"Somebody is doing something bad with science. Quick, stop all science!" -- You.
This is more like, "Stop working at an organization that you know is violating the fundamental liberties of the American people, as well as violating the highest law of the land." People working at the NSA need to quit, and the people need to rise up and put a stop to this nonsense.
No one is suggesting that we not do anything else. These people just need to refuse to take part in immoral activities, even if you think it's 'useless'. Principles matter.
It's not just mathematicians working for the NSA who are at fault; at this point, anyone working there is knowingly helping evil prevail. Anyone who doesn't quit is a scumbag.
Oh no, no, no! I am not trying to convince you that "freedom is worthless," but rather am pointing out that you have no useful idea about how your freedom was gained, maintained, and what is needed in the future to ensure it.
If we need to infringe upon our freedoms to freedoms in order to 'preserve' them or even gain them, then I'd rather go down fighting. We're supposed to be 'the land of the free and the home of the brave,' not the land of the utterly worthless cowards. Cowards like you, who worship the government and pretend to want a small government at the exact same time. It's a fucking eyesore.
If you are confusing what goes on in North Korea with what goes on in the US you are badly uninformed indeed.
Your goal seems to be to make the US like North Korea. I merely suggested that you move there instead, since it's a quicker way to get what you want.
Telling me of other acts of spying will not convince me that freedom is worthless, which is what you want me to believe. Freedom and principles are simply more important than security. You belong in North Korea.
That's the message I want to send, regardless of how wrong you are in comparing every act of spying to what the NSA is doing.
Someone else might do it instead, but that's no excuse for doing it yourself. You're still helping government thugs commit acts of evil, which is inexcusable.
Yes, we should be tackling the issue in multiple ways, but that doesn't mean people are excused for 'just doing their jobs.'
And they do a lot of really evil stuff there too, which is more important in a free country. If they don't want the supposedly good things they do to be tossed into the garbage with the bad, then they have only themselves to blame.
Typical. We're supposed to be the land of the free, and yet all these thugs care about is 'safety' (or, in reality, power), even when freedom should be considered more important in a land of truly free and brave people.
It's "obvious"? To who? I've seen numerous people who think that their opinions about subjective matters are objectively correct, so if you don't state something as an opinion, there's no real way to know which type of person you are.
So yeah, try actually reading the posts in the discussion next time before accusing me of "blaming the victims" (especially when I didn't say anything about the victim, and I explained how other people were not doing so, and even debunked the same sort of arguments you made in that fucking post elsewhere).
And I was responding to you to explain EXACTLY how it truly IS "blaming the victim."
You didn't explain that. You were disputing how effective and reasonable their solution is, which is 100% different. That's what you should be doing, rather than resorting to that "You're blaming the victim!" bullshit, which is 100% illogical.
You ARE blaming the victim.
I never said anything about the victim; I merely said that other people weren't blaming any victim. Saying that someone could do something to improve their security isn't at all the same thing as saying they're 100% at fault for the crime and that the attacker should get away.
I explained all this. Debunked that "You're blaming the victim!" bullshit in a bunch of different posts, and you still continue with it. I responded to every possible stupid argue. Just stop it. Argue over the reasonableness of their security, but don't use bullshit emotional appeals to try to get out of making logical arguments. I'm not even going to bother responding to more pointless analogies, as I've debunked that sort of bullshit logic.
Jesus Fuck, it's like in your haste to show us all how smart you are, you forgot to consider how monumentally fucking retarded you are.
And you're completely worthless and unintelligent for utterly misinterpreting my words. I said nothing about this specific case, or whether they took reasonable measures against attacks. If you want to debate that, go elsewhere, because I sure didn't say anything about it in my post. Instead, I was telling people not to use the bullshit "Stop blaming the victim!" card.
Yes, but there was nothing to show that the majority would do such a thing, other than a guess. The way you presented that sentence made it seem as if you were saying, "Our elected representatives agree with it, so the public does too."
You may disagree with this if you wish, and I may be wrong, however if both representative and direct democracies would support the current system, then how is it not public consent?
Like I said, it should be changed, but honestly, what consent of the public do you want? Our elected representatives support copyright by-and-large, yes, even slashdot's Patron Saint ROONNNNN PAAUULLLLL.
However, people do not vote only for people they 100% agree with. Most end up voting for 'the lesser of two evils' (because our system is poorly designed and they're idiots) based on a select few issues that they agree with their chosen candidate on; other issues often get ignored. So even if our elected representatives agree with the current state of copyright policy, that doesn't mean the public at large does. Unless I misunderstood what you were saying.
