in short: guy moves to malaysia (he had no ties to the area, just picked it on economic considerations) and doesn't just survive, but does well, on $16k/yr, working 10 hours a week
John is not independently wealthy. He did not have a big IPO, and does not have have a revenue stream. Nor does he have a best-selling book on, say, how to live cheap. Instead, he was a practicing programmer and IT program manager who moved from Virginia to Malaysia, on the expectation of taking a year long “sabbatical,” and, if he could find a way to make it work, to stay a bit longer.
if you see dark conspiracies where simple human nature obviously dominates, you're a fucking nutcase
not a baseless insult. an objective determination
to think the highly highly improbable is more likely than the spankingly obvious and inevitable is just dumb, and unhinged
violent religious nuts exist. violent religious nuts do what they do
panicky mobs exist. panicky mobs do what they do
overreaching bureaucrats exist. overreaching bureaucrats do what they do
this is all inevitable. there is no cabal. to think so, to not see basic human foibles at work and instead dark plots means you're an idiot and mentally deranged
You hardly need to be mentally ill to reach this conclusion
i stopped reading there
no, you really do
to not see how all of the elements in play here are organic is to not understand human nature, and to see instead vast dark conspiracies is, indeed, mental illness
that's called taxes, moron, which all people are required to pay to society to keep it running
you can disagree with how your money is spent, that's fine. then vote for someone who will spend it in another way. but you don't get to make up on your own how much you owe according to your dimwitted uneducated "ideas"
money doesn't magically get in your bank account, dependent only on you, as if you live in an island. in fact, money is nothing more than an abstract value of human society itself. money only exists in the context of a human society, and is directly valuable in reflection of how well run that society is. money for broken down societies where no one pays taxes is worthless, inflation ridden junk. by your thinking, that's what you want your money to be: junk. can you eat your money in an isolated cabin in the woods where you never go to town? but you want to keep your money for yourself, and not give a portion to keep the society running in which your money actually means anything. this is simply revealing how fucking stupid you are about this topic
luckily, no one sane is going to let a stupid douchebag like yourself or the other puerile crackptos like you prevail on this notion, because we like being rich, and we don't morons like yourself making us poor
again, remedial education: your income depends upon a well functioning society. if no one maintains that society, your income shrinks, along with everyone else's. therefore, you must contribute in order to keep society functioning. understand loser?
and, indeed, if you're too stupid or selfish to understand this basic fact of your existence, then yes, men with guns should be sent to take from you what you owe, you freeloading asshole. and if you shoot back, drop your ignorant useless ass dead, please, and liquidate what you own to pay what you owe, the world a better place with one less stupid freeloading loser
the base assumption is that we are dealing with human beings, not factory specifications
there is no civil disagreement between two valid opinions here, there is acceptance of the obvious on my part and a quasireligious blindly exuberant faith in technology on your part that is ruinously insane
let us hope you or anyone who thinks like you never gets near a classroom. those poor kids
everyone is entitled to their own beliefs but no one is entitled to their own facts. you can not educate a human being from an AI which at best is limited to whatever crude specs you fill it in with, in whatever limited timeframe and context, it can never make up for the complex interplay and social feedback of a real human being in the moment
i have no respect for you and your position as a respectful disagreement depends upon both parties acknowledging basic facts and reality beforehand, which you do not
at best, you need a remedial education, ironically, on the basics of human social interaction and information transmission before it can be said you have a respectable, informed opinion on the subject matter
adios, starry eyed cotton candy head futurist
stick to science fiction fantasy please
you're a harmless nutjob at best, and damaging to children's development at worst
we should adopt the finnish model, they have one of the best if the not the best education system in the world
and your denigration of the prussian model is correct, but your lesson form that is counterintuitive. i'm certain the zeal for the mass production successes of the 1800s informed its development in ways that should not be celebrated... so your conclusion is we should pursue automation and remove the teacher from decision making even more? i'm not sure you have thought that out completely
we should never depend on algorithms to analyze and proscribe any model of learning for any student. it is absolutely impossible for such an algorithm to do a better job than a moderately involved, competent teacher, who should be the only one involved in any decision making in any capacity for any student. technology is wonderful as a supplementary tool in many ways, but it must be a teacher behind the what, when, where of how that is invoked
i cannot understand someone who thinks an algorithm, any algorithm, can do better than a decent teacher in a classroom. such a belief defies reason and only tells us about your unbridled technophilia. you really need to rethink what avenues of society are and aren't applicable for improvement by automation and technology
i can think of one parallel that is instructive here: compstat form the 1980s and 1990s that saw the USA break the back of an intense crack ridden crime wave
but the technology was only used to improve reporting and tracking
it was more of management philosophy change than a technology overhaul that, in parallel to what you are proposing, moved computers at the heart of decision making in police work
that's kind of insane actually
it was still cop grunts that had to fight crime with blood and sweat, and police brass that made decisions
no one, outside of a dystopian robocop fantasy movie, would have suggested that an actual computer make decisions about crime fighting. in fact, you should watch that movie as a good lesson about blindly optimistic technophilia and how simple human corporate greed and shortsightedness makes a mockery of that
