I'm not really one for conspiracy theories, but could these tapes turning up missing have anything to do with Buzz Aldrin saying that he saw a UFO while they were on Apollo 11? Quoting the article:
Aldrin also revealed that he and other astronauts had reported seeing a UFO during the flight, but Nasa had covered it up. He said, "There was something out there, close enough to be observed, and what could it be?
Obviously, we weren't going to blurt out, 'Hey Houston, we've got something moving alongside of us and we don't know what it is,' you know?"
>I hate to say this, because it is so damn obvious but so unpopular in the USA; I'll say it anyway: what you propose is throwing your vote away.
It is not possible to throw your vote away except by not voting. If you vote for the person who most closely matches your views, you have done the right thing and haven't sold yourself out to the deluded pragmatism of voting the "lesser of two evils".
>And yes, it is totalatarian -- but only during a time of war. And we are at war.
No, we are not. If you look at that declaration of war from WW2, you will notice that it uses the words "declare" and "war". No such thing has happened for Iraq or Afghanistan or anywhere else for that matter. Hence, we are not at war and the president gets no special powers. If congress wanted him to have those powers, they would have declared war.
The administration is not a person, and it should not receive any presumption of innocence. We should assume that it will do anything that it thinks is within its power to do, and therefore should make damn sure that it is as legally limited as possible.
Yes, the government needs to try to stop terrorism, but if the cost is all of our freedoms, it's not worth it. "Live free or die" and all that jazz.
>Let me take your troll at face value for a moment... You want to execute those responsible for initiating a program intended to protect American citizens.
Prove it. All you have are the assurances of the executive branch, a group of known liars, that any of this is about protecting American citizens.
>By this definition, it is those giving the enemies of the U.S. "aid and comfort" that begin to meet that standard.Given that the wiretaps were specifically aimed at people who made calls to or received calls from known terrorist phone numbers,
Once again, prove it. If they were only targetted at terrorists, they could have gone through the FISA courts for their rubber stamp. They didn't. That tells us something about the legitimacy of their claims to be only tapping "enemies".
>They've abandoned logic and the pursuit of important issues for a straight party-line political action. Shame on them for this.
In case you missed it, there are plenty of people on the conservative side of the spectrum who disagree with this illegal domestic spying program.
Exactly! I don't understand why people don't get this yet. I've been using this fake name for years and years online. You search for my real name and you find very little, and none of that is anything that paints me in a bad light.
I thought it was a common thing, but I am completely immune to all poison ivy/oak/whatever. I have literally sat in the stuff before and didn't get so much as a discoloration.
>Adderall is becoming popular because it has signs of being just as nonaddictive as Ritalin & co., but with longer active period and less side effects. > >Speed is a different class of "uppers", namely amphetamines.
>The money you pay is your consideration. The software (or access rights thereto) they provide is theirs.
Yes, but you had already given the money up before you agreed to this contract. There is no additional consideration on the buyer's part when the EULA is supposedly accepted.
Re:Sonds like a job for Judge Judy!
on
Online Revenge
·
· Score: 1
The guy had ripped him off. Not only was the laptop non-functional, it was also not the laptop he had advertised for sale.
>The state tax refund is treated as "additional" income because it wasn't taxed to begin with.
Whaaaa...
If you make X amount of dollars, and have Y withheld, your taxes are still computed based on X, not X-Y.
>It's withheld from your net paycheck and, therefore, not taxed as income at that time.
Withholding for taxes isn't like withholding for a 401k.
Any state that does this is basically robbing you. You *are* being taxed on the exact same money twice, as the next year your income would be computed as X + (Y - your actual tax bill) when you've already paid taxes on Y.
>At what point will journalists in this country realize that we are a nation of laws?
Yes, we are a nation of laws. One of our first, and most important ones says:
"Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press"
The executive branch isn't given the ability to stifle this right simply because some of the facts it exposes might be embarassing or actually illegal. If you really do think this is a nation of laws, you should be complaining about the White House breaking them long before Wired News.
>For those who would try and turn this around to point at the current administration, Let us all keep in mind that everything going on with the NSA is perfectly LEGAL.
And how exactly would you know that? Because the administration says so? For anyone who even pretends to respect freedom, that's not enough.
Go to http://www.truecrypt.org/ and check out their product. It allows you to store and encrypted drive inside another encrypted drive in such a way that it's impossible to tell that the first one even exists. They can't force you to give them the keys to something that they don't know is there.
The requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley on a corporation are nothing but a huge expense that private companies don't have at all, putting them at a real disadvantage in the marketplace. The millions of dollars that are being spent by even medium-sized companies could be much better spent elsewhere.
I must be exceptionally lucky then because I get 25 paid days off per year plus all the big national holidays and I've only worked here for 5 years. I also haven't been sick (not counting an appendicitis) for about 10 years.
>The central issue in this case is whether the power to conduct this kind of surveillence falls within the powers reserved to the executive branch.
No, the central issue is that this power doesn't fall within *any* branch of the government. The restriction is spelled out in the forth amendment, and no branch of government can ignore it at will.
Wah! Everyone run and hide because there are some religious nuts in the world. They're so scary! Stop complaining about losing your rights to your own government because these guys live half way around the world and worry about your women marrying donkeys!
>Right now we have to defend ourselves against an enemy that has shown it has no qualms about using whatever means are available to attack us. If that means we have to temporarily suspend some of our rights to ensure our survivial, then I'm all for it. It certainly wouldn't be the first time we've done it.
With citizens like you, why even bother fighting the terrorists? Your attitude doesn't protect the country at all, it succumbs to the terrorists by incrementally giving up everything that makes it great.
If our country cannot survive under the system of laws that it was founded, then it shouldn't. I'd rather have a 9/11 every month than live in a police state, and that is exactly where we are heading.
You never know, in my building we were told the same thing but when I went and got Vonage I just left a cheap phone plugged into the outlet. I don't get a dialtone on it, but I can still use it to buzz people into the building.
>I don't think so. If "they" only look at certain messages, then all others have not been intercepted...
Sure, if you ignore the fact that they actually were, you know, intercepted. Most likely stored for later easy access too, and all without any warrant whatsoever.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not really one for conspiracy theories, but could these tapes turning up missing have anything to do with Buzz Aldrin saying that he saw a UFO while they were on Apollo 11? Quoting the article:
Aldrin also revealed that he and other astronauts had reported seeing a UFO during the flight, but Nasa had covered it up. He said, "There was something out there, close enough to be observed, and what could it be?
Obviously, we weren't going to blurt out, 'Hey Houston, we've got something moving alongside of us and we don't know what it is,' you know?"
Huh...I found a copy of the program. Available here!
>I hate to say this, because it is so damn obvious but so unpopular in the USA; I'll say it anyway: what you propose is throwing your vote away.
It is not possible to throw your vote away except by not voting. If you vote for the person who most closely matches your views, you have done the right thing and haven't sold yourself out to the deluded pragmatism of voting the "lesser of two evils".
Evil is evil, and voting for it is stupid.
>And yes, it is totalatarian -- but only during a time of war. And we are at war.
No, we are not. If you look at that declaration of war from WW2, you will notice that it uses the words "declare" and "war". No such thing has happened for Iraq or Afghanistan or anywhere else for that matter. Hence, we are not at war and the president gets no special powers. If congress wanted him to have those powers, they would have declared war.
The administration is not a person, and it should not receive any presumption of innocence. We should assume that it will do anything that it thinks is within its power to do, and therefore should make damn sure that it is as legally limited as possible.
Yes, the government needs to try to stop terrorism, but if the cost is all of our freedoms, it's not worth it. "Live free or die" and all that jazz.
>Let me take your troll at face value for a moment... You want to execute those responsible for initiating a program intended to protect American citizens.
Prove it. All you have are the assurances of the executive branch, a group of known liars, that any of this is about protecting American citizens.
>By this definition, it is those giving the enemies of the U.S. "aid and comfort" that begin to meet that standard.Given that the wiretaps were specifically aimed at people who made calls to or received calls from known terrorist phone numbers,
Once again, prove it. If they were only targetted at terrorists, they could have gone through the FISA courts for their rubber stamp. They didn't. That tells us something about the legitimacy of their claims to be only tapping "enemies".
>They've abandoned logic and the pursuit of important issues for a straight party-line political action. Shame on them for this.
In case you missed it, there are plenty of people on the conservative side of the spectrum who disagree with this illegal domestic spying program.
>Because in the end they just pass along the costs to the consumer.
They don't pass it along to me, since I stopped buying their crap years ago and don't intend to start back up again any time soon!
Exactly! I don't understand why people don't get this yet. I've been using this fake name for years and years online. You search for my real name and you find very little, and none of that is anything that paints me in a bad light.
