So he's going to design really crappy electric cars for 10 years which will sell well with artists who are big on brand loyality and tollerate being abused.
Next he's going to download various open source hardware car parts off the internet, put some faux wood and faux leather interior, and sell it to suave hipsters who he can ply on their on white/yuppie guilt to sell trendy fads and make them feel better about themselves, and then ignore any and all complaints for the next 10 years, esentiallly selling what should have been a $10k smart car for $20k.
He'll then dictate what speakers, intake and exhaust you put on it, sue chevy for patent infringements on the volt, and get his crowd of loyal followers to cover up his mistakes.
Then we'll start talking about how much of an innovater he was, but the people who did most of the real innovation will die quiet deaths, unnoticed by the technology he made popular.
Or mabey we should stop using the term "The Next Steve Jobs" out of the context of meaning "the next George Pullman"
"Saying no one buys Apple for hardware just shows your ignorance" I'm sorry I forget people who don't know what comparison shopping is.
"If you're going to buy 'top of the line' from anyone, you buy Apple at a hardware refresh and you'll get hardware at below market price for the first month or two" apple computers are easy twice the value of similar spec'd competitors.
"Is EFI available on ARM?" No, but apple could have locked down the boot proccess with a secure boot implementation on x86 years ago, and no one would have said or done shit.
They didn't because many people NEED windows, and Apple uses the selling point "it can run windows, but PCs can't run OSX".
" I don't see any reason for Apple not to."
apple sells the brand name. They like to pretend to be geeky, and chic. They have no reason NOT to, because the people who buy apple hardware and use something other than apple software are slim to none. What they'll NOT want are custom unlocked versions of their software. The reason is to keep functionality the same.
How many linux nerds are really trying to push to get linux running on apple hardware. Mabey a token amount, just to say they've done it for a challenge.
I also don't get why they'd switch to arm. ARM at this point still doesn't have remotely the CPU power to challenge anything x86 as most bang for single thread buck.
Because law enforcement has always used its powers on "bad guys" and criminals. Long before Anonymous, the FBI was running RUIN life on people for their own agenda.
The author insinuates, like most other police states, that everyone suspected by law enforcement is really a criminal, and power is rarely abused.
for the record the name man trusts catholic nuns to guard his data "I would trust nuns to guard my personal information in the cloud. I would also trust nuns to keep the government from getting my information and using it for evil. But I would limit the job to nuns who have been in the habit, so to speak, for at least twenty years" http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/guardians_of_privacy/ Because the church does not evil. I mean they are a church. You must be a communist to think the church is evil.
Anyone who thinks that living in a police suvailence state, could you please link to another country on earth where it has worked, well, and the police do not abuse their powers? Link to biased outside media if you could.
But if you want to know what a police force, conducting secrect survaillence on US citizens looks like, you can google "Church Comittee" https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Church_Committee_Created.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee
Then there is "COINTELPRO" https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_nf=3&tok=gukAibuebXq64nmwN-zOUw&pq=church%20committee&cp=6&gs_id=h4&xhr=t&q=COINTELpro&pf=p&safe=off&tbo=d&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=COINTE&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=5339a8ff113dcf96&bpcl=37643589&biw=1108&bih=647 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO http://vault.fbi.gov/cointel-pro
What we will have is that federal law enforcement will use their powers to undermine our democratic values by eliminating dissent/otherwise giving an unfair advantage to political canidates they agree with.
Anyone who comes accross damning evidences or otherwise criticizes the system, if not arrested, the FBI would have enough dirt that it could leak and destroy people's reputation. It could send neighbors against people, get people fired. Harrass spouses, friends, girlfriends.
You see the "things the FBI doesn't care about", changes when they want to single you out and make an extra-judicial example out of you. As Mario Savio, of the Berkley Free Speech movement.
And if you think that "congresstional oversight" is a magic bullet, when it just gives potentially unscrupulous members of congress something else to keep them in office.
Then we get to this: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/opinion/sunday/terrorist-plots-helped-along-by-the-fbi.html?pagewanted=all
How long has the FBI been doing things like this before they got caught? This is a mainstream paper that in more modern times doesn't generally like to dig further than they need to. Good investigators like the FBI don't routinely get caught by half assed ametures link pro-journalists.
Macs have not used BIOS on their intel macs for years. They've used Sun's OpenBoot EFI.
