can be trusted, and that includes the "good" one. Our Constitution was drafted specifically with this in mind...I really wish they'd teach this in public school, but that's probably asking too much.
They are supposed to be there to help us being safe , right now it's them we don't feel safe with.
You're assuming that the Government wants to keep you safe. This is false. The Government wants you to pay them to think that they're keeping you safe, but the reality is that they couldn't give a shit as long as they're getting paid.
I'm confused (although this is fairly normal). If they have the license plate number, and if cars are pretty much all equipped with GPS, why is it such a chore to find them? I mean, we can bitch about different agencies sharing information inappropriately with other departments, but we already know it's taking place anyway. I don't see what is gained by NOT using the technology that's already in place...I mean, presumably the DMV knows which plate goes with which VIN, and with the VIN couldn't they pull the GPS info? Obviously not an expert, but shit, if we're going to have our rights stripped away anyway why not use their power (at least occasionally) to solve some problems? (I'm sorry, is that too logical?)
The public is not "willing to give up its rights", it is smart enough to know it didn't have them to begin with.
Minor quibble: The public is too stupid to know that they aren't GIVEN rights, but that if they want them, they have to TAKE them. The Government isn't interested in letting you be free...you have to do that for yourself.
That isn't actually a reason, though. It just says 'some other people a long time ago also thought they shouldn't'. It just asks the question 'why should the US constitution say that?'.
Well yeah, but that should prompt most people to see what those reasons were. Our founders were concerned that their political views would be used against them in their daily lives. They used psuedonyms to plan the Revolution, and our Bill of Rights reflects that (and many other concerns that they had). Their newsletters of the time - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Papers - make it pretty clear what their concerns were and why.
Computer Intrusion is illegal, and the FBI knows that.
Yup...people have been clamoring for more transparency...perhaps this is that?
So is spying on someone without a warrant, and given that they can't know who they're spying on, I don't see how they could possibly have obtained a warrant for this action.
Agreed - the legislation that's in place has granted them far too much power, far more than most of us feel comfortable with.
I hope the TOR user community sues them. Very roughly. And with extreme prejudice.
That'd be nice, but I doubt it'll happen. It won't happen any faster than voting decency into office will:-/
The US has gotten way too fucking big for it's britches.
I agree - we need to get these douchebags outta office and get someone in office that does their f'ing job!
I used to think maybe there was justification for the anti-terrorism attitude that the US has.
I'm sure that at least some of the people involved believe that they're doing the right thing. Their belief doesn't make it "right" however...they need to stay the f out of my life. If I'm not breaking the law, they've got no business knowing a goddamned thing about me.
I've changed my mind.
My sympathies now lie with those who rise up against these goddamn born-again Nazis in their attempt at world domination.
YES! We need to protest, rise up as one mind, with one purpose, to effect change in our Government! Occupy Wall Street was only the beginning!
You go, Al Queda!
I'm sorry, WHAT?!?!?!
Woah, woah, woah, woah....where in the hell did that come from? Now, I fully agree that we need changes in our Government, and I'm even on board with listening to what revolutionaries have to say, but that's a far damn cry from supporting the murder of innocent citizens and the repression of (plenty) of basic human rights. No, I'm afraid your downmods were your own fault.
but I bet it blows the mind of those who think it is a crime to subsidies business or that government can just print money and pay out the nose for their crap.
He's not lying (or even fibbing, not even a little). The last 3 jobs I've had as a tech required 10+ hour days Mon/Fri, and if I wanted to do anything on the weekend that would take more than a few hours I had to notify my boss (in case they tried to reach me and I was unavailable). I'm no manager or lead or anything like that...I'm just the guy that they want to make sure is available in case a computer breaks.
Once upon a time those jobs were restricted to the heads of the company and they were awarded accordingly. Now those jobs are everywhere unless you're literally the bottom rung on the ladder.
Slashdot Mirror
TFA's a little short on detail, but why are they blocking violent content in the first place? I assume they have some reason to do so.
They do - it's because they are your betters. All they want is to keep you safe, and in order to do that they have to protect you. This is that.
