What else are they watching. The ability of the system to arbitrarily detain people without due proccess is mortifying.
I urge everyone to close all real name accounts and halt all activity on facebook not directly related to agitation of political ideas immediately. All cordination of facebook activities from this point on should be cordinated off site.
Now, if AMD linux drivers could really not suck, that would be awesome.
Because their drivers are crappy. Their FOSS driver is crappy and their propiertary driver is crappy. They are really putting the cart before the horse here. What they really need to do, is just a massive bug hunt with their drivers. Right now they are lacking.
Oh, and its hurting sales, because people won't buy AMD cards because they are known to be buggy. Even after they fix them, its going to take a lot of them to be seen as reliable.
unpopular as it is, they can always raise taxes. Simply just take our fucking money without having Officer Hardon come fuck with us, or generate criminal records and the otherwise unwarranted search of persons and property.
which doesn't change the definition of "net neutrality", the concept of the internet as a public network, that private companies only charge access to, but don't decide content.
I am also OK with takedown orders/siezures of equipment as long as there is a court ordered warrant, where probable cause has been established, and the warrant exists only for the minimum amount of equipment reasonibly suspected to be involved in the crime. This is the same burden of proof for law enforcement under all other circumstances, and my only demands is that the same standards apply everywhere, and the cops aren't simply given unlimited power because society is simply affraid of the internet.
Context. Judaeism is both a race and religeon. There is a stark diffrence between jewish ethnicity, and jewish religeon.
Israel is not founded on the jewish religeon, but on the jewish race. 90% of the population is secular, and its founders where athiests and national socialists.
American and European Jews mainly identify by the Jewish religeon, but the Jewish religeon has a racial element to it.Your jewish Identity determined by birth, i.e. your mother's status, rather than your beliefs. Becoming a Christian is often as simple as getting baptized, and reciting "God loved the world so he gave them his only son". Becoming a Muslim is as simple as reciting "There is no god but allah, and his messenger muhammed, peace be upon him" in arabic.
Convert to judaeism? Forget about it. The proccess is extremely difficult, and many rabbis simply won't do it unless you are either marrying in, or they have some other motive or really like you. Even still, your conversion most likely won't be recognized by all of judaeism. Under biblical law you'd still be a "gate jew", and not a real jew, something attainable only through birth. Forunately if you lived in America this wouldn't be an issue, because American Jews are extremely westernized, and they don't follow this.
Oh, but thats religous standards on race, of which Americanized jews(hassids not withstanding) are notoriously lax with. Most consider themselves white, and are very accepting of their neighbors. However, Israeli standards on judaeism are soley race based with the exact same standards as nazi germany had on the subject: Two or more Jewish granparents:
Point 2:
Millions of your fellow worshippers were just slaughtered wholesale because of their religion
you obviously have not studied the holocaust too well. They were slaughtered for their race. A jew was not someone who believed in judaeism, but someone with two or more jewish grandparents. Secular jews, and even people with some jewish blood and no relation to the Jewish community where also sent to the camps, or at least singled out from society. Along with communists, gays, gypsies, even slavs(eastern europeans).
Time to find a place where we can at least stand up for ourselves
you can stand up for yourself anywhere for being a human being. Also exploited where roma(gypsies) and homosexuals, they never got a state for being themselves.
British promised that such a place was available in one of their colonial holdings
basicly occupied land based on imperial holdings, with original residents still living there. Israel was founded by colonists from Europe.
that place happens to be your ancestral homeland!
Ancesteral homeland of what? A race. my people insiuates race. "Blood relation" that is not extended family. That is race. This is also ridicolous. Its land your ancestors lost in some long ancient war. Its also land they gained a thousand years prior in some long ancient war as well. You have no relation to any actual flesh and blood people from that long fallen ancient empire. Just distant memories.
Your also using Hitler logic. The German people have also been pushed around for most of history. By France, Spain, England, Russia. They only became a country in 1876, with No empire, and no colonies and the traditional European powers saw them as a threat to their imperialism. But hey, it just so happens their enemies have thier "ancient homeland", where northern european people originally came from, in a lot shorter time span than the ancient Judaen empire.
Also by your logic, is that of Osama Bin Laden reviving the Islamic Caliphate from Anniulus to India, again, their ancient homeland, of which is a much shorter timespan between that and the ancient judaen empire.
Mousillini and his Rome, Saddam Hueissan and Babylonia. The list goes on, but you share a common delusion with dictatories, Fasc
Assuming the NSA finds out. If your the best the NSA has, and you know all their systems because your the guy who's basicly the NSA, who exists to find you?
