I certainly hope that almost no one believes any use of torture is ever justified. The same applies to our prison system which tortures people with boredom and want. What do we say when we find, time after time, innocent men who have been locked down for decades and subjected to that nonsense? Is one million dollars a year enough to pay back for the wrong done to those innocent people?
Almost no one believes any use of torture is ever justified. But what they consider torture will vary depending on who is being tortured.
A person suspected of being a Muslim (that seems to be a crime these days) is most probably somehow connected to a radical group who are somehow connected to a terrorist group and is, therefore, hiding information that is somehow important to my personal safety. Because someone, somewhere, who claimed to be a Muslim, detonated a bomb that killed x number of people.
If the interrogation of such a person requires some intensity reserved only for those who cannot claim protection under a 'civil' law, this is not necessarily torture. It may be just an aggressive search for knowledge.
I don't believe the use of torture, per se, is ever justified. But.... an aggressive search for information when my personal security is at stake?.....
This is the problem with Internet mobs, or mob justice of any kind. The degree or severity of the crime is proportional to my own value system rather than an impartial value system.
While I view the comments to be offensive and insensitive to the extreme, I view some of the comments of Paul Rand on the subject of those 'subjects' who are so ill-advised as to belong to the race of the 'un-intitled', to be even more offensive and insensitive. And before someone gets their self-righteous anger seething, the race of the 'un-intitled' knows no colour, no country, other than the colour green, and the country called 'terra firma'.
I'm not sure 'publicly' is being used correctly here, as the public certainly has NOT approved these missions.
Most people (IMHO) would agree with "secretly approved intelligence missions" or "intelligence missions approved by the white house".
Nevermind that the administration has only CLAIMED these massive data gathering operations have resulted in discovering up to 2 (two) instances that might have been terrorist plots of some kind and maybe provided some information helpful to a couple dozen of other investigations (which were initiated and driven by intelligence NOT derived from these mass data gathering operations).
"publicly approved intelligence missions" in this sense means approved by the governing body elected to manage the country on behalf of the people - the 'public'. The purpose of elections is so that the 'public' can get on with creating wealth and other such endeavours while those elected to manage can handle the 'mundane' tasks of running the country.
While the 'public' is not called upon to approve individual actions, they have through the process of an election approved the actions of the people elected. And this is regardless of whether an individual voted for these people or not. That is the way democracy works.
The problem you are referring to is that most people (and this is worldwide, not just in the U.S.of A.) don't give a s*#t come election time and allow the minority to elect the group that will best serve their (the minority) interests. In the case of the U.S.of A, it may be 'Big Oil', 'Big Banks', 'Pharmaceuticals', 'Agro-Industry', or 'the Religious Right'. Who knows? Who cares?
The poor very often do not even have the means, transportation, time, whatever, to get to the polls. It is the massive middle group - soon to be poor - who fail in thei duty here. And the frequently 'trotted out' cop out of 'they're all the same' doesn't fly. There is no law that says there is only two. And if you get involved early enough and stay involved long enough you can make a change - and a real one, not the kind that new media marketers trot out.
Why not a 'Glass Free section' - in the same way as a 'Smoke Free' section.
Of course, that gets into the realm of "Glass Free Restaurant", which is what this is all about.
My opinion - I agree with the Restauranteur. His place. His rules. Privacy in some places even if not in all places.
But it is also true that you can never expect complete privacy anymore - too many spies around of the government kind. Eat at home and perhaps you will be safe from prying eyes.
I think there is another side to this - with respect to 'high achieving' countries you mention. In my experience, parents in those countries are much more involved in the education of their children. Engaged parents cooperating with even competent (as opposed to excellent) teachers makes all the difference.
What was that country song - 'yah can't please everyone, so yah got ta please yourself'.
Do yourself a favour. Stay home. Let everyone complain. This conflict involves about 5 different Muslim sects and their strongest belief (each group) is that Allah will take care of them (each one of them). Each person within each group holds firm the belief that death in this conflict is a guarantee of Paradise.
It may not be our notion of civilized but... to recall a oft repeated saying of my youth "Who died and made you God?"
Perhaps I am mistaken here but - a backdoor is not something that calls out. It is something to allows you to call in.
I have put back doors in (old) systems simply to allow me to over-ride system problems and to take control of the system as and when needed.