And if that's the case, should it matter how old or famous the unacceptably violent work is?
I don't think that this should matter anyway, personally, but then again, I'm an American so I'm only used to my freedoms being suppressed in subtle ways.
Bottom line: if Hamlet fits their definition of inappropriate content, should they make explicit exceptions for particularly famous and important works, or should they evaluate the overall filtering/blocking objectives and rationale as well as the mechanisms and algorithms implementing those restrictions?
IMO we can "should" all day long...I think that they "should" realize that censorship is a waste of time that does more harm than good. They *won't* realize that, but I think that they *should*.
...and then they enter politics.
Why? They will just fail it. You would spend most of your time wiping the drool from their mouths while they stare at BO's picture. Liberal are vial creatures.
You think they're all test-tube babies or something? And you're calling THEM stupid?
That's the same reason the NSA doesn't think there's anything wrong with spying on the world. Still believe that?
Let me know when we're able to block ONE surveillance program and we can start discussing the others.
Notice that they bitch about PRISM... but don't bother mentioning the UK's program, or any of the other monitoring programs run by various governments around the world. The US is hardly the only country doing it, but it's popular to bash on America and it draws attention away from their own spy programs. The purpose of "in-housing" the email is so it's easier for their own agencies to access.
That's because the only people that were in the dark about the various spying programs are the citizens, and most of the Governments have a vested interest in keeping ALL of the programs secret. No country is going to risk the "wrath" of the others when (so far) it's just the whistleblowers actually getting into trouble.
The only "solution" to avoid being tracked is to stay offline, stay off of the phone, and only conduct conversations face to face within a Faraday cage.
I would imagine that it would happen about the same way that Reservists in the States are treated. I had a coworker get sent to the middle east a few years ago, and when he got back the company had filled his position. When he returned, they "made" a position for him to keep him on the payroll and give him something to do until an appropriate "real" position became available.
Laying off 90% of the Sysadmins AND more transparency? Yeah, they'll be more "transparent" about the programs that we're aware of (which will slowly be phased out and disappear), while an entirely new staff succeeds at creating NEW secret programs that we'll hear about....never. They only need to be transparent about what we already know about (after all, how long has the DEA been cheating the system without getting busted?)...the shit that's secret they get to KEEP secret because nobody is going to ask about what they don't know.
This is just a plan to get the NSA/Government back to the same levels of douchery as they had 10 years ago. Your Freedoms are gone, and gone they will remain.
Do you REALLY want to see Sarah Palin in a position of authority? (bent over is not an authoritative position)
It's only the messengers' fault if you can't blame anyone but yourself.
So which part of 'self-evident' makes you think that people need to be GIVEN their rights? The whole point to the Bill of Rights was to enumerate rights that human beings have, regardless of who they are or where they were born. Notice how it says that it's the Governments role to secure the people's rights (NOT to grant them).
Well, the initial stories said that Snowden had acquired the information and intentionally waited until after the last election to release it. The reasons that I remember being given were that Snowden had HOPED for some CHANGE in the Government and for some wacky reason thought that Obama would be the one to do it. Apparently the data was released after he determined that the hope and change thing wasn't gonna happen.
Right now it sounds to me a lot like blackmail - the documents will continue to be released as long as the US Gubmint starts acting like spoiled brats. We can see that this hasn't changed, so we can expect documents to continue to be released. If they're smart they'll break up the data from least to most damaging and release it in that order...the more the US resists decency, the worse their reputation will get until the Americans (or hell, other countries) get together to kick some ass.
You know what this is? Fear. This is the same fear that they've been jamming down our throats for years, and we finally have an indication that the tables can turn. These douchebags are AFRAID of the sexually inactive anarchists. I can't help but see this as a good trend.
If we could trust the NSA it would be one thing , but they shown us we can't .
This is where I see most people get tripped up. You're wrong. The fact that they want to spy on us at ALL proves that you're wrong. No Government can be trusted, and that includes the "good" one. Our Constitution was drafted specifically with this in mind...I really wish they'd teach this in public school, but that's probably asking too much.
