Can we stop talking about 'hate speech'? This concept is so slippery it is close to meaningless. We have laws on freedom of speech, if you do not break those, carry on as normal. If you break them, then prosecution. If you do not like them, petition for changes. Otherwise, Twitter included, just be quite and let the world get on with business as usual.
Was it like crack, MDA, heroin or what? Let me guess, they were happy doing what they enjoyed and surprise surprise, they enjoyed it. Nothing to see here.
Whoever even thought that drugs were good for you? Things are bad for us, we still take them. I am not sure what the point of this is: do they think drug takers will say OMFG i did not know that? Pointless research
Look, it is not good but: it only collects TLDN. Any closer inspection requires two levels of legal agreement. Do not think the judiciary here is passive, it is not. I have heard everything here from the UK is a dictatorship to somehow we are fascists.
It is a proposal/law by people that do not understand technology. All they have done is make the haystack bigger and forced people to hide the needle better. It will not do what it claims to: hey, we have all promised that tech will solve all your problems. It does not, and cannot.
wow, you realise that lawyers have legal obligations the same as the rest of us right? They cannot legally defend anyone knowing their guilt. Is this news to you? Really?
Notice he says 'essential' not all. Also, since when is Franklin a font of wisdom? You can only care about freedom AFTER you have safety. Take it from someone that has lived in warzones all over the world. Freedom is a luxury.
Just a general remark: it is a sad time when we are even have to discuss this. I agree, if you use Tor you must be doing something wrong: that is the default position and also, expect our governments to be monitoring it.
I have lived in the rain forests of the Congo (DR) for years, the people are free. Free to die brutally at the hands of rebels. Do not think it is as simple as saying 'we are free', it is not and you are a bad observer of life to even think so.
Apologies, but that was the point I was making. 'In the US, the constitution explicitly forbids -- both to the federal government and that of the states -- going back in time and making crimes out of actions that were not crimes at the time, or increasing punishment along the same lines' How progressive, 500 years later than Europe, but good to know you have simple logic. But any future government can change that. As for 'you've forfeited that option. Sorry.' Really? Who did and when? And how? I have no idea who you are talking about and why the FU attitude
I take your point: I was trying to say that many people just trust government, even if they do, they should always remember times will change. This year was a wake up call to those that thought things would just stay the same.
' becomes aware of a crime committed by a client' that was your post, if you become aware of a crime, you have to report it. I am not sure what your point was, it is the same in the USA
You cannot defend someone if they say 'Yes, I did it'. Like any other citizen, you cannot conceal knowledge of crime, or do you think lawyers are above these laws? Clue: they are not
Slashdot Mirror
Can we stop talking about 'hate speech'? This concept is so slippery it is close to meaningless. We have laws on freedom of speech, if you do not break those, carry on as normal. If you break them, then prosecution. If you do not like them, petition for changes. Otherwise, Twitter included, just be quite and let the world get on with business as usual.
Move on, nothing to see here
Was it like crack, MDA, heroin or what? Let me guess, they were happy doing what they enjoyed and surprise surprise, they enjoyed it. Nothing to see here.
Whoever even thought that drugs were good for you? Things are bad for us, we still take them. I am not sure what the point of this is: do they think drug takers will say OMFG i did not know that? Pointless research
Really? You have not travelled much have you?
Look, it is not good but: it only collects TLDN. Any closer inspection requires two levels of legal agreement. Do not think the judiciary here is passive, it is not. I have heard everything here from the UK is a dictatorship to somehow we are fascists. It is a proposal/law by people that do not understand technology. All they have done is make the haystack bigger and forced people to hide the needle better. It will not do what it claims to: hey, we have all promised that tech will solve all your problems. It does not, and cannot.
Welcome back! I think Snowden sort of pointed out that this has been happening for years.
Citation? I think you do not understand the word 'dictatorship'.
just a p.s. good to know you think defending rapists makes you a good human being.
wow, you realise that lawyers have legal obligations the same as the rest of us right? They cannot legally defend anyone knowing their guilt. Is this news to you? Really?
The answer is this, block all you want. Now nobody will do business here.
you think fascists are the experts at mass surveillance? History would argue with you.
Notice he says 'essential' not all. Also, since when is Franklin a font of wisdom? You can only care about freedom AFTER you have safety. Take it from someone that has lived in warzones all over the world. Freedom is a luxury.
Just a general remark: it is a sad time when we are even have to discuss this. I agree, if you use Tor you must be doing something wrong: that is the default position and also, expect our governments to be monitoring it.
You are correct, all they can/will gather is domain name, not even deeper pages visited
Really? I run huge databases and guess what, the only data we ever see is the data we ask for.
I have lived in the rain forests of the Congo (DR) for years, the people are free. Free to die brutally at the hands of rebels. Do not think it is as simple as saying 'we are free', it is not and you are a bad observer of life to even think so.
Apologies, but that was the point I was making. 'In the US, the constitution explicitly forbids -- both to the federal government and that of the states -- going back in time and making crimes out of actions that were not crimes at the time, or increasing punishment along the same lines' How progressive, 500 years later than Europe, but good to know you have simple logic. But any future government can change that. As for 'you've forfeited that option. Sorry.' Really? Who did and when? And how? I have no idea who you are talking about and why the FU attitude
Who said this had anything to do with 'bad' or 'immoral'? Oh you, now you are arguing against yourself. You should win that argument.
You have to let the facts play out. But Muslim extremists are such a small threat it simply does not justify giving up freedom and privacy.
I take your point: I was trying to say that many people just trust government, even if they do, they should always remember times will change. This year was a wake up call to those that thought things would just stay the same.
' becomes aware of a crime committed by a client' that was your post, if you become aware of a crime, you have to report it. I am not sure what your point was, it is the same in the USA
Because how many murders has the UK had from muslims in the past twenty years? Compare to deaths by the IRA.
wow, you clearly have never been here. If you have no facts or experience, a blind ignorance helps.
You cannot defend someone if they say 'Yes, I did it'. Like any other citizen, you cannot conceal knowledge of crime, or do you think lawyers are above these laws? Clue: they are not