Snowden was the guy. He didn't get caught until he outed himself to give the leaks credibility. Of course if he was doing espionage he just would have kept is mouth shut and accepted money.
What is more likely, is that NSA contractors have jobs moonlighting for large corporations as intellegence officers an simply use NSA resources at work for their corporate patrons. If they outright gave them the code, it would make themselves fairly worthless as consultants. This matches up to teh %60 of espionage being economic. I.E. Corporations pay NSA employees for use of NSA resources. It also calls into question the technology "invented here" meme, which just might have been, "invented somewhere else, but stolen by the NSA and given to private partners".
Combine this with the fact the best "security" i.e. hackers working for the government, are for-profit blackhats that get caught and flip as part of a plea deal.
I'll stick with, I meant what I said and I said what I meant. It is meant to disadvantage governments that discourage free expression; regardless of their allegiances.
Except its made by the government in charge of the world's largest prison system, and by far the largest per-capita incarceration rate. Irony being duly noted. Despite what you think, the US Government does not tollerate dissent.
Nor is the US Government populist, and rarely do they sponser populist regimes overseas unless they are wealthy enough to buy senators. They are notorious for astro-turfing revolutions for gain though.
I do agree, there are many benefits to TOR. However much of the code should be double checked, and because of the US Government's closeness to the TOR development team, all of which most likely have their personal information documented, heavily, it really wouldn't be hard to manipulate them.
It also would not be hard to put pressure on tor exit node operators to co-operate with the federal government. Many of them are already run by MITM attacks, many of them are suspected to be NSA already. Not only could the feds get foreign citizens to use TOR to beat their own surivallence, it could set up its own survialence on the same citizens via owning the exit nodes. It could then create profiles and find who it can be best manipulated/used to create an astro-turfed revolution.
Of course there are work arounds for this, but before the first wave of "pedophile" busts, Freedom hosting also included a hidden site called inspecTOR, which simply looked for, and reported on bad nodes. visitors could generate code to copypasta into their torrc to keep from using them. Among the ban list was a node named NSAFortMeade. Most likely a simple troll, but its odd behavior had intrigued many. This site with the rest of "Freedom Hosting" went down and never came back, and was never re-implemented. Also, things like canada's "pedo bust" last week, was really a indiscriminate TOR server raid. The government had no idea how much, if any of the data they collected actually had kiddie porn if you actually read the article. They did know that they were running TOR. Thats all it really took for Canadian authorities to simply sieze the servers, and then label the event as a "pedophile bust".
Also, serveral weaknesses in TOR make it vulernble to attack by government. Attack might not always mean "shutdown", but "forced compliance":
1. Tor Traffic, by design is meant to look like TOR traffic, its only supposed to be indistiguishable from other TOR traffic. Its easy to spot nodes and bridges. Support for anonymizing the "first hop" with a dedicated bridge exists. You also need to have information on the bridge. So it only protects people in target countries that exist outside the bulk of TOR infrastructure. You also need specific information given to you from someone in a reigon accross the globe. Random citizens do not generally share this information with other random citizens, that speak diffrent languages in two countries with hostile to eachother governments. Publicly publishing such data would result in authorities finding and blocking the public nodes. Its only real practicle application is with spies, and those with help on the outside, i.e. recruited assets of an intellegency agency.
2. Because all casual, non-spy TOR users are already flagged as users, if push came to shove they can all be arrested if need be. Given the fact that pedophiles exist on TOR it would not be unbelievable to anyone that everyone arrested was a pedophile. They would not have to arrest everyone, just enough to scare the rest off, weakening the network further by lack of mainstream usage. Further driving it to the fringes makes it even easier to target, because it will be increasingly run by the people most people don't give a fuck about, and of course, government agents running the fastest nodes, which of course don't get busted. Remember, this is the USA with the highest incarceation rate in
Net Neutrality has nothing to do with government/law enforcement ordered takedowns. Its simply non-discrimination of data. ISPs are allowed to regulate the size of the pipe,(i.e. rate limit the whole connection), how much data goes through total, and nothing else. It has nothing to do with blocking sites based on court order.
This is what online anonymity promotes: Hatred of women and rape culture.