Its pretty easy to install ubuntu on a mac.
From Apple's business perspective, I don't think apple is worried. With intel macs, they use the same CPUs, Hard disks, RAM, and all other things which you can get off the shelf.
People pay a very large premium over similar retail computers that run windows, so their core audience is buying OSX not for the hardware but for OSX.
The people who will run Ubuntu, and windows for that matter, will most likely do so in dual boot, and keep OSX.
No one buys apple products for the hardware, they buy them because they are apple products.
This will certainly help but I think the gnome 3 debacle really snuffed the "year of the linux desktop for 2013"
in gnome 2 we had a pretty united face of what linux looks like on the desktop. Not that other desktops are without merrit, but it was gnome 2 that was the default install on many distros, and became the "face" of linux. Not only that, it was good at it did.
Gnome 3 shattered that, with distros starting to make distro specific User eXperiances, albeit with the same libraries, such as UNITY and Cinamon. Then we have a few stubborn gnome shell enthusiasts, as well as a resurgent XFCE with 4.10, and KDE.
What is the face of linux on the desktop to the casual user?
I'd say don't feed the trolls, but I'd point out your argument makes no sense
People don't use windows because they want to use windows, they use windows because they either don't know there is an alternative, or don't know how to access that alternative. Even more get tripped up on Microsoft FUD and lies.
Few, if any make any make an informed decision about operating system choice.
nano is by far the best, simplest, easiest choice there is for command line(curses) editing text files. Plus modern versions of nano do syntax highlighting for scripts and code.
emacs is hidelously over-complicated. emacs is also terribly overfeatured and violates the UNIX philosphy of "do one thing, do it well". Also 1975 called, they want vi back.
emacs X11 is also terrible and extremely awkward, clumbsy and unfeatured as a text editor. many modern heavy weight text editors like gnome's gedit are power powerful, as well as easier to use, and simply more intuitive.
How hard is it on a modern linux desktop to use gamin to read the shebang and auto highlight syntax??
Do I really need crypto, a calculator, a calender, or other text based anacronisms in my text editor when they've been replaced with really pretty, extremely functional X11+GTK/QT apps a very long time ago. (that all seems to inter-operate with eachother based on freedesktop.org open standards, accross all 4 desktop enviroments I have installed)
The US does not use landmines anymore. I don't know if its policy, but in practice, since around 2007-8, the course on "laying landmines" as been removed from army training.
with the new advances in balistic grade transparant materials there is no reason to suspect solar panels will be anything less than as tough as the rest of your house.
Transparant alluminim, gorilla glass, and clear saphire are all powers of 10 more tough than tar shingles and wood pannels used to make most houses.
Far more tough than the mostly silicate glass you use for windows.
"That's not completely true. If the citizen's views veer sharply in one direction or another, the parties will move to compensate."
sometimes.
" It's happened before; we used to have a Whig party, and it disappeared" a very long time ago, in the midst of the war of 1812, the more radical half called for cession from the union. the not so radical half denounced them.
After the war ended, with more favorable terms for the US that anticipated, they were more or less discredited as a whole, with mass defections to the democratic-republicans who more or less accepted the defectors, mostly the moderates, while quietly blocking remaining whigs from all aspects of political life.
The democratic republican party from that day foward dominated politics ever since. The party then split into the now familiar Democratic and Republican parties we see today over slavery.
The socialists you mentioned were active more in the 1900s-1940s. Their end came not with the democratic party caving to socialist demands, but the persecution and de-legimization of socialists/communists as soviet spies.
And yes, both parties maintain they are both private organizations and they both choose who they let run in the primaries in the first place. They both have "leadership comittees", and in the presidential races, they appoint the so called "super delegates", to skew the polls in favor of party leadership.
Party leadership more or less sets the tone of what issues they want to bring up, and what canidates get to run.
Your right on one thing. Most Americans don't care. They don't think their vote, or voice matters anyway, and they are under the impression if they speak up too loudly, in a way not politically convienant, bad things will happen to them. Most people will mutter this under their breath.
A good example wouild be that Barrack Obama was able to get elected pressing foreign policy issues of ending the wars, GITMO, and the abuses he was able to squarely land on president Bush. he won on a landslide. The same people 4 years later, have all but given up and are trying to get out of the gang-warfare mentality of politics in 2012.
keep telling yourself that. Voter turn out is at best abysmal, and the canidates that are allowed to get any airtime on largely(read 85%+) clear channel, are carefully vetted by the parent company AOL-Time-Warner, which as you know is one of the five parent companies of the RIAA, which as you know has the biggest names in politics behind it.