It doesn't take many brain cycles to see how this would be useful in a very heated situation between nominally friendly (?) powers to give one the upper hand in intelligence about the plans of the other.
It also doesn't take many brain cycles to know that this would be useful one time only as it would quickly be identified and blocked, even if the actual source of the leak could not be definitively proven.
A digital 'sleeper cell', regardless of the cost, is something that foreign intelligence agencies are working on constantly - from the time of Sun Tsu.
As I have written my 'backdoors' in assembly code - I know they can be very hard to detect as long as they remain silent. Just waiting.
But, if you read the article (what? On/. Never) - you will see that there are avenues of redress. Specifically a government body that will reimburse the couple for their costs if they are found to be truly burdened by such costs.
Also, the First Nations group also is contributing to the cost of preserving some portion of their history, even if this was simply a death resulting from a nomadic life style.
I don't believe that Ontario, Canada is the only jurisdiction that will offer such support. Many times it comes in the form of private foundations interested in this but it also comes from the governments that mandate the preservation of historical artifacts.
Interesting as it is, it is not solely the responsibility of the couple who 'did the right thing'.
Don't use it for real. Don't accept friend requests from real friends, unless they are also engaged in the subterfuge and using a different name.
Accept lots of friend requests from people you don't know - and possibly don't want to know (but who knows?) - and create a robust presence of fictitious online activity.
Most of Facebook is like this anyway. So what's the problem. Just use the characteristics of social networking creatively to create some fog for who you really are.
Also, as is possible for electronic mail, drop boxes obscure and possibly even eliminate information of the parties at either end.
With the number of new mail accounts in the public domain being created and abandoned on a daily basis it is easy to hide in the confusion. This requires a degree of paranoia that I think is bordering on unhealthy but - if enough people were actively engaged in civil disobedience to obscure the results - it might be useful.
It is not the reaction time. They have the parameters. They don't look at everybody. But they can. What if they come looking for you? 3 million people and their conversations is far to much to analyse. But, if I want to intimidate - I start with one. Only one - and then I spread out. You do remember McCarthy don't you?
In this case, apparently, they have the public interest at heart. Search for the network that sponsored the brutal attack. And keep spreading out on the search until you find something. Intimidate everyone you find to try to get more. If the original target is innocent, or a dupe, you will eventually get to the guilty party.
But... what if they need to find closure and nothing shows up. Who takes the hit.
It is doable. And it is doable currently. And as for analysing...? To try to do a random analysis, probably a couple of weeks of priority time. But.. a specific analysis - tools are available now to crunch that data.
If I know I am looking for a needle with specific characteristics, I will find it easily in the haystack.
Give me the persons name and a general location and that may be 10 minutes work.
Don't be fooled. The price of freedom is constant vigilance.
Yes really. I have in the recent past undergone bypass surgery. One of the activities during recovery was a stress test which involved the use a treadmill. The test was closely monitored by a technician to ensure I didn't 'accidentally' push myself too far.
Doctors routinely use stress tests such as these using treadmills to give an early indication of cardio vascular problems.
For someone who does not visit a doctor regularly - more frequent in the U.S. I would imagine than in Canada where such things are a part of our 'socialist medicine' regime - even a light workout can trigger an event. Dizzyness, light headedness and shortness of breath are the external symptoms of such an event.
And, by the way, it doesn't matter whether you are in top physical shape or not. Circulation problems can happen even then. Just not as often.
Strange to say, because I do not usually find points of agreement with my neighbours to the south but....
I equally object to being called an "American" in my current country of residence. I consider it an insult. I am Canadian through and through.
An "American" is someone from the United States of America. They are proud of that, and parts of their history warrant that pride. I am proud of being a Canadian and equally parts of our history warrant such pride.
But, an "American" is not someone from either of the continents of North or South America.
Brazilians would not call themselves American. Mexicans would not call themselves American, although many would like the opportunity to do so. Peruvians would not call themselves American.
Europeans are people from Europe but try to tell that to a Frenchman, or Italian, or Brit.
Get it straight folks. An "American" is someone from the good ole U.S.ofA. for better or for worse.
I am here on planet Earth - just not in the good ole U.S.of A.
Oxford Dictionaries define agnostic as
noun
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God.
Close to your definition but subtly different.
