Now the Truth Bearer Neutralization Procedure (tm) is backfiring, the truth that the independent genius has uncovered about our conspiracy, it is given too much prominence!
Why Slashdot why!? Do you know what the torture chambers of the interdimensional Illuminati Lizard Kings are like?!
Oh no... I hear that unmistakeable hum now... they are coming! I've failed in my duties!
Don't worry man, I'm just an advance Internet Forum Consent Engineer (tm), my assignment is Slashdot Task Force 45D, subsection truth bearer neutralization.
We are aware of the few geniuses such as yourself who have independently stumbled upon the real truth the Bilderberg Agenda (tm) has so desperately worked to keep secret, and we will not let you ruin our plans.
So I must continuously mock you so as to keep the others properly propagandized and placated.
but if you have a thought, and you put it on a wire that leads to a public network, you have just given up your right to privacy
not legally, but logically
even if the government was passionate about not snooping on the network in its borders, what of corporations? what of rogue government operatives? what of technically proficient and strangely motivated individuals?
it's a NETWORK, not a closed box in your garage
if you want something private, don't put it on a public network. once it gets out there, it is beyond your control. and you are the person who put it out there. so don't put it out there if it is important for you to keep private
this has nothing to do with legality. it has to do with a common sense understanding of the nature of the subject matter you are dealing with: a wide open public network. there is no such thing as privacy on that
every city in the world has a police force. in some cities the police force is corrupt and inefficient. in other cities, there's still corruption, but policing is efficient and they do their best to root out the corruption
but because you can find corruption in any police force, let's go after the very idea of police itself as unnecessary and essentially wrong
or: because they found one corrupt cop out of a mostly good police force in city X, no one in city X can criticize the completely corrupt police in city Y
do you understand the failure in logic here?
good, now you understand your own failure
the usa finds some internet usage objectionable and looks for it
ethiopia finds some internet usage objectionable and looks for it
WHAT do they find objectionable?
kiddie porn? or political expression?
criticize based on THAT, not the fact that governments, all of them, look at the packets on their networks, and always will, and oftentimes, for good reasons
if this concept bothers you, you have a problem with the reality of the world you live in
there's still AM radio, they still sell player piano rolls, cassette tapes, etc.
"dies" means "ceases to be the most important driver of creation and consumption of media"
which has already happened, socially and culturally. financial and political death are what we are still waiting on. give it a decade or two for the older clueless folks to die off
so if i come up to you and say "if you don't move your car i'm going to shooot you", you don't move your car, and i shoot you... you're in the wrong? because i warned you?
bullshit
it doesn't matter if i gave you fair warning i was going to abuse you. it doesn't matter if you didn't get out of the way. if i abused you, that's what is wrong. the warning of the abuse or not is immaterial
furthermore, you didn't "choose" to be abused. anyone can threaten anyone with violence. that in and of itself is a crime. to follow up on the threat with actual violence simply means you've compounded the crime. the person who initiates the violence is in the wrong, period
every single demonstrator should have a camera. every single cop should have a camera. now you have a proper adversarial situation. when something goes bad, whether the fault of demonstrator or cop, now we will clearly know
the more cameras, on either side, the better. who cares if someone loses something? the incriminatory evidence should be available from the side that wants to present the abuse that was perpetrated
"the police" are not alien beings hell bent on abuse for the fun of it. they are employed by us, the citizens, to enforce the laws we write
they are accountable to us, they are accountable to YOU
but as long as you have this "us" versus "them" mentality you have posts like yours that imagine police to be feral predators out to swing nightsticks, when they are just employees doing a good job or bad one, and deserving promotion or punishment, depending upon their performance, just like you and me. are there bad cops? yeah, there ARE predators out there. so they should be FIRED. not the entirety of the police force painted with the image of these few bad apples. see how that works?
when a cop goes home at night, he kisses his kids, watches tv, and goes to sleep, just like you and me. stop talking about them like they invasive inscrutable species out to hurt you for no reason and maybe you'll actually get something accomplished about their behavior
so a demonstrator is allowed to present their side of a story to the court of public opinion, and the police can only present their side of the story to an actual court?
one or the other: both police and demonstrators can engage the court of public opinion, or both police and demonstrators must keep their footage for an actual court of law. you choose
i don't understand this point of view that only demonstrators can engage the public. the police are not alien beings, they are our neighbors, tasked with a job we want them to do, keep the law and order. if they abuse someone, we want to see the video and we want to have them judged. if someone LIES about them abusing someone, we want to see that video too and the liar to be judged. as a citizen, i want to hear both sides. you will not tell me i can't hear or see the policeman's side of the story, just as much as you or the government can't tell me i can't hear the demonstrator's side of the story. transparency is the only way justice can work, and that truth works BOTH ways. shrouding one side, or the other, is when abuses get perpetrated, whether by police, or demonstrator
are you honestly saying "a billboard up across the street from you in which i show your 12 year old daughter's face photoshopped into a hardcore porno scene" isn't a problem?
