i keep waiting for the day that a massive wave of realization crosses the minds of the average slashdot reader/ editor
What?! Don't you know how important we are? Our opinions are teh educated ones! We know how online tracking works and the general public doesn't. Therefore, online tracking is important. Very important. We have concerns and everyone should listen to us and -- this is crucial -- value our understanding. Our understanding must be acknowledged and accorded status. Because we are important.
--
I have to go now. I'm cycling my house lights on and off at irregular intervals according to a schedule generated from randomized cosmic noise using a perl script. If there's no pattern, they'll never know when I'm asleep. If enough people do the same, we can end Daylight Savings Time once and for all.
The study found that people do actually care. Their behavior is not due to not caring about the tracking that is going on but being completely ignorant that there is any tracking at all going on.
They care so much that they don't bother to find out whether they are tracked.
When people really care about something, they do something about it. Folks will say they care about things when you ask them. In reality, they don't.
yeah and have a gay shitty fps experience with a douchebag controller. Fuck you consumer whore. Eat shit and die.
Are you a happy person? Does not being a "consumer whore" make you happy? Do any of your attitudes make you happy? Maybe try something more positive. Be in favor of something instead of just against things. Encourage people to do what's right for them instead of hating them for choosing differently than you.
It's not out for PS3 yet, so no. I have 3 AAA games (R&C, Heavenly Sword, GRAW2) I haven't had time to even try yet. Warhawk still needs me to play it all the time. Plus CoD4 comes out next week. The Orange Box is due for PS3 December 11, so maybe it'll be an xmas vacation game if I decide to play it instead of Uncharted.
I could buy it for PC, but I don't need to play "update my graphics drivers, check compatibility lists on sound card drivers, why did it crash, my HD is full, etc, etc". I like the ability to just start the game and play in HD on a nice big HDTV.
It would be nice to see PC gaming included in these. It seems like PC gaming is mostly MMO-only now, with the focus of every other type of gaming (except flash-based games) moving to consoles. But it would be nice to see numbers to indicate whether this shift is real or just perceived.
So you would support me screwing up your travel plans because I find your attitudes annoying - or am I missing something?
If I'm asking for a favor -- like entry into a country -- that country can say "yes" or "no". Why would I make travel "plans" before I knew the answer?
Protesters screw up travel plans for people all the time. It's more-or-less the definition of being a protester -- you cause trouble for people.
It's not a punishment. Canada has no obligation to let people in the country. If they grant you entry, it's essentially a privilege.
If I were a Canadian, I'd say the list was no longer dependable and demand my government quit using it.
If I were Canadian, I'd cheer the result.
Maybe the list isn't supposed to be used for this particular result. So perhaps create another, even better list -- "Troublemakers who have nothing to offer" -- to keep protesters and activists out.
I'm sure there are dangerous criminals on that FBI list in addition to the annoying protesters though. I'm guessing Canadians don't want to start importing sex offenders and armed robbers so they may want to think twice before they oppose using that FBI list.
As a citizen of the USA, I hope Canada does start importing our protesters and sex offenders and gives them generous social benefits to try to get them to stay in Canada.
Yes? No? What's the point of the question? Seriously. Is there some sort of "conspiracy" mood-music playing in your head when you type stuff like that?
My guess is that Australia just found out who the guy was and decided they didn't need imported anarchists that bad. Maybe they just Googled "Scott Parkin".
There's a serious due-process violation here because a listing in this database is equivalent to an "infamous" conviction.
What does this sentence mean?
I'm pretty sure the rules are that no one should be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process. Liberty doesn't extend to cross-border travel in general because nations have the inherent authority to control their borders. No life or property was involved.
So what is the author talking about? It's completely unclear. I could guess it's just generic whining, but I'd really rather know the answer to the question: What is the author talking about?
