Something might be happening. What is it? We don't know.
Kent: Hordes of panicky people seem to be evacuating the town for
some unknown reason. Professor, without knowing precisely
what the danger is, would you say it's time for our viewers
to crack each other's heads open and feast on the goo inside?
The latest subpoenas are nothing if not an admission that they didn't do the proper research before passing the act
The act was passed a long time ago. By congress. Perhaps congress did their research. Perhaps not. It doesn't have too much to do with the Justice Dept.
Fuck Bush, fuck every one of his little AGs he put into office, fuck everyone who voted for this travesty and who is now spending public money to to research stuff they ought to have known before voting on this act.
Except the COPA act was passed before Bush took office. This lawsuit used to be called ACLU vs. Janet Reno. I guess it's somehow Bush's fault anyway though. Just like the weather is.
To get a law overturned on constitutional grounds.
Sure, there are "other situations" where subpoenas can be used for whatever someone likes, but is "Waaah! I can't pass my pet law so I'm going to scream and cry until I get what I want!" one of them?
I guess so. Ask the judge that allowed the subpeona.
You think it's ok if information is "safeguarded", I think that the subpoenas shouldn't have existed in the first place.
Ok. Well, then you need to do something about the judge that allowed the subpeona or the law (or rules) that he was acting under. Good luck.
I think posting uninformed rants on a message board isn't really the ultimate solution though.
Private information can be subpeonaed for good and just reasons for a criminal investigation under guidelines of the constitution. The war on terror didn't change that.
Read the definition of a subpeona please. Stop the war on terror FUD. Also, this isn't a criminal matter. No one ever said it was. You might want to stop the FUD on that subject too.
And if the cable company has your shows, they can be subpeonaed (by the Department of Education, for a stupidity law case). And then everyone will know you stored 10 episodes of Ricki Lake. Scary.
Private information can be subpoena'd if a crime has been committed.
Or for civil cases. Or in a number of other situations. Subpeona.
Grow a brain... stop bending over everytime someone wants something from you
Perhaps someone with a brain might want to know what a subpeona is before he says stupid things on a message board.
And I didn't say anything about whether they ought to get the information. I actually think they shouldn't unless the court safeguards the ISP's users.
the internet actually *DID* change that... Instead of the private information of one targetted individual being requested, suddenly private information of an enormous number of people is requested.
No it didn't. Before the internet, insurance company records could be subpeonaed. Also credit card company records. Banks. Hospitals. All of them have large amounts of private information on large numbers of people.
either way it's scary
Oh yeah, terrifying. Why can't it just be a problem you'd like to see corrected instead of a boogeyman?
I'd like to see some more sensible safeguards on private information. Because it's wise though, not because I have an emotional fear-based reaction to things in the news.
Easy answer. It's not a seizure of private property. It's a subpeona for information. The collection of information for court proceedings happens for every case, criminal or civil.
You should read the definition of subsidy again then.
Taking $4 from someone against their will instead of taking $5 isn't subsidizing (synonym - "assisting") them. I guess John Dillinger was subsidizing all the banks he didn't rob?
Sure, but isn't a balance of both the best thing in terms of getting work done?
No. The "best thing in terms of getting work done" is the thing that gets the work done.
Java is a good example. Java helps people get work done. Java is not "free" enough for some people who are mostly focused on things other than getting a project done.
Slashdot Mirror
Then someone would complain about the router spying on them. After all, do you want your router CALLING HOME TO D-LINK WITHOUT ASKING YOU??!!!!!??!!
It would be the worst case of spyware since Slashdot implemented cookies.
I've got news for you. There's no "separation of church and state" in in the Constitution either.
That's just a contemporary legal tactic used to victimize and disenfranchise religious people (especially Christians) using the judicial system.
Something might be happening. What is it? We don't know.
Kent: Hordes of panicky people seem to be evacuating the town for
some unknown reason. Professor, without knowing precisely
what the danger is, would you say it's time for our viewers
to crack each other's heads open and feast on the goo inside?
Professor: Mmm, yes I would, Kent.
"smells" are hard to detect
Not that hard.
why do users revert back to email as soon as they hit a snag in the system?
This question answers all the other questions.
The latest subpoenas are nothing if not an admission that they didn't do the proper research before passing the act
The act was passed a long time ago. By congress. Perhaps congress did their research. Perhaps not. It doesn't have too much to do with the Justice Dept.
