When US bombs with drones weddings, funerals, rescuers, schools and in general spread terror in the 6+ countries where is using drones to bombard the population, is ok, we have to do it, is the right thing. If any other country dares to kill someone even by accident with a drone, probably will make a trade embargo, ask for allies to invade them, cry that there are human rights that are being violated.
Maybe the rest of the world should take a clue and do a trade embargo and break all treaties with the US, i wonder if when Germany was in war was accepted to trade with them no matter how profitable would be doing it.
Print enough bones, take your DeLorean and plant them around the sites the first paleontologist would find ones. Then history would be rewritten and all would believe now that dinosaur were made of plastic, and thats how oil got made.
Maybe the rest of the human rights are anomalies too. Cant we start stripping them from the people that affirms that privacy should not need to be respected?
If you use the word "bribing" instead of "lobbying" it becomes more clear who are the ones that screwed all there. Being governed by people that not only accept bribes, but is also not worried about that being known is almost as bad as citizens taking that as something normal.
Open source is not about saving money, is about having control, knowing what you run, modify it if you need, being the actual owner of your files and devices. Besides that, reality made their worst vague subjective fears into an objective nightmare.
In this particular case not sure how essential for life is, or not. But lets suppose that it is the difference between life and death to have it or not. Having a quality one improve your chances, but having none (for one of the reasons i posted above, and probably more, like not profitable to produce for some markets, delivery time, etc) is having no chances. And you don't want business to make decisions based on profits that cause deaths.
Not sure if everyone in US have and can afford a medical insurance, but you know, there is a rumour that there is a world outside US that exists too. And those medical devices use to have heavy patents/copyright issues usually forced by TPP-like agreements and trade embargos to make them pretty expensive or directly unavailable to others. Making them open source enables the entire world to decide to take the risk, or even to have responsible companies outside developing them.
In the other hand, a device that you can't buy or is not available probably will harm you more than not having it. Making devices/drugs/whatever that could be the difference between life and death for a lot of people, but have to have to add a "sue protection" price bump makes it not available for anyone,
Making it open source, and easy for anyone to build it also make people to decide which is the biggest risk, using it or not. Big companies could make the insured, high quality, throughly tested and expensive version, smallish/hobbyist could make the evaluate and take your risks cheap ones. They are not exclusive alternatives, and should not be neither.
Once you accepted that you can have secret laws to force providers to not tell something, how far is that from forcing them to keep updating that metatag or lying? Before that becomes a standard or something popular enough the law covering that chance will follow.
The system is broken already, there is no possible trust if you have secret laws to force even the most trustfully provider to follow their orders, stop playing boiling frog.
And if you think that things are bad enough already, think that we know so far a few of the 200000 documents leaked by Snowden.
Too bad secret laws exist to force you, even if you don't want, and to not say that you are doing it. And a lot could want anyway, as could be incentives to make it desirable (like obtained secrets of competitors, "friendly" judges and so on). In any case, American companies can't be trusted, and big enough from other countries on line with this (UK, Australia, Sweden, Israel, maybe whoever signs the TPP, etc) probably should be avoided too.
It is not about terrorists, but population control. If they were serious about terrorism they would put the control just before boarding, as this shows.
A control is better than no control, but an abusive and intrusive control like TSA's one provides little extra protection, a lot of false positives, and keeping population scared and so in control.
Didn't explained it well. I meant that the real issue is not just bigger than Cisco shares dropping value, it is bigger than something as big as all those companies going bankrupt, but not saying that it will happen. Anyway, companies based on countries wich governments orders them to spy and report on their users and not reveal that it is happening will could have a hard time with foreing users in the future, no matter what encryption new encryption protocol comes in the future (i.e. the proposed http 2.0)
Router based on PCs were there since last century, it wouldn't change projections beause they were always there.
But putting an equipment that you can't trust in the critical point of your network where you must have the maximum trust (either because Cisco want to cooperate, or is forced to, secret laws are nukes in the trust domain) is not a great idea.
Just wait till the next Haiyan hits their city and some of them will change their minds. The rest will stand in their ground till really hits their own face.
That means that for each 100 people abused by the TSA or just detained for a deeper inspection, 50 were found guilty of something? Or must be read like it could be random chance throwing 100 dices and that all hit 6?
Is worse than that. US is officially not acknowledging the right of intellectual property of anyone in the planet (except of for the insiders) with its wide surveillance (and sabotage/backdooring/etc) effort, including specially every single citizen of those signing countries. Why them should acknowledge that right of for US citizens/corporations, unless they are in the bag already?
This is also about attacking; hacking, intrusion, modifying systems, sabotaging hardware, etc. Is not a passive "i want to know this", but an active/aggresive "i will plant a backdoor/rootkit to be able to do there whatever i want", including hitting you as a person, as a country, or as a trusted media that reach enough/certain people/companies.
We already knwo they planted backdoors on Tor users and Slashdot and LinkedIn users, and with Silicon Valley cooperation, probably they will be bundled in a lot more software/hardware/services. Time to stop playing boiling frog.
Ask the Federal Reserve, they are pretty successful making money out of thin air. And if well the inventor may be anonymous, the source code is not. You can check if it is broken or not by yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
When US bombs with drones weddings, funerals, rescuers, schools and in general spread terror in the 6+ countries where is using drones to bombard the population, is ok, we have to do it, is the right thing. If any other country dares to kill someone even by accident with a drone, probably will make a trade embargo, ask for allies to invade them, cry that there are human rights that are being violated.
Maybe the rest of the world should take a clue and do a trade embargo and break all treaties with the US, i wonder if when Germany was in war was accepted to trade with them no matter how profitable would be doing it.