The Canadian government should certainly not accept this FBI database as the criteria for entering the country
Yeah. Why wouldn't Canada want huge numbers of protesters in their country causing trouble? They're really missing out on all that valuable, constructive protesting that these paragons of civilization would be engaging in.
Canada is no different than anywhere else. Almost any government would shut out these protesters if they could. In a practical sense, they are a useless pain in the ass. Canada figured out a legal way to solve part of their problem.
That was really a long post, and I don't know what you think your point is. I think you were trying to say that there are some bad drivers. Everyone knows that already. That's no reason for everyone to be treated like children by their benevolent government overlords.
Stop trying to control everyone and be everyone's Mom. You can't make the world perfectly safe for everyone no matter how many people you harm in your safety zeal.
And, just for the record, I don't really go that fast. I haven't gotten a speeding ticket in many years, and I think I only ever got one of them, but it might have been a warning. It's not about me.
I want to support law enforcement and the rest of the government. But I can't, because the laws are unjust and law enforcement officers are happy to enforce the unjust ones.
does being a dickhead actually make you feel better about yourself?
Yeah. What a jerk. The guy wants people to mind their own business. What if everyone were like that and people could just go about their business freely? What a horrible world that would be.
All I know is that it's given me a small, joyful, satisfaction on the rare couple of occasions when a police car just happened to be in the right place in the neighborhood at the right time.
Off topic, but you might want to reconsider that. Someone's life was made worse and it made you happy. That's normal, but it's not particularly good. The goal of law enforcement isn't revenge or to harm the people we've decided we don't like. Don't wait until someone who can get laws passed decides he doesn't like you.
What, are we not allowed to use the phrase "He was going too fast?"
"Too fast" is not a number. "Too fast" depends on the circumstances. Often, going the speed limit number is reckless becasue it's too fast. Other times, it borders on dangerous because it is too slow.
You're another excuse-maker.
Freedom is not an excuse. And no one needs an excuse for minding his own business driving along a road endangering no one. I could say you are the "excuse-maker", excusing the government's overreach for fund-raising through speeding fines and allowing folks to arbitrarily control the lives of their neighbors. But that's not really productive.
My point is that freedom is important and the law should not be unjust -- even if that means folks need to give up on their own righteousness and wisdom a little bit and allow their neighbors to make their own choices.
But what about the jackass who puts my life in danger on the highway? Are you saying the laws are not about that? At all?
He should be arrested for reckless or dangerous driving. I'm not sure how the speeding law is supposed to help with that.
I've driven 120 miles per hour on a deserted stretch of straight-as-an-arrow country road where nobody was around.... I'm not going to sit around claiming that driving that fast is some kind of fundamental right, though.
You were minding your own business and endangering no one. "Freedom" is a fundamental right. And you don't have it when you can be arrested and fined for minding your own business and endangering no one.
So in your opinion, should there be much less speed ticketing, or none at all?
Ticket people for reckless or dangerous driving if they are driving recklessly or dangerously. Put up warning signs and issue modest tickets for speeding in areas where there are pedestrians. No tickets for speeding on highways.
If it's about safety, make it about safety. Until then, it's about raising money and controlling everyone's life.
Things work much better when people follow uniform standards for things like speed...
Put up the signs. Make them suggestions. Enforce reckless and dangerous driving laws.
In general, people do go at the prevailing speed of the rest of the traffic. It's dangerous when you have some folks going slower because there's a speed limit sign set to an artificially low speed so the government can raise money.
...as an EMT I'm tired of looking at people smeared all over the road.
If you can't exercise a little self-control and refrain from wanting to be everyone's Mom, please consider picking a job that allows you to mind your own business.
...if you threaten my life by your driving habits...
If someone threatens your life or even your safety by their driving habits, they ought to be arrested.
Speeding laws aren't about that. Folks get ticketed for speeding when they are endangering no one.
I support speed limits with moderate fines in residential areas, to protect pedestrians. A driver doesn't always know where and when there are likely to be pedestrians. Putting up "watch for pedestrians" signs would be good though.