They are supposed to be there to help us being safe , right now it's them we don't feel safe with.
You're assuming that the Government wants to keep you safe. This is false. The Government wants you to pay them to think that they're keeping you safe, but the reality is that they couldn't give a shit as long as they're getting paid.
I'm confused (although this is fairly normal). If they have the license plate number, and if cars are pretty much all equipped with GPS, why is it such a chore to find them? I mean, we can bitch about different agencies sharing information inappropriately with other departments, but we already know it's taking place anyway. I don't see what is gained by NOT using the technology that's already in place...I mean, presumably the DMV knows which plate goes with which VIN, and with the VIN couldn't they pull the GPS info? Obviously not an expert, but shit, if we're going to have our rights stripped away anyway why not use their power (at least occasionally) to solve some problems? (I'm sorry, is that too logical?)
Taxes. Movie Logic!
The public is not "willing to give up its rights", it is smart enough to know it didn't have them to begin with.
Minor quibble: The public is too stupid to know that they aren't GIVEN rights, but that if they want them, they have to TAKE them. The Government isn't interested in letting you be free...you have to do that for yourself.
That isn't actually a reason, though. It just says 'some other people a long time ago also thought they shouldn't'. It just asks the question 'why should the US constitution say that?'.
Well yeah, but that should prompt most people to see what those reasons were. Our founders were concerned that their political views would be used against them in their daily lives. They used psuedonyms to plan the Revolution, and our Bill of Rights reflects that (and many other concerns that they had). Their newsletters of the time - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Papers - make it pretty clear what their concerns were and why.
It's not like these whales are flying out of the stands like a NASCAR crash gone wrong and killing people in the crowd.
Yet.
I hadn't heard this - something in the news?
Computer Intrusion is illegal, and the FBI knows that.
Yup...people have been clamoring for more transparency...perhaps this is that?
So is spying on someone without a warrant, and given that they can't know who they're spying on, I don't see how they could possibly have obtained a warrant for this action.
Agreed - the legislation that's in place has granted them far too much power, far more than most of us feel comfortable with.
I hope the TOR user community sues them. Very roughly. And with extreme prejudice.
That'd be nice, but I doubt it'll happen. It won't happen any faster than voting decency into office will :-/
The US has gotten way too fucking big for it's britches.
I agree - we need to get these douchebags outta office and get someone in office that does their f'ing job!
I used to think maybe there was justification for the anti-terrorism attitude that the US has.
I'm sure that at least some of the people involved believe that they're doing the right thing. Their belief doesn't make it "right" however...they need to stay the f out of my life. If I'm not breaking the law, they've got no business knowing a goddamned thing about me.
I've changed my mind.
My sympathies now lie with those who rise up against these goddamn born-again Nazis in their attempt at world domination.
YES! We need to protest, rise up as one mind, with one purpose, to effect change in our Government! Occupy Wall Street was only the beginning!
You go, Al Queda!
I'm sorry, WHAT?!?!?!
Woah, woah, woah, woah....where in the hell did that come from? Now, I fully agree that we need changes in our Government, and I'm even on board with listening to what revolutionaries have to say, but that's a far damn cry from supporting the murder of innocent citizens and the repression of (plenty) of basic human rights. No, I'm afraid your downmods were your own fault.
but I bet it blows the mind of those who think it is a crime to subsidies business or that government can just print money and pay out the nose for their crap.
Oh. Like politicians.
This is also an outcome (and the most likely one).
He's not lying (or even fibbing, not even a little). The last 3 jobs I've had as a tech required 10+ hour days Mon/Fri, and if I wanted to do anything on the weekend that would take more than a few hours I had to notify my boss (in case they tried to reach me and I was unavailable). I'm no manager or lead or anything like that...I'm just the guy that they want to make sure is available in case a computer breaks.
Once upon a time those jobs were restricted to the heads of the company and they were awarded accordingly. Now those jobs are everywhere unless you're literally the bottom rung on the ladder.
The working climate in the US is dismal.
This.