Print enough bones, take your DeLorean and plant them around the sites the first paleontologist would find ones. Then history would be rewritten and all would believe now that dinosaur were made of plastic, and thats how oil got made.
Maybe the rest of the human rights are anomalies too. Cant we start stripping them from the people that affirms that privacy should not need to be respected?
If you use the word "bribing" instead of "lobbying" it becomes more clear who are the ones that screwed all there. Being governed by people that not only accept bribes, but is also not worried about that being known is almost as bad as citizens taking that as something normal.
The source is open, you can port/rewrite it in HTML5 if you want.
Open source is not about saving money, is about having control, knowing what you run, modify it if you need, being the actual owner of your files and devices. Besides that, reality made their worst vague subjective fears into an objective nightmare.
Seems that in Germany bribery is outlawed instead of renamed to "lobbying" as in other countries.
In this particular case not sure how essential for life is, or not. But lets suppose that it is the difference between life and death to have it or not. Having a quality one improve your chances, but having none (for one of the reasons i posted above, and probably more, like not profitable to produce for some markets, delivery time, etc) is having no chances. And you don't want business to make decisions based on profits that cause deaths.
Not sure if everyone in US have and can afford a medical insurance, but you know, there is a rumour that there is a world outside US that exists too. And those medical devices use to have heavy patents/copyright issues usually forced by TPP-like agreements and trade embargos to make them pretty expensive or directly unavailable to others. Making them open source enables the entire world to decide to take the risk, or even to have responsible companies outside developing them.
In the other hand, a device that you can't buy or is not available probably will harm you more than not having it. Making devices/drugs/whatever that could be the difference between life and death for a lot of people, but have to have to add a "sue protection" price bump makes it not available for anyone,
Making it open source, and easy for anyone to build it also make people to decide which is the biggest risk, using it or not. Big companies could make the insured, high quality, throughly tested and expensive version, smallish/hobbyist could make the evaluate and take your risks cheap ones. They are not exclusive alternatives, and should not be neither.
Once you accepted that you can have secret laws to force providers to not tell something, how far is that from forcing them to keep updating that metatag or lying? Before that becomes a standard or something popular enough the law covering that chance will follow.
The system is broken already, there is no possible trust if you have secret laws to force even the most trustfully provider to follow their orders, stop playing boiling frog.
And if you think that things are bad enough already, think that we know so far a few of the 200000 documents leaked by Snowden.
Too bad secret laws exist to force you, even if you don't want, and to not say that you are doing it. And a lot could want anyway, as could be incentives to make it desirable (like obtained secrets of competitors, "friendly" judges and so on). In any case, American companies can't be trusted, and big enough from other countries on line with this (UK, Australia, Sweden, Israel, maybe whoever signs the TPP, etc) probably should be avoided too.
It is not about terrorists, but population control. If they were serious about terrorism they would put the control just before boarding, as this shows.
A control is better than no control, but an abusive and intrusive control like TSA's one provides little extra protection, a lot of false positives, and keeping population scared and so in control.
Didn't explained it well. I meant that the real issue is not just bigger than Cisco shares dropping value, it is bigger than something as big as all those companies going bankrupt, but not saying that it will happen. Anyway, companies based on countries wich governments orders them to spy and report on their users and not reveal that it is happening will could have a hard time with foreing users in the future, no matter what encryption new encryption protocol comes in the future (i.e. the proposed http 2.0)
Exactly, The big issue would far bigger even than Cisco, Microsoft, Google, Amazon and Apple all go bankrupt at once because of this.
Router based on PCs were there since last century, it wouldn't change projections beause they were always there. But putting an equipment that you can't trust in the critical point of your network where you must have the maximum trust (either because Cisco want to cooperate, or is forced to, secret laws are nukes in the trust domain) is not a great idea.
Just wait till the next Haiyan hits their city and some of them will change their minds. The rest will stand in their ground till really hits their own face.
That means that for each 100 people abused by the TSA or just detained for a deeper inspection, 50 were found guilty of something? Or must be read like it could be random chance throwing 100 dices and that all hit 6?
Anyway, if they are forced to improve numbers, they will find enough victims, after all everyone commits 3 felonies a day
More interesting, what if spam/unsolicited mail? PIAWAAS (put me in a watchlist as a service) could be the new gold mine for startups,
The BSOD is pretty efficient in energy consumption.
Is worse than that. US is officially not acknowledging the right of intellectual property of anyone in the planet (except of for the insiders) with its wide surveillance (and sabotage/backdooring/etc) effort, including specially every single citizen of those signing countries. Why them should acknowledge that right of for US citizens/corporations, unless they are in the bag already?
US prisons are full because it is profitable for the companies that run them. If crime drops enough, then they will find a way to keep them full anyway, and a surveillance/police state is a guarantee that they will succeed at that.
This is also about attacking; hacking, intrusion, modifying systems, sabotaging hardware, etc. Is not a passive "i want to know this", but an active/aggresive "i will plant a backdoor/rootkit to be able to do there whatever i want", including hitting you as a person, as a country, or as a trusted media that reach enough/certain people/companies.
We already knwo they planted backdoors on Tor users and Slashdot and LinkedIn users, and with Silicon Valley cooperation, probably they will be bundled in a lot more software/hardware/services. Time to stop playing boiling frog.
Ask the Federal Reserve, they are pretty successful making money out of thin air. And if well the inventor may be anonymous, the source code is not. You can check if it is broken or not by yourself.
So you think that is good that people can only get there owning favors to rich people?