It does not connote a disbelief in God. It connotes a disbelief in any structure or organisation that tries to define God or his/her/it wishes or manifestation.
I believe Einstein could be reasonable labelled an agnostic rather than an atheist.
The problem with atheism is that it is impossible to prove a negative - there is no god.
The problem with the opposite is that it is impossible to prove the existence except through circumstantial evidence. For someone like me who has an unshakeable belief in the existence of God, the circumstantial evidence is sufficient. And any evidence to the contrary invokes cognitive dissonance for me.
The problem with this - and you are right, there are two groups - the problem is that j-q public doesn't know, and won't learn the difference between the information being disseminated. They cannot tell objective fact from fictional belief.
There is nothing illegal about spreading false information unless it is defamatory. And there is nothing you can do about people believing it - except to try to educate all of the people to understand the fundamental issues. This is not likely to happen because it is both too expensive and the results are not deemed to be worth the effort.
The problem is essentially a problem of ignorance on the part of the masses of people who then make decisions to affect the outcome. The wealthy few are fully aware of the issue and, in my opinion, realize the gravity of the situation. But they also believe their wealth will save them from the outcome (IMO). They just don't want to spend their money on saving the masses.
I haven't given up all hope - but it is fading fast.
No. I don't own Facebook. But I do have a right to have my personal data protected in the way they claim it will be.
If, by accident, I discover they are failing to do so and I inform them of the problem, then I have an obligation to myself and all other facebook users to ensure the problem has been corrected.
Accessing the data was part of his task - encouraged by the College.
Unlimited access to any data was a side effect of his doing what his club was supposed to do. Having identified the problem in the first place, this could actually be viewed as an extension to what the club's activities were defined to do.
If you notified them of the missing wall and several days later walked by to find it still missing - it could now be considered to be public property because you have failed to secure it properly. After all, the money may have blown out of the safe in the wind.
You could also argue that you were merely securing the valuables for the owner.
Slashdot Mirror
I certainly hope that almost no one believes any use of torture is ever justified. The same applies to our prison system which tortures people with boredom and want. What do we say when we find, time after time, innocent men who have been locked down for decades and subjected to that nonsense? Is one million dollars a year enough to pay back for the wrong done to those innocent people?
Almost no one believes any use of torture is ever justified. But what they consider torture will vary depending on who is being tortured.
A person suspected of being a Muslim (that seems to be a crime these days) is most probably somehow connected to a radical group who are somehow connected to a terrorist group and is, therefore, hiding information that is somehow important to my personal safety. Because someone, somewhere, who claimed to be a Muslim, detonated a bomb that killed x number of people.
If the interrogation of such a person requires some intensity reserved only for those who cannot claim protection under a 'civil' law, this is not necessarily torture. It may be just an aggressive search for knowledge.
I don't believe the use of torture, per se, is ever justified. But.... an aggressive search for information when my personal security is at stake?.....
This is the problem with Internet mobs, or mob justice of any kind. The degree or severity of the crime is proportional to my own value system rather than an impartial value system.
While I view the comments to be offensive and insensitive to the extreme, I view some of the comments of Paul Rand on the subject of those 'subjects' who are so ill-advised as to belong to the race of the 'un-intitled', to be even more offensive and insensitive. And before someone gets their self-righteous anger seething, the race of the 'un-intitled' knows no colour, no country, other than the colour green, and the country called 'terra firma'.
"publicly approved intelligence missions"
I'm not sure 'publicly' is being used correctly here, as the public certainly has NOT approved these missions.
Most people (IMHO) would agree with "secretly approved intelligence missions" or "intelligence missions approved by the white house".
Nevermind that the administration has only CLAIMED these massive data gathering operations have resulted in discovering up to 2 (two) instances that might have been terrorist plots of some kind and maybe provided some information helpful to a couple dozen of other investigations (which were initiated and driven by intelligence NOT derived from these mass data gathering operations).
"publicly approved intelligence missions" in this sense means approved by the governing body elected to manage the country on behalf of the people - the 'public'. The purpose of elections is so that the 'public' can get on with creating wealth and other such endeavours while those elected to manage can handle the 'mundane' tasks of running the country. While the 'public' is not called upon to approve individual actions, they have through the process of an election approved the actions of the people elected. And this is regardless of whether an individual voted for these people or not. That is the way democracy works.