Yes, we all know it hardly existed before hand. If you really cared about such, you'd have better luck invetisgating the athletics department. If you questioned the actual rapists and actual people promoting and normalizing rape if they post online, if they learned to rape people online, the answer would most likely be no. You also give no real evidence to support your claim. Rape culture is propigated by people who are very much not anonymous, not online, but simply above the rules. People who are too big to jail, popular and "member of the community", which we are unwilling to prosecute. These are the people who commit most of the actual rapes. Example is Bill Cosby, most of the same "leftist" hollywood types where quick to question the accusations against Mr Cosby, and many people quick to dismiss them because he played the loving Mr Huxable on TV 20 years ago. People like him commit most of the rapes. The biggest reason why we can't deal with rape culture is because some of its biggest supporters are women calling themselves feminists.
Speaking of online anonyimitty, I am logged in and you are not. The irony is both hillarious and glaring.
If you went to class every day and called your professor an ugly cunt that should be beaten every day, how would that affect your relationship with that professor? If you said your professor was a dick and should have someone sodomize him with a baseball bat during the Q&A portion of a lecture, would that help or hurt your grade in the class? What if you could do it anonymously? Which of those two cases would produce a better societal outcome for you, personally? Which one would produce a better outcome for the class as a whole?
the problem is most of society deals with this every day. those with money, status, and power are systematicly allowed to abuse those without, to their face, with no consequnces.
The only thing here is we are aghast that people without power, money, or status are now taking the same liberties.
Perhaps we need more "Golden Rule" unviersalism in our ethos and this probably would not happen, as most people learn by example.
Of course not. All I am asking as you do not throw "due proccess" out the window because you are threatened this time. Due proccess exists for a reason. The reason is that not everyone accused is guilty.
There is no such thing as "true socialism" because its litterally dozens of entirely unrelated ideas who only share their disgust for capitalism, and desire for a worker run society without bosses.
Some of these societies are filled with justice, some are simply oppressive states, sans the usual motives of profit, heridtary, and race.
Yik Yak has already agreed to co-operate with court orders, and this title is the same alarmist sensationalist fear-monger garbage which gets us involved with things like "The War on Drugs", and "The War on Terror", except changing the threat to a cause we readily identify behind.
This is pure hype designed to make us scared into giving away our freedoms, a re-branding of the police state to sell it to people with leftist sympathies, nothing more. They are banking the on fact people will have an emotional response rather than think through the consequnces of having an ever-watching police state.
How many rapes or other violent attacks will this really stop? Then think about how many attacks by the police, and how many people will be ostracized or harrased by the police or university for drugs, political beliefs, or simply being wierd. The real kicker is do you really trust the police to act without court orders?
I think a good start is getting the university to start getting court orders for rape and other threats and lets make all the complaints public so we can debate this publicly. Perhaps we can get a discussion going at the root of why people feel the need to make these threats, and perhaps ways to express themselves more constructively, without threatening other people.
The alternative is simply letting the police drag the same terror state into college campuses that is already present in the rest of society. We are told our neighbors or our enemy, and we simply run to the police forking over all rights in the proccess everytime we feel threatened. Every time we feel threatened is everytime the news media decides we need less rights and decides to threaten us.
Its almost as if we should be discussing the larger problems in society that lead people to rape eachother rather than trying to lock down speech.
Lets face it, rape is endemic on campuses, and endemic among athletes and all the people are are told are good upstanding people in society, so we don't do anything about it. Do you want to really prevent rapes? Lets hold a conversation about rape and other forms of violence, instead of trying to sweep it under the rug with censorship. Lets discuss openly the problems.
Yik-Yak's policy is to comply with legally binding orders to fork over data, which is fair. I see no reason that the school should not have to get warrants and court orders if people believe there is a legitimate threat. Going to the police can get those orders. I am not comfortable with a system that monitors people without court orders, and court orders that are not based on reasonible suspicion. This is a huge problem right now, and pretending mass survailence will stop rape is a big misnomer.
What this typical for mainstream news article is being hysterical about is demanding we fork over freedoms
If people have to be kept in check top down from authority figures to prevent them from raping and murdering people, its a sign society has some pretty deep seeded problems.
The only thing yik-yak is doing is bringing deep seeded social problems to light.
Think about it, before hand, the type of people who posted this stuff would be raping and hurting people anyway, which can be attested by the amount of rapes and assaults that happen on college campuses to start with. The obscene behavior by college kids predates these anonymous threats.
But, in typical American fashion, you'd rather not deal with the underlying problem.
The objective is to allow political dissidents under repressive regimes a method of communicating politically online without getting in trouble by their governments.
you mean regimes unfriendly to the US
Hopefully this would lead to grass-roots "regime change" around the world.
you mean overthrow of regimes unfriendly to US foreign intrests, and nothing else. Why don't you just come out and say "TOR was designed by US intellegence for the sake of helping spies communicate, the the grand goal of trying to overthrow unfriendly governments".