They simply have the only voice, by law, through mandate of the FCC.
A more complicated solution involving inductive nearfield power was developed by GE for electric cars around 5 years ago, and they've demonstrated a near finished commercial product, asserted it was safe that would even work underwater, and wouldn't short.
Yes, there was a slashdot article, no I can't find it. They tried selling it to san franciso, but they opted out, as the unknown effects of high power RF.
"Worse, many of these systems are unneccessarily connected to the Internet,"
Instead of spending the oodles of money for those worthless airport scanners, department of defense boondoggles, and useless shit, flame, etc...
we could have spent the money to develop an ultra secure replacement for hardware controllers, and manditory audits of mission critical systems, and unplugged needlessly internet connected components from the internet.
Instead we spent our money foolishly on shit we don't need.
I am calling for the same people in the NSA who do the SHA and AES competitions to do something along these lines, because they've already proved themselves competitant, where other branches fail.
trisquel is a libre version of Ubuntu, stripped of things like flash, and adobe reader, and runs the -libre kernel, which is stripped of unfree drivers and firmware.
The debian concept of free and nonfree repos is too much for the FSF who has strict guidelines on what software can be included in an FSF certified distro:
I've ran Free distros before, suprisingly useful, and many if not most hardware still worked.
That said, this is revenge for years of brownshirts.
GNU and linux work on every sort of hardware imaginable. Windows runs on desktops, UNIX on servers, and old high end workstations no one uses any more.
could also be to ensure someone doesn't install an OS which bypasses http://opennet.net/chinas-green-dam-the-implications-government-control-encroaching-home-pc
So you'd have the choice of a few domesticly vetted and modified Operating Systems.
microsoft my guess seems up to the task of supporitng chineese censorship at every turn in exchange for being able to do business unmolested, as they have been. I could only speculate they see censorship as a good thing, and further might be able to work it in their advantage in the future.
politicians are arrogant about their power and connections
bankers and CEOs are arrogant about their financial control.
Celebrities are arrogant about their social status.
Why are you blaming the nerds for being top of their game in designing computers that basicly make 21st century society possible in the first place.
Nerds are the ones who keep society going, as no one today can funciton without a computer.
That said, society still spits on people who do the most good and most of the work, while celebrating people who have no productive, and sometimes have negative and destructive value to society.
Most computer nerds(geeks really), go through school being outcast by their peers and under constant suspicion of being digital terrorists by administrators and governments alike, instead they hold their heads high, continue to function, in spite of, not because of it.
So when they go on to great things later, mabey they have a right to look down on the people who tried holding them back.
of course it would. What if they paid or blackmailed your girlfriend into breaking up with you over it. What if they told your boss there would be consequences for the company.
How would anyone ever know?
I know enough dimwitts who put party affiilation before their friends. They do this, because they actively believe the otherside is raping babies and out to get them, and there is a giant conspiracy at works against them, and that dissent should not be tollerated, and that anyone who disagrees with them was systematicly brainwashed by a large secret authoritarian agency. So once you get people worked up like this, its easy to get them to start spying on eachother, and start rumors and panic based on FEAR.
Durring the 1950s, Hoover and the FBI vehenatly denied the black bag jobs they were doing, and that all suspected communists were throughly investigated and everyone who wasn't a communist was cleared.
The truth was diffrent, according to newly released documents.
Google also states that its vast troves of data it collects on you are soley to assist you, and it never uses your data for mallicous means.
I am glad that Obama's campaign values privacy, I really am. But I also take such bold statements with a grain of salt. Just as I take democratic party values with a grain of salt, they've all proven to bend, break, ignore, or otherwise make exceptions for, when it comes to their friends and allies.
Slashdot Mirror
So he's going to design really crappy electric cars for 10 years which will sell well with artists who are big on brand loyality and tollerate being abused.
Next he's going to download various open source hardware car parts off the internet, put some faux wood and faux leather interior, and sell it to suave hipsters who he can ply on their on white/yuppie guilt to sell trendy fads and make them feel better about themselves, and then ignore any and all complaints for the next 10 years, esentiallly selling what should have been a $10k smart car for $20k.