Fuck Bush, fuck every one of his little AGs he put into office, fuck everyone who voted for this travesty and who is now spending public money to to research stuff they ought to have known before voting on this act.
Except the COPA act was passed before Bush took office. This lawsuit used to be called ACLU vs. Janet Reno. I guess it's somehow Bush's fault anyway though. Just like the weather is.
Can it wait until next winter? Ocean-front lodgings in the tropics are just the thing to cure the winter blues.
Just because a government works within legal means doesn't mean it makes it moral (or just).
Nope. It helps to understand a topic you're discussing though.
If it was civil case subpeona then the US federal government shouldn't be handling these out now would they?
You could look up information about the case to find out.
You'll find out that it's not a criminal case and the government is the defendant.
This looks more like an ad hominem than an argument full of factual information to me.
A request to use reason and thought instead of emotion and fear is "ad hominem"?
I don't think it was that way before the Internet.
Is that so?
yes
Who's being sued?
The ACLU is suing the US Government.
For what damages?
To get a law overturned on constitutional grounds.
Sure, there are "other situations" where subpoenas can be used for whatever someone likes, but is "Waaah! I can't pass my pet law so I'm going to scream and cry until I get what I want!" one of them?
I guess so. Ask the judge that allowed the subpeona.
You think it's ok if information is "safeguarded", I think that the subpoenas shouldn't have existed in the first place.
Ok. Well, then you need to do something about the judge that allowed the subpeona or the law (or rules) that he was acting under. Good luck.
I think posting uninformed rants on a message board isn't really the ultimate solution though.
please tell what the [information] has to do with the [case]
No idea. Ask the judge that allowed the subpeona. It's his decision.
... scary ... nice and optimistic ... hope ... not so optimistic ... very pessimistic ... alarming parallels to the society of George Orwell's 1984.
At least you're in touch with your emotions.
I like to decide things based on facts and practical considerations. Pros and cons. It makes for better decisions. Try it out sometime.
Private information can be subpeonaed for good and just reasons for a criminal investigation under guidelines of the constitution. The war on terror didn't change that.
Read the definition of a subpeona please. Stop the war on terror FUD. Also, this isn't a criminal matter. No one ever said it was. You might want to stop the FUD on that subject too.
And if the cable company has your shows, they can be subpeonaed (by the Department of Education, for a stupidity law case). And then everyone will know you stored 10 episodes of Ricki Lake. Scary.
Private information can be subpoena'd if a crime has been committed.
... stop bending over everytime someone wants something from you
Or for civil cases. Or in a number of other situations. Subpeona.
Grow a brain
Perhaps someone with a brain might want to know what a subpeona is before he says stupid things on a message board.
And I didn't say anything about whether they ought to get the information. I actually think they shouldn't unless the court safeguards the ISP's users.
Again, what specific crime has been commited that gives the justice department the right to subpoena information?
None. The court is allowing them to subpeona information to use to decide a case. They're supposed to decide cases without information?
This was made clear in my previous comment.
the internet actually *DID* change that ... Instead of the private information of one targetted individual being requested, suddenly private information of an enormous number of people is requested.
No it didn't. Before the internet, insurance company records could be subpeonaed. Also credit card company records. Banks. Hospitals. All of them have large amounts of private information on large numbers of people.
either way it's scary
Oh yeah, terrifying. Why can't it just be a problem you'd like to see corrected instead of a boogeyman?
I'd like to see some more sensible safeguards on private information. Because it's wise though, not because I have an emotional fear-based reaction to things in the news.
Easy answer. It's not a seizure of private property. It's a subpeona for information. The collection of information for court proceedings happens for every case, criminal or civil.
Private information can be subpeonaed. The Internet didn't change that.
Two words:
space prostitute
That 100,000 isn't true, of course.
But even if it were true, it's still below Saddam's average number of victims for that length of time.
Freedom of speech only "lightly" abridged (for now). Yeay.
You should read the definition of subsidy again then.
Taking $4 from someone against their will instead of taking $5 isn't subsidizing (synonym - "assisting") them. I guess John Dillinger was subsidizing all the banks he didn't rob?
A tax cut ("credit" in this case) is not a subsidy.
I also don't think we need the IRS to define whether a project is "open" or not.
Sure, but isn't a balance of both the best thing in terms of getting work done?
No. The "best thing in terms of getting work done" is the thing that gets the work done.
Java is a good example. Java helps people get work done. Java is not "free" enough for some people who are mostly focused on things other than getting a project done.