The US track record on this shows that populist intrest is rarely a motive behind involvement or regime change. Generaly either self-intrest, or intrest of corporate patrons.
People who want to avoid the US government should probably avoid projects sponsored BY the US Government for the purpose of spreading American values
At the same token its a Free Software/Open Source project, so the code is in anyones hands. Saying something is strictly bad, or cannot be adopted for other means simply because the it was made with bad intentions.
I think more importantly, when people are on the way up, we make the inverse "winner edit", to try and justify why some people have status, and privledge the rest of us do not to try and justify status and position. Admitting someone who is "winning" didn't really deserve it or got luck puts our own social status at risk. People with power and influence to use that power and influence to weed out any threats. Critics are threats.
Only when they fall from grace, we have no inhabitions of saying we have really felt the entire time.
There are no "looser edits", just repealing of "winner edits".
Truth is, none of us in our heart of hearts really like status, class, or privledge. We all know its entirely bullshit. Only some of us have the audacity to risk being put on a watch list. Its why, when we have the power of anonyimitty feel more free to critique these structures of power and class. Its why we obssess over privacy, and saftey, and strong crypto, and fear the NSA.
I'd like to tell you me with a straight face there are bigger and more dangerous sociopaths on the internet than in congress, heading large corporations, in the press, and in the police force.
They offer a perfect playground for sociopaths and misanthropes.
As for Shilling, I'd hardly call a bunch of jocks posting on social networks how much they want to bang his "hot daughter" trolls, or even mildly shocking. The article is also very misleading, and shilling is most likely lying when he said he never heard that kind of sex talk about young women in locker rooms. He simply looked up personal information of people who posted real pictures of themselves and real names, using their public social media accounts.
He's also playing with fire, lest the real trolls(i.e. chanistan, formerly "Anonymous") find this as a "challenge accepted", and he is totally fucked.
subsides would actually help bring the technology mainstream because it will encourage adoption which will make it cheaper in volume of scale. It will also incentivise development which will refine the technology to make it cheaper, more reliable, and more effecient.
this gets modded +5 insightful?, what the fuck are you even talking about. You know absolutely nothing about either running a country successfully or fighting a war.
1. ISIS has close to zero approval rating in the middle east. Most of their recruits are westerners.
2. ISIS has more to do with Al-Maliki's general incompetence, and utter hatred of sunnism that left many sunnis feeling disenfranchized, the complex situation western europe has with the Islamic faith and its adherent residents, and the power vacuum left not by Saddam, but by Assad, propelled by the western backed war against him. With this, the total incompetence, and lack of cohesion in the Iraqi army, which let ISIS capture US made weapons, and steal a fuckton of gold from Iraq. 99.5% of Sunni muslims might not like ISIS, but they feared Al-Maliki to the point where putting together a national army in Iraq to defend against them became an impossible task.
3. Western funding of daesh and daesh-like groups in libya, syria, etc.. durring the "Arab Spring" to overthrow regimes. ISIS fighters had US Support all the way up until ISIS crossed the border into Iraq, and wiped out the Iraqi army.
This is absolutely nothing like the French-US involvement in Viet-Nam. Not only do you have not the slightest clue on how to fight a war, I bet you can't expand on your idea more than general angry rhetoric, or even back it up with historical examples. You also know nothing about the war in viet-nam or how we "lost" it.
If you want to have a semantics discussion go elsewhere, if you want to have an actual discussion I suggest you read the actual manuals for linux distributions that were "tuned" (according to your words) for super computer and high-node count clusters.
please do. Your phrase of "might as well not be linux", is not equivilant to "adjusted some options at compile time". Its still Linux, and guess what, it will still run most linux binaries, and it will definately run most Linux code. Its still all the same code.
I suggest you compare the binaries and then return to me and dare to repeat said statement
compare them how, with a hash sum, or for compatibility.
. I get it, you hate systemd
Actually no. I think we can chalk you off to a troll.
you fail to understand the concept that the same code can compile to very different binaries with a single pre-processor variable
You don't understand how the same code is the same program, and regardless of the binary being diffrent.
and you don't like the fact that some people out there want productivity
random acusations.
Next you also claim that you don't need a configuration file to know which modules to load at boot
No, I said it doesn't use a shell script. now you're flat out lying about what I said. Great.