By "entitlement," I was referring to the asserted 'right' to use a VPN to access a service. There is no such right.
Did someone say there was such a right?
Do you agree that the problem is Hollywood's stupid licensing fetishism, or are you still maintaining that this is Hulu's conspiracy to track that you rewatch Strictly Sexual [imdb.com] every Friday night and sell that information to OKCupid and Lubriderm?
I don't even use Hulu, so it's not my problem, but I think it may very well be both at the exact same time.
You're not much for reading comprehension, are you? I didn't say that the license terms were reasonable, I said that given what they are, Hulu's method of enforcement is sensible.
I read that and understood it. I do not think it is "sensible," as the license terms themselves are unreasonable, so enforcing them is unreasonable, no matter how effective the enforcement is.
No one, apart from a few paranoid freaks, uses a VPN to watch legal non-porn videos unless they're violating region restrictions.
Yes, people who actually care about being ever so slightly more anonymous are "paranoid freaks." Or, could it be that they use VPNs for other things too,
You're not entitled to free movies
No one said otherwise.
Utter nonsense. The ratio [actual conspiracies]/[paranoid bullshit] on slashdot is damn near zero, though admittedly still not as close as I'd like.
When it comes to privacy, almost every single company works hand-in-hand with the government to give them what they want. Especially the large companies that have tons of data. With the NSA's activities revealed (and you really should've known before), nothing is impossible. I have no clue what use Hulu could have, but the government always manages to surprise me with how far they're willing to go to harass people and invade our privacy.
Slashdot Mirror
"Somebody is doing something bad with science. Quick, stop all science!" -- You.
This is more like, "Stop working at an organization that you know is violating the fundamental liberties of the American people, as well as violating the highest law of the land." People working at the NSA need to quit, and the people need to rise up and put a stop to this nonsense.
no need for anyone else to do anything.
No one is suggesting that we not do anything else. These people just need to refuse to take part in immoral activities, even if you think it's 'useless'. Principles matter.
It's not just mathematicians working for the NSA who are at fault; at this point, anyone working there is knowingly helping evil prevail. Anyone who doesn't quit is a scumbag.
Oh no, no, no! I am not trying to convince you that "freedom is worthless," but rather am pointing out that you have no useful idea about how your freedom was gained, maintained, and what is needed in the future to ensure it.
If we need to infringe upon our freedoms to freedoms in order to 'preserve' them or even gain them, then I'd rather go down fighting. We're supposed to be 'the land of the free and the home of the brave,' not the land of the utterly worthless cowards. Cowards like you, who worship the government and pretend to want a small government at the exact same time. It's a fucking eyesore.
If you are confusing what goes on in North Korea with what goes on in the US you are badly uninformed indeed.
Your goal seems to be to make the US like North Korea. I merely suggested that you move there instead, since it's a quicker way to get what you want.
Telling me of other acts of spying will not convince me that freedom is worthless, which is what you want me to believe. Freedom and principles are simply more important than security. You belong in North Korea.
That's the message I want to send, regardless of how wrong you are in comparing every act of spying to what the NSA is doing.
Someone else might do it instead, but that's no excuse for doing it yourself. You're still helping government thugs commit acts of evil, which is inexcusable.
Yes, we should be tackling the issue in multiple ways, but that doesn't mean people are excused for 'just doing their jobs.'
And they do a lot of really evil stuff there too, which is more important in a free country. If they don't want the supposedly good things they do to be tossed into the garbage with the bad, then they have only themselves to blame.
Typical. We're supposed to be the land of the free, and yet all these thugs care about is 'safety' (or, in reality, power), even when freedom should be considered more important in a land of truly free and brave people.
Are you seriously trying to say that nonsense stories can be satisfying?
Whether they can or can't depends on the person. "nonsense" is also subjective.
Not unless you're a mind reader, in which case my statement would simply be wrong.
It's "obvious"? To who? I've seen numerous people who think that their opinions about subjective matters are objectively correct, so if you don't state something as an opinion, there's no real way to know which type of person you are.
"A story that doesn't make sense is unsatisfying" is a tautology
It's a statement of fact. "A story that doesn't make sense is unsatisfying to me" would be an opinion.
It was relevant. If you wanted to state it as your own opinion, I think you should've done so.