Looks like it's time to start making a shitload of fake Kent State athelete profiles on Facebook!
I thought it was a common thing, but I am completely immune to all poison ivy/oak/whatever. I have literally sat in the stuff before and didn't get so much as a discoloration.
>Adderall is becoming popular because it has signs of being just as nonaddictive as Ritalin & co., but with longer active period and less side effects.
>
>Speed is a different class of "uppers", namely amphetamines.
Umm, Adderall *is* amphetamines.
"* 1/4 Dextroamphetamine Saccharate
* 1/4 Dextroamphetamine Sulfate (Dexedrine®)
* 1/4 Amphetamine Aspartate
* 1/4 Amphetamine Sulfate"
>Then GPL and other open source licenses are all invalid. You don't pay anything for the software.
If that's true, then you have no right to redistribute the software at all, as the GPL is the only thing that would give you that right.
>The money you pay is your consideration. The software (or access rights thereto) they provide is theirs.
Yes, but you had already given the money up before you agreed to this contract. There is no additional consideration on the buyer's part when the EULA is supposedly accepted.
The guy had ripped him off. Not only was the laptop non-functional, it was also not the laptop he had advertised for sale.
The scammer got what he deserved.
>The state tax refund is treated as "additional" income because it wasn't taxed to begin with.
Whaaaa...
If you make X amount of dollars, and have Y withheld, your taxes are still computed based on X, not X-Y.
>It's withheld from your net paycheck and, therefore, not taxed as income at that time.
Withholding for taxes isn't like withholding for a 401k.
Any state that does this is basically robbing you. You *are* being taxed on the exact same money twice, as the next year your income would be computed as X + (Y - your actual tax bill) when you've already paid taxes on Y.
>At what point will journalists in this country realize that we are a nation of laws?
Yes, we are a nation of laws. One of our first, and most important ones says:
"Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press"
The executive branch isn't given the ability to stifle this right simply because some of the facts it exposes might be embarassing or actually illegal. If you really do think this is a nation of laws, you should be complaining about the White House breaking them long before Wired News.
>For those who would try and turn this around to point at the current administration, Let us all keep in mind that everything going on with the NSA is perfectly LEGAL.
And how exactly would you know that? Because the administration says so? For anyone who even pretends to respect freedom, that's not enough.
Go to http://www.truecrypt.org/ and check out their product. It allows you to store and encrypted drive inside another encrypted drive in such a way that it's impossible to tell that the first one even exists. They can't force you to give them the keys to something that they don't know is there.
The requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley on a corporation are nothing but a huge expense that private companies don't have at all, putting them at a real disadvantage in the marketplace. The millions of dollars that are being spent by even medium-sized companies could be much better spent elsewhere.
I must be exceptionally lucky then because I get 25 paid days off per year plus all the big national holidays and I've only worked here for 5 years. I also haven't been sick (not counting an appendicitis) for about 10 years.
>Now, if someone looks through my credit card history, they're going to think I'm into men.
:)
Not that there's anything wrong with it...
>The central issue in this case is whether the power to conduct this kind of surveillence falls within the powers reserved to the executive branch.
No, the central issue is that this power doesn't fall within *any* branch of the government. The restriction is spelled out in the forth amendment, and no branch of government can ignore it at will.
Just like the government would never ask at&t for the ability to monitor all internet traffic in realtime...
Wah! Everyone run and hide because there are some religious nuts in the world. They're so scary! Stop complaining about losing your rights to your own government because these guys live half way around the world and worry about your women marrying donkeys!
>Right now we have to defend ourselves against an enemy that has shown it has no qualms about using whatever means are available to attack us. If that means we have to temporarily suspend some of our rights to ensure our survivial, then I'm all for it. It certainly wouldn't be the first time we've done it.
With citizens like you, why even bother fighting the terrorists? Your attitude doesn't protect the country at all, it succumbs to the terrorists by incrementally giving up everything that makes it great.
If our country cannot survive under the system of laws that it was founded, then it shouldn't. I'd rather have a 9/11 every month than live in a police state, and that is exactly where we are heading.
You never know, in my building we were told the same thing but when I went and got Vonage I just left a cheap phone plugged into the outlet. I don't get a dialtone on it, but I can still use it to buzz people into the building.
>I don't think so. If "they" only look at certain messages, then all others have not been intercepted...
Sure, if you ignore the fact that they actually were, you know, intercepted. Most likely stored for later easy access too, and all without any warrant whatsoever.
How is this not scary?