So I must apologize for having a hard time taking you serious. And lets not forget how you twisted my words into "you think I'm stalking you". You're a bad show man.
wat? I'm certain your either a troll, or purposefully reciting FUD.
no, we have two sets of corporate parties that take money and work for diffrent lobbying groups. At the moment they are both more than happy enough to take swipes at eachother's money source and nothing else. But its entirely unfair to say either party is more "capitalist" than the other. Social issues sure, the republicans in general are slightly more socially conservative, but that is slowly changing, as both parties are moving away from token images they pretend to care about to simply offering protection from "the other".
I run cyanogenmod on a fairly obscure phone, that I bought with the sole intention of running CM and other custom roms, after cross checking feature lists and compatibility.
Slashdot Mirror
I urge everyone to close all real name accounts and halt all activity on facebook not directly related to agitation of political ideas immediately. All cordination of facebook activities from this point on should be cordinated off site.
Now, if AMD linux drivers could really not suck, that would be awesome.
Because their drivers are crappy. Their FOSS driver is crappy and their propiertary driver is crappy. They are really putting the cart before the horse here. What they really need to do, is just a massive bug hunt with their drivers. Right now they are lacking.
Oh, and its hurting sales, because people won't buy AMD cards because they are known to be buggy. Even after they fix them, its going to take a lot of them to be seen as reliable.
unpopular as it is, they can always raise taxes. Simply just take our fucking money without having Officer Hardon come fuck with us, or generate criminal records and the otherwise unwarranted search of persons and property.
which doesn't change the definition of "net neutrality", the concept of the internet as a public network, that private companies only charge access to, but don't decide content. I am also OK with takedown orders/siezures of equipment as long as there is a court ordered warrant, where probable cause has been established, and the warrant exists only for the minimum amount of equipment reasonibly suspected to be involved in the crime. This is the same burden of proof for law enforcement under all other circumstances, and my only demands is that the same standards apply everywhere, and the cops aren't simply given unlimited power because society is simply affraid of the internet.
Point 1:
Context. Judaeism is both a race and religeon. There is a stark diffrence between jewish ethnicity, and jewish religeon.
Israel is not founded on the jewish religeon, but on the jewish race. 90% of the population is secular, and its founders where athiests and national socialists.
American and European Jews mainly identify by the Jewish religeon, but the Jewish religeon has a racial element to it.Your jewish Identity determined by birth, i.e. your mother's status, rather than your beliefs. Becoming a Christian is often as simple as getting baptized, and reciting "God loved the world so he gave them his only son". Becoming a Muslim is as simple as reciting "There is no god but allah, and his messenger muhammed, peace be upon him" in arabic.
Convert to judaeism? Forget about it. The proccess is extremely difficult, and many rabbis simply won't do it unless you are either marrying in, or they have some other motive or really like you. Even still, your conversion most likely won't be recognized by all of judaeism. Under biblical law you'd still be a "gate jew", and not a real jew, something attainable only through birth. Forunately if you lived in America this wouldn't be an issue, because American Jews are extremely westernized, and they don't follow this.
Oh, but thats religous standards on race, of which Americanized jews(hassids not withstanding) are notoriously lax with. Most consider themselves white, and are very accepting of their neighbors. However, Israeli standards on judaeism are soley race based with the exact same standards as nazi germany had on the subject: Two or more Jewish granparents:
Point 2:
Millions of your fellow worshippers were just slaughtered wholesale because of their religion
you obviously have not studied the holocaust too well. They were slaughtered for their race. A jew was not someone who believed in judaeism, but someone with two or more jewish grandparents. Secular jews, and even people with some jewish blood and no relation to the Jewish community where also sent to the camps, or at least singled out from society. Along with communists, gays, gypsies, even slavs(eastern europeans).
Time to find a place where we can at least stand up for ourselves
you can stand up for yourself anywhere for being a human being. Also exploited where roma(gypsies) and homosexuals, they never got a state for being themselves.
British promised that such a place was available in one of their colonial holdings
basicly occupied land based on imperial holdings, with original residents still living there. Israel was founded by colonists from Europe.
that place happens to be your ancestral homeland!
Ancesteral homeland of what? A race. my people insiuates race. "Blood relation" that is not extended family. That is race. This is also ridicolous. Its land your ancestors lost in some long ancient war. Its also land they gained a thousand years prior in some long ancient war as well. You have no relation to any actual flesh and blood people from that long fallen ancient empire. Just distant memories.
Your also using Hitler logic. The German people have also been pushed around for most of history. By France, Spain, England, Russia. They only became a country in 1876, with No empire, and no colonies and the traditional European powers saw them as a threat to their imperialism. But hey, it just so happens their enemies have thier "ancient homeland", where northern european people originally came from, in a lot shorter time span than the ancient Judaen empire.