He'll then dictate what speakers, intake and exhaust you put on it, sue chevy for patent infringements on the volt, and get his crowd of loyal followers to cover up his mistakes.
Then we'll start talking about how much of an innovater he was, but the people who did most of the real innovation will die quiet deaths, unnoticed by the technology he made popular.
Or mabey we should stop using the term "The Next Steve Jobs" out of the context of meaning "the next George Pullman"
"Saying no one buys Apple for hardware just shows your ignorance"
I'm sorry I forget people who don't know what comparison shopping is.
"If you're going to buy 'top of the line' from anyone, you buy Apple at a hardware refresh and you'll get hardware at below market price for the first month or two"
apple computers are easy twice the value of similar spec'd competitors.
"Is EFI available on ARM?"
No, but apple could have locked down the boot proccess with a secure boot implementation on x86 years ago, and no one would have said or done shit.
They didn't because many people NEED windows, and Apple uses the selling point "it can run windows, but PCs can't run OSX".
" I don't see any reason for Apple not to."
apple sells the brand name. They like to pretend to be geeky, and chic. They have no reason NOT to, because the people who buy apple hardware and use something other than apple software are slim to none. What they'll NOT want are custom unlocked versions of their software. The reason is to keep functionality the same.
How many linux nerds are really trying to push to get linux running on apple hardware. Mabey a token amount, just to say they've done it for a challenge.
I also don't get why they'd switch to arm. ARM at this point still doesn't have remotely the CPU power to challenge anything x86 as most bang for single thread buck.
Because law enforcement has always used its powers on "bad guys" and criminals. Long before Anonymous, the FBI was running RUIN life on people for their own agenda.
The author insinuates, like most other police states, that everyone suspected by law enforcement is really a criminal, and power is rarely abused.
for the record the name man trusts catholic nuns to guard his data
"I would trust nuns to guard my personal information in the cloud. I would also trust nuns to keep the government from getting my information and using it for evil. But I would limit the job to nuns who have been in the habit, so to speak, for at least twenty years"
http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/guardians_of_privacy/
Because the church does not evil. I mean they are a church. You must be a communist to think the church is evil.
Anyone who thinks that living in a police suvailence state, could you please link to another country on earth where it has worked, well, and the police do not abuse their powers? Link to biased outside media if you could.
But if you want to know what a police force, conducting secrect survaillence on US citizens looks like, you can google "Church Comittee"
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Church_Committee_Created.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee
Then there is "COINTELPRO"
https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_nf=3&tok=gukAibuebXq64nmwN-zOUw&pq=church%20committee&cp=6&gs_id=h4&xhr=t&q=COINTELpro&pf=p&safe=off&tbo=d&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=COINTE&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=5339a8ff113dcf96&bpcl=37643589&biw=1108&bih=647
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
http://vault.fbi.gov/cointel-pro
What we will have is that federal law enforcement will use their powers to undermine our democratic values by eliminating dissent/otherwise giving an unfair advantage to political canidates they agree with.
Anyone who comes accross damning evidences or otherwise criticizes the system, if not arrested, the FBI would have enough dirt that it could leak and destroy people's reputation. It could send neighbors against people, get people fired. Harrass spouses, friends, girlfriends.
You see the "things the FBI doesn't care about", changes when they want to single you out and make an extra-judicial example out of you. As Mario Savio, of the Berkley Free Speech movement.
And if you think that "congresstional oversight" is a magic bullet, when it just gives potentially unscrupulous members of congress something else to keep them in office.
Then we get to this:
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/opinion/sunday/terrorist-plots-helped-along-by-the-fbi.html?pagewanted=all
How long has the FBI been doing things like this before they got caught? This is a mainstream paper that in more modern times doesn't generally like to dig further than they need to. Good investigators like the FBI don't routinely get caught by half assed ametures link pro-journalists.
I doubt they'll do this.
Macs have not used BIOS on their intel macs for years. They've used Sun's OpenBoot EFI.
Its pretty easy to install ubuntu on a mac.
From Apple's business perspective, I don't think apple is worried.
With intel macs, they use the same CPUs, Hard disks, RAM, and all other things which you can get off the shelf.
People pay a very large premium over similar retail computers that run windows, so their core audience is buying OSX not for the hardware but for OSX.
The people who will run Ubuntu, and windows for that matter, will most likely do so in dual boot, and keep OSX.