Speed limits on highways are about raising fund by ticketing people for profit -- nothing else.
Not really. A lot of folks in our society are would-be dictators. They are happy to force people to do things against their will and take money from people against their will. They do it with laws and taxes, respectively.
It's morally wrong. I like pointing it out because some people don't really realize they are doing it.
Some people see the average guy as "stupid" and sub-human, like the plantation owners in the old South saw their slaves. A lot of slave owners justified their actions by taking a paternalistic view of their slaves. They'd tell themselves that the slaves needed the owner's guidance because they were so lowly and the owner so wise. The owner was doing them a favor, he thought, because the slaves were incapable of making it on their own.
Law-givers like yourself have the same justification for your need to control us. I'd hope some of you would come to some sort of realization and give up the idea that we all need to be controlled because we're stupid and you are wise.
I'm quite happy that there are LAWS to protect ME from OTHER people's stupidity.
Yes. LAWS protect you. No one would ever violate a LAW. Your safety is guaranteed and we're all just one or two LAWS away from everyone living forever.
Apparently, you think all the "stupid" people you want to control with your LAWS don't mind getting in a car wreck. Car wrecks are OK with them, but they weep with fear at the idea of getting a speeding ticket.
Note also that it's OK to threaten and control people and force them to obey (and impose consequences on them) if you just decide they are "stupid". I'm sure it's pretty empowering to decide others are "stupid" and you're their rightful ruler.
And, of course, your controls and forced obedience apply to everyone and not just the "stupid". Because who wants to control just a bunch of "stupid" people when you can control everyone.
Slashdot Mirror
i keep waiting for the day that a massive wave of realization crosses the minds of the average slashdot reader/ editor
What?! Don't you know how important we are? Our opinions are teh educated ones! We know how online tracking works and the general public doesn't. Therefore, online tracking is important. Very important. We have concerns and everyone should listen to us and -- this is crucial -- value our understanding. Our understanding must be acknowledged and accorded status. Because we are important.
--
I have to go now. I'm cycling my house lights on and off at irregular intervals according to a schedule generated from randomized cosmic noise using a perl script. If there's no pattern, they'll never know when I'm asleep. If enough people do the same, we can end Daylight Savings Time once and for all.
The study found that people do actually care. Their behavior is not due to not caring about the tracking that is going on but being completely ignorant that there is any tracking at all going on.
They care so much that they don't bother to find out whether they are tracked.
When people really care about something, they do something about it. Folks will say they care about things when you ask them. In reality, they don't.
yeah and have a gay shitty fps experience with a douchebag controller. Fuck you consumer whore. Eat shit and die.
Are you a happy person? Does not being a "consumer whore" make you happy? Do any of your attitudes make you happy? Maybe try something more positive. Be in favor of something instead of just against things. Encourage people to do what's right for them instead of hating them for choosing differently than you.
Just a suggestion -- because haters aren't happy.
It's not out for PS3 yet, so no. I have 3 AAA games (R&C, Heavenly Sword, GRAW2) I haven't had time to even try yet. Warhawk still needs me to play it all the time. Plus CoD4 comes out next week. The Orange Box is due for PS3 December 11, so maybe it'll be an xmas vacation game if I decide to play it instead of Uncharted.
I could buy it for PC, but I don't need to play "update my graphics drivers, check compatibility lists on sound card drivers, why did it crash, my HD is full, etc, etc". I like the ability to just start the game and play in HD on a nice big HDTV.
It would be nice to see PC gaming included in these. It seems like PC gaming is mostly MMO-only now, with the focus of every other type of gaming (except flash-based games) moving to consoles. But it would be nice to see numbers to indicate whether this shift is real or just perceived.
Who needs fossil evidence? Just watch the movie. See? Packs.
The question here is whether the US government and US authorities can be trusted.
Governments can't be trusted. Glad I could clear that up once and for all.