Also by your logic, is that of Osama Bin Laden reviving the Islamic Caliphate from Anniulus to India, again, their ancient homeland, of which is a much shorter timespan between that and the ancient judaen empire.
Mousillini and his Rome, Saddam Hueissan and Babylonia. The list goes on, but you share a common delusion with dictatories, Fasc
Snowden was the guy. He didn't get caught until he outed himself to give the leaks credibility. Of course if he was doing espionage he just would have kept is mouth shut and accepted money.
What is more likely, is that NSA contractors have jobs moonlighting for large corporations as intellegence officers an simply use NSA resources at work for their corporate patrons. If they outright gave them the code, it would make themselves fairly worthless as consultants. This matches up to teh %60 of espionage being economic. I.E. Corporations pay NSA employees for use of NSA resources. It also calls into question the technology "invented here" meme, which just might have been, "invented somewhere else, but stolen by the NSA and given to private partners".
Combine this with the fact the best "security" i.e. hackers working for the government, are for-profit blackhats that get caught and flip as part of a plea deal.
I'll stick with, I meant what I said and I said what I meant. It is meant to disadvantage governments that discourage free expression; regardless of their allegiances.
Except its made by the government in charge of the world's largest prison system, and by far the largest per-capita incarceration rate. Irony being duly noted. Despite what you think, the US Government does not tollerate dissent.
Nor is the US Government populist, and rarely do they sponser populist regimes overseas unless they are wealthy enough to buy senators. They are notorious for astro-turfing revolutions for gain though.
I do agree, there are many benefits to TOR. However much of the code should be double checked, and because of the US Government's closeness to the TOR development team, all of which most likely have their personal information documented, heavily, it really wouldn't be hard to manipulate them.
It also would not be hard to put pressure on tor exit node operators to co-operate with the federal government. Many of them are already run by MITM attacks, many of them are suspected to be NSA already. Not only could the feds get foreign citizens to use TOR to beat their own surivallence, it could set up its own survialence on the same citizens via owning the exit nodes. It could then create profiles and find who it can be best manipulated/used to create an astro-turfed revolution.
Of course there are work arounds for this, but before the first wave of "pedophile" busts, Freedom hosting also included a hidden site called inspecTOR, which simply looked for, and reported on bad nodes. visitors could generate code to copypasta into their torrc to keep from using them. Among the ban list was a node named NSAFortMeade. Most likely a simple troll, but its odd behavior had intrigued many. This site with the rest of "Freedom Hosting" went down and never came back, and was never re-implemented. Also, things like canada's "pedo bust" last week, was really a indiscriminate TOR server raid. The government had no idea how much, if any of the data they collected actually had kiddie porn if you actually read the article. They did know that they were running TOR. Thats all it really took for Canadian authorities to simply sieze the servers, and then label the event as a "pedophile bust".
Also, serveral weaknesses in TOR make it vulernble to attack by government. Attack might not always mean "shutdown", but "forced compliance":
1. Tor Traffic, by design is meant to look like TOR traffic, its only supposed to be indistiguishable from other TOR traffic. Its easy to spot nodes and bridges. Support for anonymizing the "first hop" with a dedicated bridge exists. You also need to have information on the bridge. So it only protects people in target countries that exist outside the bulk of TOR infrastructure. You also need specific information given to you from someone in a reigon accross the globe. Random citizens do not generally share this information with other random citizens, that speak diffrent languages in two countries with hostile to eachother governments. Publicly publishing such data would result in authorities finding and blocking the public nodes. Its only real practicle application is with spies, and those with help on the outside, i.e. recruited assets of an intellegency agency.
2. Because all casual, non-spy TOR users are already flagged as users, if push came to shove they can all be arrested if need be. Given the fact that pedophiles exist on TOR it would not be unbelievable to anyone that everyone arrested was a pedophile. They would not have to arrest everyone, just enough to scare the rest off, weakening the network further by lack of mainstream usage. Further driving it to the fringes makes it even easier to target, because it will be increasingly run by the people most people don't give a fuck about, and of course, government agents running the fastest nodes, which of course don't get busted. Remember, this is the USA with the highest incarceation rate in
Net Neutrality has nothing to do with government/law enforcement ordered takedowns. Its simply non-discrimination of data. ISPs are allowed to regulate the size of the pipe,(i.e. rate limit the whole connection), how much data goes through total, and nothing else. It has nothing to do with blocking sites based on court order.
This is what online anonymity promotes: Hatred of women and rape culture.