you're not acting in reality
you're acting in the distorted realm of Intarwebs arguments, where rhetorical opposition matters more to you than actually trying to make sense
i'm going to put a billboard up across the street from you in which i show your 12 year old daughter's face photoshopped into a hardcore porno scene
buck up and accept it
you aren't going to fight me, are you? are you a controlling fascist against freedom of expression?
sorry, there are limits on everything. words that are incredibly specific and personal in a small community do real damage. you are incredibly naive or being intellectually dishonest if you don't understand that. when someone abuses you, you fight back. part of fighting back rightfully includes denying the abuser the channels of their abuse
so let's try an analogy. if a bully punches you every day in the face, you should just develop a tough face, rather than go after the abusive bully. that's the substance of your post
look: anonymity is not a sacred concept. it is just a tool. in plenty of situations, it is used to fight abuse, such as with whistleblowers fighting corrupt corporations or freedom fighters working against authoritarian governments. but anonymity is also used to create abuse, to create a power imbalance in which you can say really vile things about your neighbors in small town forums. this should not be tolerated. anonymity is not a sacred concept. fighting abusers IS a sacred concept
"I don't want to to have to worry about getting punished for accidentally ruffling a few feathers..."
are you going to stalk and harass your neighbors? no? then what are you worried about?
Slashdot Mirror
No!
Don't mod Insightful!
Now the Truth Bearer Neutralization Procedure (tm) is backfiring, the truth that the independent genius has uncovered about our conspiracy, it is given too much prominence!
Why Slashdot why!? Do you know what the torture chambers of the interdimensional Illuminati Lizard Kings are like?!
Oh no... I hear that unmistakeable hum now... they are coming! I've failed in my duties!
Cruel, cruel intarwebs forums!
Don't worry man, I'm just an advance Internet Forum Consent Engineer (tm), my assignment is Slashdot Task Force 45D, subsection truth bearer neutralization.
We are aware of the few geniuses such as yourself who have independently stumbled upon the real truth the Bilderberg Agenda (tm) has so desperately worked to keep secret, and we will not let you ruin our plans.
So I must continuously mock you so as to keep the others properly propagandized and placated.
i call bullshit
show me the simple political expression that the USA is blocking
thank you
you said better than what i said in a sister comment
go read the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and reference the section on Criteria for Paranoid Schizophrenia
don't worry, we'll censor the comment, and all will be normal again
but if you have a thought, and you put it on a wire that leads to a public network, you have just given up your right to privacy
not legally, but logically
even if the government was passionate about not snooping on the network in its borders, what of corporations? what of rogue government operatives? what of technically proficient and strangely motivated individuals?
it's a NETWORK, not a closed box in your garage
if you want something private, don't put it on a public network. once it gets out there, it is beyond your control. and you are the person who put it out there. so don't put it out there if it is important for you to keep private
this has nothing to do with legality. it has to do with a common sense understanding of the nature of the subject matter you are dealing with: a wide open public network. there is no such thing as privacy on that
every city in the world has a police force. in some cities the police force is corrupt and inefficient. in other cities, there's still corruption, but policing is efficient and they do their best to root out the corruption
but because you can find corruption in any police force, let's go after the very idea of police itself as unnecessary and essentially wrong
or: because they found one corrupt cop out of a mostly good police force in city X, no one in city X can criticize the completely corrupt police in city Y
do you understand the failure in logic here?
good, now you understand your own failure
the usa finds some internet usage objectionable and looks for it
ethiopia finds some internet usage objectionable and looks for it
WHAT do they find objectionable?
kiddie porn? or political expression?
criticize based on THAT, not the fact that governments, all of them, look at the packets on their networks, and always will, and oftentimes, for good reasons
if this concept bothers you, you have a problem with the reality of the world you live in
that's awesome, that you are so addled by fear that you accept these bogeymen as reality
you'll excuse the rest of us who don't just lie down and get raped when someone tries to rape us
if that is how you handle reality, good for you. the rest of us aren't so meek and cowed as you to simple menace
your words speak of a slave's mentality
fight for what is right, or shut up and fuck off
oh shit... i let that slip
no media ever really dies
there's still AM radio, they still sell player piano rolls, cassette tapes, etc.