The problem you are referring to is that most people (and this is worldwide, not just in the U.S.of A.) don't give a s*#t come election time and allow the minority to elect the group that will best serve their (the minority) interests. In the case of the U.S.of A, it may be 'Big Oil', 'Big Banks', 'Pharmaceuticals', 'Agro-Industry', or 'the Religious Right'. Who knows? Who cares?
The poor very often do not even have the means, transportation, time, whatever, to get to the polls. It is the massive middle group - soon to be poor - who fail in thei duty here. And the frequently 'trotted out' cop out of 'they're all the same' doesn't fly. There is no law that says there is only two. And if you get involved early enough and stay involved long enough you can make a change - and a real one, not the kind that new media marketers trot out.
Of course, that gets into the realm of "Glass Free Restaurant", which is what this is all about.
My opinion - I agree with the Restauranteur. His place. His rules. Privacy in some places even if not in all places.
But it is also true that you can never expect complete privacy anymore - too many spies around of the government kind. Eat at home and perhaps you will be safe from prying eyes.
Sounds like a scam to make as much money as possible without delivering any noticeable results.
I love American Enterprise. The leaders of the Tea Party should write a song.
No. They 'poise' (sic) (or poison, methinks) completely nameless bystanders with fracking and other wonderful schemes.
I think there is another side to this - with respect to 'high achieving' countries you mention. In my experience, parents in those countries are much more involved in the education of their children. Engaged parents cooperating with even competent (as opposed to excellent) teachers makes all the difference.
Only for those with enough money to afford them.
What was that country song - 'yah can't please everyone, so yah got ta please yourself'.
Do yourself a favour. Stay home. Let everyone complain. This conflict involves about 5 different Muslim sects and their strongest belief (each group) is that Allah will take care of them (each one of them). Each person within each group holds firm the belief that death in this conflict is a guarantee of Paradise.
It may not be our notion of civilized but... to recall a oft repeated saying of my youth "Who died and made you God?"
I have put back doors in (old) systems simply to allow me to over-ride system problems and to take control of the system as and when needed.
It doesn't take many brain cycles to see how this would be useful in a very heated situation between nominally friendly (?) powers to give one the upper hand in intelligence about the plans of the other.
It also doesn't take many brain cycles to know that this would be useful one time only as it would quickly be identified and blocked, even if the actual source of the leak could not be definitively proven.
A digital 'sleeper cell', regardless of the cost, is something that foreign intelligence agencies are working on constantly - from the time of Sun Tsu.
As I have written my 'backdoors' in assembly code - I know they can be very hard to detect as long as they remain silent. Just waiting.
But, if you read the article (what? On /. Never) - you will see that there are avenues of redress. Specifically a government body that will reimburse the couple for their costs if they are found to be truly burdened by such costs.
Also, the First Nations group also is contributing to the cost of preserving some portion of their history, even if this was simply a death resulting from a nomadic life style.
I don't believe that Ontario, Canada is the only jurisdiction that will offer such support. Many times it comes in the form of private foundations interested in this but it also comes from the governments that mandate the preservation of historical artifacts.
Interesting as it is, it is not solely the responsibility of the couple who 'did the right thing'.
Don't use it for real. Don't accept friend requests from real friends, unless they are also engaged in the subterfuge and using a different name.
Accept lots of friend requests from people you don't know - and possibly don't want to know (but who knows?) - and create a robust presence of fictitious online activity.
Most of Facebook is like this anyway. So what's the problem. Just use the characteristics of social networking creatively to create some fog for who you really are.
If you don't participate it raises flags immediately. Regardless of your age.
Participate but be boring. Most (all?) accounts are so- this is nothing new.
The whole trick to avoiding scrutiny, even of supposedly terrorist activity is to be extremely boring.
Think of Mr. Bean. The man's a millionaire because he is so good at being extremely commonplace.
With the number of new mail accounts in the public domain being created and abandoned on a daily basis it is easy to hide in the confusion. This requires a degree of paranoia that I think is bordering on unhealthy but - if enough people were actively engaged in civil disobedience to obscure the results - it might be useful.
It is not the reaction time. They have the parameters. They don't look at everybody. But they can. What if they come looking for you? 3 million people and their conversations is far to much to analyse. But, if I want to intimidate - I start with one. Only one - and then I spread out. You do remember McCarthy don't you?