Yes, we all know it hardly existed before hand. If you really cared about such, you'd have better luck invetisgating the athletics department. If you questioned the actual rapists and actual people promoting and normalizing rape if they post online, if they learned to rape people online, the answer would most likely be no. You also give no real evidence to support your claim. Rape culture is propigated by people who are very much not anonymous, not online, but simply above the rules. People who are too big to jail, popular and "member of the community", which we are unwilling to prosecute. These are the people who commit most of the actual rapes. Example is Bill Cosby, most of the same "leftist" hollywood types where quick to question the accusations against Mr Cosby, and many people quick to dismiss them because he played the loving Mr Huxable on TV 20 years ago. People like him commit most of the rapes. The biggest reason why we can't deal with rape culture is because some of its biggest supporters are women calling themselves feminists.
Speaking of online anonyimitty, I am logged in and you are not. The irony is both hillarious and glaring.
If you went to class every day and called your professor an ugly cunt that should be beaten every day, how would that affect your relationship with that professor? If you said your professor was a dick and should have someone sodomize him with a baseball bat during the Q&A portion of a lecture, would that help or hurt your grade in the class? What if you could do it anonymously? Which of those two cases would produce a better societal outcome for you, personally? Which one would produce a better outcome for the class as a whole?
the problem is most of society deals with this every day. those with money, status, and power are systematicly allowed to abuse those without, to their face, with no consequnces.
The only thing here is we are aghast that people without power, money, or status are now taking the same liberties.
Perhaps we need more "Golden Rule" unviersalism in our ethos and this probably would not happen, as most people learn by example.
Of course not. All I am asking as you do not throw "due proccess" out the window because you are threatened this time. Due proccess exists for a reason. The reason is that not everyone accused is guilty.
Some of these societies are filled with justice, some are simply oppressive states, sans the usual motives of profit, heridtary, and race.
Yik Yak has already agreed to co-operate with court orders, and this title is the same alarmist sensationalist fear-monger garbage which gets us involved with things like "The War on Drugs", and "The War on Terror", except changing the threat to a cause we readily identify behind.
This is pure hype designed to make us scared into giving away our freedoms, a re-branding of the police state to sell it to people with leftist sympathies, nothing more. They are banking the on fact people will have an emotional response rather than think through the consequnces of having an ever-watching police state.
How many rapes or other violent attacks will this really stop? Then think about how many attacks by the police, and how many people will be ostracized or harrased by the police or university for drugs, political beliefs, or simply being wierd. The real kicker is do you really trust the police to act without court orders?
I think a good start is getting the university to start getting court orders for rape and other threats and lets make all the complaints public so we can debate this publicly. Perhaps we can get a discussion going at the root of why people feel the need to make these threats, and perhaps ways to express themselves more constructively, without threatening other people.
The alternative is simply letting the police drag the same terror state into college campuses that is already present in the rest of society. We are told our neighbors or our enemy, and we simply run to the police forking over all rights in the proccess everytime we feel threatened. Every time we feel threatened is everytime the news media decides we need less rights and decides to threaten us.
Lets face it, rape is endemic on campuses, and endemic among athletes and all the people are are told are good upstanding people in society, so we don't do anything about it. Do you want to really prevent rapes? Lets hold a conversation about rape and other forms of violence, instead of trying to sweep it under the rug with censorship. Lets discuss openly the problems.
Yik-Yak's policy is to comply with legally binding orders to fork over data, which is fair. I see no reason that the school should not have to get warrants and court orders if people believe there is a legitimate threat. Going to the police can get those orders. I am not comfortable with a system that monitors people without court orders, and court orders that are not based on reasonible suspicion. This is a huge problem right now, and pretending mass survailence will stop rape is a big misnomer.
What this typical for mainstream news article is being hysterical about is demanding we fork over freedoms
If people have to be kept in check top down from authority figures to prevent them from raping and murdering people, its a sign society has some pretty deep seeded problems.
The only thing yik-yak is doing is bringing deep seeded social problems to light.
Think about it, before hand, the type of people who posted this stuff would be raping and hurting people anyway, which can be attested by the amount of rapes and assaults that happen on college campuses to start with. The obscene behavior by college kids predates these anonymous threats.
But, in typical American fashion, you'd rather not deal with the underlying problem.
The objective is to allow political dissidents under repressive regimes a method of communicating politically online without getting in trouble by their governments.
you mean regimes unfriendly to the US
Hopefully this would lead to grass-roots "regime change" around the world.
you mean overthrow of regimes unfriendly to US foreign intrests, and nothing else. Why don't you just come out and say "TOR was designed by US intellegence for the sake of helping spies communicate, the the grand goal of trying to overthrow unfriendly governments".