"dies" means "ceases to be the most important driver of creation and consumption of media"
which has already happened, socially and culturally. financial and political death are what we are still waiting on. give it a decade or two for the older clueless folks to die off
it's tail thrashes around a lot, and does a lot of damage
it's still going to be extinct very soon nevertheless
you can't foist a business model from a dead era on us
well you can try, and drain all of your coffers in the process, thereby speeding up your demise
but economic reality has a way of being economic reality despite your protestations
they call things like the Internet "disruptive technology" for a reason
consider yourself permanently disrupted, media conglomerates
so if i come up to you and say "if you don't move your car i'm going to shooot you", you don't move your car, and i shoot you... you're in the wrong? because i warned you?
bullshit
it doesn't matter if i gave you fair warning i was going to abuse you. it doesn't matter if you didn't get out of the way. if i abused you, that's what is wrong. the warning of the abuse or not is immaterial
furthermore, you didn't "choose" to be abused. anyone can threaten anyone with violence. that in and of itself is a crime. to follow up on the threat with actual violence simply means you've compounded the crime. the person who initiates the violence is in the wrong, period
every single demonstrator should have a camera. every single cop should have a camera. now you have a proper adversarial situation. when something goes bad, whether the fault of demonstrator or cop, now we will clearly know
the more cameras, on either side, the better. who cares if someone loses something? the incriminatory evidence should be available from the side that wants to present the abuse that was perpetrated
"the police" are not alien beings hell bent on abuse for the fun of it. they are employed by us, the citizens, to enforce the laws we write
they are accountable to us, they are accountable to YOU
but as long as you have this "us" versus "them" mentality you have posts like yours that imagine police to be feral predators out to swing nightsticks, when they are just employees doing a good job or bad one, and deserving promotion or punishment, depending upon their performance, just like you and me. are there bad cops? yeah, there ARE predators out there. so they should be FIRED. not the entirety of the police force painted with the image of these few bad apples. see how that works?
when a cop goes home at night, he kisses his kids, watches tv, and goes to sleep, just like you and me. stop talking about them like they invasive inscrutable species out to hurt you for no reason and maybe you'll actually get something accomplished about their behavior
so a demonstrator is allowed to present their side of a story to the court of public opinion, and the police can only present their side of the story to an actual court?
one or the other: both police and demonstrators can engage the court of public opinion, or both police and demonstrators must keep their footage for an actual court of law. you choose
i don't understand this point of view that only demonstrators can engage the public. the police are not alien beings, they are our neighbors, tasked with a job we want them to do, keep the law and order. if they abuse someone, we want to see the video and we want to have them judged. if someone LIES about them abusing someone, we want to see that video too and the liar to be judged. as a citizen, i want to hear both sides. you will not tell me i can't hear or see the policeman's side of the story, just as much as you or the government can't tell me i can't hear the demonstrator's side of the story. transparency is the only way justice can work, and that truth works BOTH ways. shrouding one side, or the other, is when abuses get perpetrated, whether by police, or demonstrator
LOL
a statement against authority figures, and an appeal to reason, as spoken by an authority figure
I agree with the quote, I just find the paradox funny
LOL!!!
thank you for the smile
who invented Noam Chomsky?
I mean as some sort of authority figure
clever troll or genuine crackpot?
you decide
either way, laugh
are you honestly saying "a billboard up across the street from you in which i show your 12 year old daughter's face photoshopped into a hardcore porno scene" isn't a problem?
you're not acting in reality
you're acting in the distorted realm of Intarwebs arguments, where rhetorical opposition matters more to you than actually trying to make sense
end of discussion
i'm going to put a billboard up across the street from you in which i show your 12 year old daughter's face photoshopped into a hardcore porno scene
buck up and accept it
you aren't going to fight me, are you? are you a controlling fascist against freedom of expression?
sorry, there are limits on everything. words that are incredibly specific and personal in a small community do real damage. you are incredibly naive or being intellectually dishonest if you don't understand that. when someone abuses you, you fight back. part of fighting back rightfully includes denying the abuser the channels of their abuse
well said
mod parent up
intelligent, thoughtful, constructive
so let's try an analogy. if a bully punches you every day in the face, you should just develop a tough face, rather than go after the abusive bully. that's the substance of your post
look: anonymity is not a sacred concept. it is just a tool. in plenty of situations, it is used to fight abuse, such as with whistleblowers fighting corrupt corporations or freedom fighters working against authoritarian governments. but anonymity is also used to create abuse, to create a power imbalance in which you can say really vile things about your neighbors in small town forums. this should not be tolerated. anonymity is not a sacred concept. fighting abusers IS a sacred concept
"I don't want to to have to worry about getting punished for accidentally ruffling a few feathers..."
are you going to stalk and harass your neighbors? no? then what are you worried about?