No one buys apple products for the hardware, they buy them because they are apple products.
This will certainly help but I think the gnome 3 debacle really snuffed the "year of the linux desktop for 2013"
in gnome 2 we had a pretty united face of what linux looks like on the desktop. Not that other desktops are without merrit, but it was gnome 2 that was the default install on many distros, and became the "face" of linux. Not only that, it was good at it did.
Gnome 3 shattered that, with distros starting to make distro specific User eXperiances, albeit with the same libraries, such as UNITY and Cinamon. Then we have a few stubborn gnome shell enthusiasts, as well as a resurgent XFCE with 4.10, and KDE.
What is the face of linux on the desktop to the casual user?
I'd say don't feed the trolls, but I'd point out your argument makes no sense
People don't use windows because they want to use windows, they use windows because they either don't know there is an alternative, or don't know how to access that alternative. Even more get tripped up on Microsoft FUD and lies.
Few, if any make any make an informed decision about operating system choice.
oh seriously fuck off.
nano is by far the best, simplest, easiest choice there is for command line(curses) editing text files. Plus modern versions of nano do syntax highlighting for scripts and code.
emacs is hidelously over-complicated. emacs is also terribly overfeatured and violates the UNIX philosphy of "do one thing, do it well". Also 1975 called, they want vi back.
emacs X11 is also terrible and extremely awkward, clumbsy and unfeatured as a text editor. many modern heavy weight text editors like gnome's gedit are power powerful, as well as easier to use, and simply more intuitive.
How hard is it on a modern linux desktop to use gamin to read the shebang and auto highlight syntax??
Do I really need crypto, a calculator, a calender, or other text based anacronisms in my text editor when they've been replaced with really pretty, extremely functional X11+GTK/QT apps a very long time ago. (that all seems to inter-operate with eachother based on freedesktop.org open standards, accross all 4 desktop enviroments I have installed)
BRING OUT YER DED
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grbSQ6O6kbs
The US does not use landmines anymore. I don't know if its policy, but in practice, since around 2007-8, the course on "laying landmines" as been removed from army training.
in the 1980s we celebrated these mujadeen as freedom fighters. We trained and armed them. It bit us in the ass.
I propose we stop giving out stinger missles peroid.
with the new advances in balistic grade transparant materials there is no reason to suspect solar panels will be anything less than as tough as the rest of your house.
Transparant alluminim, gorilla glass, and clear saphire are all powers of 10 more tough than tar shingles and wood pannels used to make most houses.
Far more tough than the mostly silicate glass you use for windows.
"That's not completely true. If the citizen's views veer sharply in one direction or another, the parties will move to compensate."
sometimes.
" It's happened before; we used to have a Whig party, and it disappeared"
a very long time ago, in the midst of the war of 1812, the more radical half called for cession from the union. the not so radical half denounced them.
After the war ended, with more favorable terms for the US that anticipated, they were more or less discredited as a whole, with mass defections to the democratic-republicans who more or less accepted the defectors, mostly the moderates, while quietly blocking remaining whigs from all aspects of political life.
The democratic republican party from that day foward dominated politics ever since. The party then split into the now familiar Democratic and Republican parties we see today over slavery.
The socialists you mentioned were active more in the 1900s-1940s. Their end came not with the democratic party caving to socialist demands, but the persecution and de-legimization of socialists/communists as soviet spies.
And yes, both parties maintain they are both private organizations and they both choose who they let run in the primaries in the first place. They both have "leadership comittees", and in the presidential races, they appoint the so called "super delegates", to skew the polls in favor of party leadership.
Party leadership more or less sets the tone of what issues they want to bring up, and what canidates get to run.
Your right on one thing. Most Americans don't care. They don't think their vote, or voice matters anyway, and they are under the impression if they speak up too loudly, in a way not politically convienant, bad things will happen to them. Most people will mutter this under their breath.
A good example wouild be that Barrack Obama was able to get elected pressing foreign policy issues of ending the wars, GITMO, and the abuses he was able to squarely land on president Bush. he won on a landslide. The same people 4 years later, have all but given up and are trying to get out of the gang-warfare mentality of politics in 2012.
keep telling yourself that. Voter turn out is at best abysmal, and the canidates that are allowed to get any airtime on largely(read 85%+) clear channel, are carefully vetted by the parent company AOL-Time-Warner, which as you know is one of the five parent companies of the RIAA, which as you know has the biggest names in politics behind it.