Thomas Paine quote - Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
So you would support me screwing up your travel plans because I find your attitudes annoying - or am I missing something?
If I'm asking for a favor -- like entry into a country -- that country can say "yes" or "no". Why would I make travel "plans" before I knew the answer?
Protesters screw up travel plans for people all the time. It's more-or-less the definition of being a protester -- you cause trouble for people.
These people were labeled and punished...
It's not a punishment. Canada has no obligation to let people in the country. If they grant you entry, it's essentially a privilege.
If I were a Canadian, I'd say the list was no longer dependable and demand my government quit using it.
If I were Canadian, I'd cheer the result.
Maybe the list isn't supposed to be used for this particular result. So perhaps create another, even better list -- "Troublemakers who have nothing to offer" -- to keep protesters and activists out.
I'm sure there are dangerous criminals on that FBI list in addition to the annoying protesters though. I'm guessing Canadians don't want to start importing sex offenders and armed robbers so they may want to think twice before they oppose using that FBI list.
As a citizen of the USA, I hope Canada does start importing our protesters and sex offenders and gives them generous social benefits to try to get them to stay in Canada.
Yes? No? What's the point of the question? Seriously. Is there some sort of "conspiracy" mood-music playing in your head when you type stuff like that?
My guess is that Australia just found out who the guy was and decided they didn't need imported anarchists that bad. Maybe they just Googled "Scott Parkin".
There's a serious due-process violation here because a listing in this database is equivalent to an "infamous" conviction.
What does this sentence mean?
I'm pretty sure the rules are that no one should be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process. Liberty doesn't extend to cross-border travel in general because nations have the inherent authority to control their borders. No life or property was involved.
So what is the author talking about? It's completely unclear. I could guess it's just generic whining, but I'd really rather know the answer to the question: What is the author talking about?
The Canadian government should certainly not accept this FBI database as the criteria for entering the country
Yeah. Why wouldn't Canada want huge numbers of protesters in their country causing trouble? They're really missing out on all that valuable, constructive protesting that these paragons of civilization would be engaging in.
Canada is no different than anywhere else. Almost any government would shut out these protesters if they could. In a practical sense, they are a useless pain in the ass. Canada figured out a legal way to solve part of their problem.
I have an even better idea:
"Agencies of the Federal Government no longer have the authority to issue scientific findings".
Problem solved.
That's just outright theft.
It's too bad it's the police. If it were just ordinary criminals doing it, you could buy a gun and defend yourself.
That was really a long post, and I don't know what you think your point is. I think you were trying to say that there are some bad drivers. Everyone knows that already. That's no reason for everyone to be treated like children by their benevolent government overlords.
Stop trying to control everyone and be everyone's Mom. You can't make the world perfectly safe for everyone no matter how many people you harm in your safety zeal.
And, just for the record, I don't really go that fast. I haven't gotten a speeding ticket in many years, and I think I only ever got one of them, but it might have been a warning. It's not about me.
I want to support law enforcement and the rest of the government. But I can't, because the laws are unjust and law enforcement officers are happy to enforce the unjust ones.
does being a dickhead actually make you feel better about yourself?
Yeah. What a jerk. The guy wants people to mind their own business. What if everyone were like that and people could just go about their business freely? What a horrible world that would be.
All I know is that it's given me a small, joyful, satisfaction on the rare couple of occasions when a police car just happened to be in the right place in the neighborhood at the right time.
Off topic, but you might want to reconsider that. Someone's life was made worse and it made you happy. That's normal, but it's not particularly good. The goal of law enforcement isn't revenge or to harm the people we've decided we don't like. Don't wait until someone who can get laws passed decides he doesn't like you.
Now define "dangerous driving" in a way that is enforceable.
There are already laws for reckless and dangerous driving with definitions that are enforceable.
What, are we not allowed to use the phrase "He was going too fast?"