The US track record on this shows that populist intrest is rarely a motive behind involvement or regime change. Generaly either self-intrest, or intrest of corporate patrons.
People who want to avoid the US government should probably avoid projects sponsored BY the US Government for the purpose of spreading American values
At the same token its a Free Software/Open Source project, so the code is in anyones hands. Saying something is strictly bad, or cannot be adopted for other means simply because the it was made with bad intentions.
You want "anti-trolling legislation", this is what you will get.
The only diffrence between this and the Curt Shilling article is how some dumbfuck english major wrote them.
Only when they fall from grace, we have no inhabitions of saying we have really felt the entire time.
There are no "looser edits", just repealing of "winner edits".
Truth is, none of us in our heart of hearts really like status, class, or privledge. We all know its entirely bullshit. Only some of us have the audacity to risk being put on a watch list. Its why, when we have the power of anonyimitty feel more free to critique these structures of power and class. Its why we obssess over privacy, and saftey, and strong crypto, and fear the NSA.
I'd like to tell you me with a straight face there are bigger and more dangerous sociopaths on the internet than in congress, heading large corporations, in the press, and in the police force.
They offer a perfect playground for sociopaths and misanthropes.
As for Shilling, I'd hardly call a bunch of jocks posting on social networks how much they want to bang his "hot daughter" trolls, or even mildly shocking. The article is also very misleading, and shilling is most likely lying when he said he never heard that kind of sex talk about young women in locker rooms. He simply looked up personal information of people who posted real pictures of themselves and real names, using their public social media accounts.
He's also playing with fire, lest the real trolls(i.e. chanistan, formerly "Anonymous") find this as a "challenge accepted", and he is totally fucked.
subsides would actually help bring the technology mainstream because it will encourage adoption which will make it cheaper in volume of scale. It will also incentivise development which will refine the technology to make it cheaper, more reliable, and more effecient.
2. ISIS has more to do with Al-Maliki's general incompetence, and utter hatred of sunnism that left many sunnis feeling disenfranchized, the complex situation western europe has with the Islamic faith and its adherent residents, and the power vacuum left not by Saddam, but by Assad, propelled by the western backed war against him. With this, the total incompetence, and lack of cohesion in the Iraqi army, which let ISIS capture US made weapons, and steal a fuckton of gold from Iraq. 99.5% of Sunni muslims might not like ISIS, but they feared Al-Maliki to the point where putting together a national army in Iraq to defend against them became an impossible task.
3. Western funding of daesh and daesh-like groups in libya, syria, etc.. durring the "Arab Spring" to overthrow regimes. ISIS fighters had US Support all the way up until ISIS crossed the border into Iraq, and wiped out the Iraqi army.
This is absolutely nothing like the French-US involvement in Viet-Nam. Not only do you have not the slightest clue on how to fight a war, I bet you can't expand on your idea more than general angry rhetoric, or even back it up with historical examples. You also know nothing about the war in viet-nam or how we "lost" it.
terms are pretty fair actually.
If you want to have a semantics discussion go elsewhere, if you want to have an actual discussion I suggest you read the actual manuals for linux distributions that were "tuned" (according to your words) for super computer and high-node count clusters.
please do. Your phrase of "might as well not be linux", is not equivilant to "adjusted some options at compile time". Its still Linux, and guess what, it will still run most linux binaries, and it will definately run most Linux code. Its still all the same code.
I suggest you compare the binaries and then return to me and dare to repeat said statement
compare them how, with a hash sum, or for compatibility.
. I get it, you hate systemd
Actually no. I think we can chalk you off to a troll.
you fail to understand the concept that the same code can compile to very different binaries with a single pre-processor variable
You don't understand how the same code is the same program, and regardless of the binary being diffrent.
and you don't like the fact that some people out there want productivity
random acusations.
Next you also claim that you don't need a configuration file to know which modules to load at boot
No, I said it doesn't use a shell script. now you're flat out lying about what I said. Great.
So I must apologize for having a hard time taking you serious. And lets not forget how you twisted my words into "you think I'm stalking you". You're a bad show man.
wat? I'm certain your either a troll, or purposefully reciting FUD.
no, we have two sets of corporate parties that take money and work for diffrent lobbying groups. At the moment they are both more than happy enough to take swipes at eachother's money source and nothing else. But its entirely unfair to say either party is more "capitalist" than the other. Social issues sure, the republicans in general are slightly more socially conservative, but that is slowly changing, as both parties are moving away from token images they pretend to care about to simply offering protection from "the other".
I install all kinda apps with no real problems.