They simply have the only voice, by law, through mandate of the FCC.
Wireless power has been done before.
A more complicated solution involving inductive nearfield power was developed by GE for electric cars around 5 years ago, and they've demonstrated a near finished commercial product, asserted it was safe that would even work underwater, and wouldn't short.
Yes, there was a slashdot article, no I can't find it. They tried selling it to san franciso, but they opted out, as the unknown effects of high power RF.
"Worse, many of these systems are unneccessarily connected to the Internet,"
Instead of spending the oodles of money for those worthless airport scanners, department of defense boondoggles, and useless shit, flame, etc...
we could have spent the money to develop an ultra secure replacement for hardware controllers, and manditory audits of mission critical systems, and unplugged needlessly internet connected components from the internet.
Instead we spent our money foolishly on shit we don't need.
I am calling for the same people in the NSA who do the SHA and AES competitions to do something along these lines, because they've already proved themselves competitant, where other branches fail.
more likely needs nvidia to apologize for writing buggy drivers.
Its not like they don't have the source code for both the kernel, xorg, and all the other various subsystems and/or a well documented APIs.
they should open up enough of the drivers, that the nouveau team can troubleshoot it. Why? despite any documentation, those guys write stable drivers
trisquel is a libre version of Ubuntu, stripped of things like flash, and adobe reader, and runs the -libre kernel, which is stripped of unfree drivers and firmware.
The debian concept of free and nonfree repos is too much for the FSF who has strict guidelines on what software can be included in an FSF certified distro:
I've ran Free distros before, suprisingly useful, and many if not most hardware still worked.
That said, this is revenge for years of brownshirts.
I think its the other way around
GNU and linux work on every sort of hardware imaginable. Windows runs on desktops, UNIX on servers, and old high end workstations no one uses any more.
the same linux kernel runs on everything.
could also be to ensure someone doesn't install an OS which bypasses
http://opennet.net/chinas-green-dam-the-implications-government-control-encroaching-home-pc
So you'd have the choice of a few domesticly vetted and modified Operating Systems.
microsoft my guess seems up to the task of supporitng chineese censorship at every turn in exchange for being able to do business unmolested, as they have been. I could only speculate they see censorship as a good thing, and further might be able to work it in their advantage in the future.
Jocks are arrogant about their sports skills
politicians are arrogant about their power and connections
bankers and CEOs are arrogant about their financial control.
Celebrities are arrogant about their social status.
Why are you blaming the nerds for being top of their game in designing computers that basicly make 21st century society possible in the first place.
Nerds are the ones who keep society going, as no one today can funciton without a computer.
That said, society still spits on people who do the most good and most of the work, while celebrating people who have no productive, and sometimes have negative and destructive value to society.
Most computer nerds(geeks really), go through school being outcast by their peers and under constant suspicion of being digital terrorists by administrators and governments alike, instead they hold their heads high, continue to function, in spite of, not because of it.
So when they go on to great things later, mabey they have a right to look down on the people who tried holding them back.
the only diffrence is that computer science makes the world go 'round.
Philopshy doesn't.
of course it would. What if they paid or blackmailed your girlfriend into breaking up with you over it. What if they told your boss there would be consequences for the company.
How would anyone ever know?
I know enough dimwitts who put party affiilation before their friends. They do this, because they actively believe the otherside is raping babies and out to get them, and there is a giant conspiracy at works against them, and that dissent should not be tollerated, and that anyone who disagrees with them was systematicly brainwashed by a large secret authoritarian agency. So once you get people worked up like this, its easy to get them to start spying on eachother, and start rumors and panic based on FEAR.
the private sector is what I am complaining about. PR agents turned into spies for hire. Hollywood, and the media corps at the center of all this.
Durring the 1950s, Hoover and the FBI vehenatly denied the black bag jobs they were doing, and that all suspected communists were throughly investigated and everyone who wasn't a communist was cleared.
The truth was diffrent, according to newly released documents.
Google also states that its vast troves of data it collects on you are soley to assist you, and it never uses your data for mallicous means.
I am glad that Obama's campaign values privacy, I really am. But I also take such bold statements with a grain of salt. Just as I take democratic party values with a grain of salt, they've all proven to bend, break, ignore, or otherwise make exceptions for, when it comes to their friends and allies.