How is that relevant to anything I said?
Because I replied to something you said?
If the story didn't make sense it wouldn't be satisfying
It wouldn't be satisfying to who? That doesn't apply to everyone.
So yeah, try actually reading the posts in the discussion next time before accusing me of "blaming the victims" (especially when I didn't say anything about the victim, and I explained how other people were not doing so, and even debunked the same sort of arguments you made in that fucking post elsewhere).
And I was responding to you to explain EXACTLY how it truly IS "blaming the victim."
You didn't explain that. You were disputing how effective and reasonable their solution is, which is 100% different. That's what you should be doing, rather than resorting to that "You're blaming the victim!" bullshit, which is 100% illogical.
You ARE blaming the victim.
I never said anything about the victim; I merely said that other people weren't blaming any victim. Saying that someone could do something to improve their security isn't at all the same thing as saying they're 100% at fault for the crime and that the attacker should get away.
I explained all this. Debunked that "You're blaming the victim!" bullshit in a bunch of different posts, and you still continue with it. I responded to every possible stupid argue. Just stop it. Argue over the reasonableness of their security, but don't use bullshit emotional appeals to try to get out of making logical arguments. I'm not even going to bother responding to more pointless analogies, as I've debunked that sort of bullshit logic.
what would your argument be for allowing known VPN IPs?
That you can't ban entire fucking VPNs just because they could be used by someone out-of-country. Why not just ban every IP in the entire world?
Jesus Fuck, it's like in your haste to show us all how smart you are, you forgot to consider how monumentally fucking retarded you are.
And you're completely worthless and unintelligent for utterly misinterpreting my words. I said nothing about this specific case, or whether they took reasonable measures against attacks. If you want to debate that, go elsewhere, because I sure didn't say anything about it in my post. Instead, I was telling people not to use the bullshit "Stop blaming the victim!" card.
Try reading next time, you piece of trash.
Yes, but there was nothing to show that the majority would do such a thing, other than a guess. The way you presented that sentence made it seem as if you were saying, "Our elected representatives agree with it, so the public does too."
You may disagree with this if you wish, and I may be wrong, however if both representative and direct democracies would support the current system, then how is it not public consent?
It would be.
Like I said, it should be changed, but honestly, what consent of the public do you want? Our elected representatives support copyright by-and-large, yes, even slashdot's Patron Saint ROONNNNN PAAUULLLLL.
However, people do not vote only for people they 100% agree with. Most end up voting for 'the lesser of two evils' (because our system is poorly designed and they're idiots) based on a select few issues that they agree with their chosen candidate on; other issues often get ignored. So even if our elected representatives agree with the current state of copyright policy, that doesn't mean the public at large does. Unless I misunderstood what you were saying.
The only reason? Some people use a VPN for everything, or for privacy. You say that there is only one reason, but that is false.
When it comes to accusations that some big company is violating people's privacy or working with the government to do so, it's true far too often.
By "entitlement," I was referring to the asserted 'right' to use a VPN to access a service. There is no such right.
Did someone say there was such a right?
Do you agree that the problem is Hollywood's stupid licensing fetishism, or are you still maintaining that this is Hulu's conspiracy to track that you rewatch Strictly Sexual [imdb.com] every Friday night and sell that information to OKCupid and Lubriderm?
I don't even use Hulu, so it's not my problem, but I think it may very well be both at the exact same time.
You're not much for reading comprehension, are you? I didn't say that the license terms were reasonable, I said that given what they are, Hulu's method of enforcement is sensible.
I read that and understood it. I do not think it is "sensible," as the license terms themselves are unreasonable, so enforcing them is unreasonable, no matter how effective the enforcement is.
No one, apart from a few paranoid freaks, uses a VPN to watch legal non-porn videos unless they're violating region restrictions.
Yes, people who actually care about being ever so slightly more anonymous are "paranoid freaks." Or, could it be that they use VPNs for other things too,
You're not entitled to free movies
No one said otherwise.
Utter nonsense. The ratio [actual conspiracies]/[paranoid bullshit] on slashdot is damn near zero, though admittedly still not as close as I'd like.
When it comes to privacy, almost every single company works hand-in-hand with the government to give them what they want. Especially the large companies that have tons of data. With the NSA's activities revealed (and you really should've known before), nothing is impossible. I have no clue what use Hulu could have, but the government always manages to surprise me with how far they're willing to go to harass people and invade our privacy.