In this case, apparently, they have the public interest at heart. Search for the network that sponsored the brutal attack. And keep spreading out on the search until you find something. Intimidate everyone you find to try to get more. If the original target is innocent, or a dupe, you will eventually get to the guilty party.
But... what if they need to find closure and nothing shows up. Who takes the hit.
They know what they want to look for -name and location.
Now who else contacted this person.
Repeat search.
Analyse results.
Start a new search based on illegally obtained information.
Repeat until I can find something that I can correlate in another way - legal this time.
Get a warrant to search.
Submit results of earlier search - repeat search if needed to update date and time stamps to make it appear legal.
If I know I am looking for a needle with specific characteristics, I will find it easily in the haystack.
Give me the persons name and a general location and that may be 10 minutes work.
Don't be fooled. The price of freedom is constant vigilance.
I think the best explanation I have seen of this is the 'Big Mac Index'. One US$ is the amount of a Big Mac it will buy.
Yes really. I have in the recent past undergone bypass surgery. One of the activities during recovery was a stress test which involved the use a treadmill. The test was closely monitored by a technician to ensure I didn't 'accidentally' push myself too far. Doctors routinely use stress tests such as these using treadmills to give an early indication of cardio vascular problems. For someone who does not visit a doctor regularly - more frequent in the U.S. I would imagine than in Canada where such things are a part of our 'socialist medicine' regime - even a light workout can trigger an event. Dizzyness, light headedness and shortness of breath are the external symptoms of such an event. And, by the way, it doesn't matter whether you are in top physical shape or not. Circulation problems can happen even then. Just not as often.
I equally object to being called an "American" in my current country of residence. I consider it an insult. I am Canadian through and through.
An "American" is someone from the United States of America. They are proud of that, and parts of their history warrant that pride. I am proud of being a Canadian and equally parts of our history warrant such pride.
But, an "American" is not someone from either of the continents of North or South America.
Brazilians would not call themselves American. Mexicans would not call themselves American, although many would like the opportunity to do so. Peruvians would not call themselves American.
Europeans are people from Europe but try to tell that to a Frenchman, or Italian, or Brit.
Get it straight folks. An "American" is someone from the good ole U.S.ofA. for better or for worse.
Oxford Dictionaries define agnostic as
noun
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God.
Close to your definition but subtly different.
It does not connote a disbelief in God. It connotes a disbelief in any structure or organisation that tries to define God or his/her/it wishes or manifestation.
I believe Einstein could be reasonable labelled an agnostic rather than an atheist.
The problem with atheism is that it is impossible to prove a negative - there is no god.
The problem with the opposite is that it is impossible to prove the existence except through circumstantial evidence. For someone like me who has an unshakeable belief in the existence of God, the circumstantial evidence is sufficient. And any evidence to the contrary invokes cognitive dissonance for me.
The problem with this - and you are right, there are two groups - the problem is that j-q public doesn't know, and won't learn the difference between the information being disseminated. They cannot tell objective fact from fictional belief.
There is nothing illegal about spreading false information unless it is defamatory. And there is nothing you can do about people believing it - except to try to educate all of the people to understand the fundamental issues. This is not likely to happen because it is both too expensive and the results are not deemed to be worth the effort.
The problem is essentially a problem of ignorance on the part of the masses of people who then make decisions to affect the outcome. The wealthy few are fully aware of the issue and, in my opinion, realize the gravity of the situation. But they also believe their wealth will save them from the outcome (IMO). They just don't want to spend their money on saving the masses.
I haven't given up all hope - but it is fading fast.
And even if he was taking something away, the fact that the flaw was still open days after notification smells like incompetence to me.
If, by accident, I discover they are failing to do so and I inform them of the problem, then I have an obligation to myself and all other facebook users to ensure the problem has been corrected.
Accessing the data was part of his task - encouraged by the College.
Unlimited access to any data was a side effect of his doing what his club was supposed to do. Having identified the problem in the first place, this could actually be viewed as an extension to what the club's activities were defined to do.
If you notified them of the missing wall and several days later walked by to find it still missing - it could now be considered to be public property because you have failed to secure it properly. After all, the money may have blown out of the safe in the wind.
You could also argue that you were merely securing the valuables for the owner.