"Too fast" is not a number. "Too fast" depends on the circumstances. Often, going the speed limit number is reckless becasue it's too fast. Other times, it borders on dangerous because it is too slow.
You're another excuse-maker.
Freedom is not an excuse. And no one needs an excuse for minding his own business driving along a road endangering no one. I could say you are the "excuse-maker", excusing the government's overreach for fund-raising through speeding fines and allowing folks to arbitrarily control the lives of their neighbors. But that's not really productive.
My point is that freedom is important and the law should not be unjust -- even if that means folks need to give up on their own righteousness and wisdom a little bit and allow their neighbors to make their own choices.
But what about the jackass who puts my life in danger on the highway? Are you saying the laws are not about that? At all?
... I'm not going to sit around claiming that driving that fast is some kind of fundamental right, though.
He should be arrested for reckless or dangerous driving. I'm not sure how the speeding law is supposed to help with that.
I've driven 120 miles per hour on a deserted stretch of straight-as-an-arrow country road where nobody was around.
You were minding your own business and endangering no one. "Freedom" is a fundamental right. And you don't have it when you can be arrested and fined for minding your own business and endangering no one.
So in your opinion, should there be much less speed ticketing, or none at all?
Ticket people for reckless or dangerous driving if they are driving recklessly or dangerously. Put up warning signs and issue modest tickets for speeding in areas where there are pedestrians. No tickets for speeding on highways.
If it's about safety, make it about safety. Until then, it's about raising money and controlling everyone's life.
Things work much better when people follow uniform standards for things like speed...
Put up the signs. Make them suggestions. Enforce reckless and dangerous driving laws.
In general, people do go at the prevailing speed of the rest of the traffic. It's dangerous when you have some folks going slower because there's a speed limit sign set to an artificially low speed so the government can raise money.
...as an EMT I'm tired of looking at people smeared all over the road.
If you can't exercise a little self-control and refrain from wanting to be everyone's Mom, please consider picking a job that allows you to mind your own business.
...if you threaten my life by your driving habits...
If someone threatens your life or even your safety by their driving habits, they ought to be arrested.
Speeding laws aren't about that. Folks get ticketed for speeding when they are endangering no one.
I support speed limits with moderate fines in residential areas, to protect pedestrians. A driver doesn't always know where and when there are likely to be pedestrians. Putting up "watch for pedestrians" signs would be good though.
Speed limits on highways are about raising fund by ticketing people for profit -- nothing else.
Not really. A lot of folks in our society are would-be dictators. They are happy to force people to do things against their will and take money from people against their will. They do it with laws and taxes, respectively.
It's morally wrong. I like pointing it out because some people don't really realize they are doing it.
Some people see the average guy as "stupid" and sub-human, like the plantation owners in the old South saw their slaves. A lot of slave owners justified their actions by taking a paternalistic view of their slaves. They'd tell themselves that the slaves needed the owner's guidance because they were so lowly and the owner so wise. The owner was doing them a favor, he thought, because the slaves were incapable of making it on their own.
Law-givers like yourself have the same justification for your need to control us. I'd hope some of you would come to some sort of realization and give up the idea that we all need to be controlled because we're stupid and you are wise.
I'm quite happy that there are LAWS to protect ME from OTHER people's stupidity.
Yes. LAWS protect you. No one would ever violate a LAW. Your safety is guaranteed and we're all just one or two LAWS away from everyone living forever.
Apparently, you think all the "stupid" people you want to control with your LAWS don't mind getting in a car wreck. Car wrecks are OK with them, but they weep with fear at the idea of getting a speeding ticket.
Note also that it's OK to threaten and control people and force them to obey (and impose consequences on them) if you just decide they are "stupid". I'm sure it's pretty empowering to decide others are "stupid" and you're their rightful ruler.
And, of course, your controls and forced obedience apply to everyone and not just the "stupid". Because who wants to control just a bunch of "stupid" people when you can control everyone.