i'm sorry but it really is just plain insane that you assert AI should drive the classroom. it might make a good science fiction premise. a miserable, depressing, maddening science fiction premise
write a dystopian fantasy book. don't fuck with kids heads to prove something to yourself that you need to learn the hard way, not them. please
no AI can ever do a better job than a competent teacher. the problem you describe is not some amazing new problem no one ever dealt with before, you only reveal the novelty the idea is to just you. all AI will do is hamstring a teacher's effectiveness by proscribing "solutions" according to an algorithm which cannot possibly see the status quo better than a moderately involved human being. as well as saddling the classroom with unnecessary intrusive and burdensome measurements to justify the inaccurate AI's solution
your words speak of blind technophilia
technology has the power to solve many problems in this world. but other types of problems are still beyond, and maybe forever beyond technology. i am not a luddite, i work in technology. the problem is not fear of technology here, the problem is this quasireligious overly evangelical faith that technology can solve all things, even things it obviously cannot
i think technology has wonderful promise in hobby learning and catch up. but no AI and no delivery method will ever do better than an involved human being, a competent teacher, in a classroom. at best technology is supplementary, probationary tool, with an involved teacher proscribing when and where it is used
education is not a factory floor, and never will be, and trying to force it into that mold will just turn students off and they will hate learning. they will learn how to manipulate the algorithm and make a mockery of the AI solution you think is superior, wrongly
OVERALL Prosperity Index: Besides scores for their economies and entrepreneurship opportunities, countries are rated on factors pertaining to social capital, effective governance, human rights and liberties, health, and security. The U.S. ranks 10th, behind the Scandinavian countries, Austalia/NZ, and Canada.
ECONOMY: Rates countries across 17 factors including gross domestic savings, unemployment, inlfation, non-performing loans, and respondents satisfaction with standard of living and employment opporunities. The U.S. ranks 18th.
ENTREPRENEURSHIP Opportunities: Rates countries across 14 factors including business startup costs, R&D expenditure, and respondents perception that "Working Hard Gets You Ahead". The U.S. ranks 5th, behind Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and the U.K.
of note, the *perception* the usa is the country where you can work hard and get ahead is higher than the *reality*. we can and should close that gap by opposing the rent-seeking corporations and plutocrats that are destroying this country. we need to save this country from their corrupt predations. back to how it used to be
end the legalized corruption that makes the corporations and plutocrats buy our congresscritters and use them to write rent seeking laws that siphon off a couple extra billion for no extra effort, while shafting everyone else. somehow they believe this is better for their bottom line than a growing and healthy middle class that actually buys their fucking products and would make them many many more billions rich than the rent seeking, middle class destroying laws. short sightedly stupid and corrupt
please stand up and oppose the rent-seeking corporations and plutocrats that are destroying this country, whenever you can. we need to save this country from their corrupt predations
we are approaching that, we aren't completely there yet. we still have some social mobility, although it is shrinking and we are becoming a classist, stratified society
our social mobility is not as good as nordic countries. every country has corruption but we have far worse, legalized corruption, unlike the nordic countries. actual sane laws can be made against the commingling of money and power, as places like canada and europe show. at least laws against the perverse ways money infects and weakens our government, that the usa tolerates for some unnknown reason. corporations and plutocrats buy our congresscritters and use them to write rent seeking laws that siphon off a couple extra billion for no extra effort, while shafting everyone else. somehow they believe this is better for their bottom line than a growing and healthy middle class that actually buys their fucking products, and would make them many many more billions rich than the rent seeking, middle class destroying laws. short sightedly stupid and corrupt
the idea is stop this madness by outlawing such commingling of money and power (i wish we had a supreme court on the people's side) and reclaim the usa's claim as the country where the poor go to work hard and succeed, and increase our social mobility ranking back to where it used to be
You want their money? Gather up 1000 people, walk over to their house, and take it.
that's unjust and immoral
unless we live in a society where the rich are born that way and stay that way even if they are lazy, and the poor are born that way and stay that way even if they are hard working
then, indeed, people will revolt and rich people's houses will be ransacked. not because the people are unjust, but because society is unjust
the point is to AVOID that, because revolutions are horrible for everyone. and we avoid that by having a just society. which was the point of my post. and that's why you *should* care
not that you do care, as your post demonstrates. if you don't think we should live in meritocracy, good for you. but if you think we should just treat everyone like shit, not try to be fair in society, and revolts and mobbing rich people's houses is inevitable and unavoidable and we can't do anything about that, then, objectively speaking and not as a baseless insult, you are stupid and malicious
the ideal is a meritocracy- if you work hard, you're rich. if you don't work, you're poor
that's the ideal
of course reality means we have rich kids who don't do shit and can't fail, or whose dad gets them a cushy do nothing job with his friends at the golf club
it also means there are poor people who are busting their asses at two full time jobs who will never get ahead, barely tread water, and are one accident or medical problem away from losing everything, due to depressed wages because of power imbalances, and an insane healthcare system. and poor people on assistance who don't work simply because the financial incentive is to stay not working: it pays more
so we do not live in a meritocracy
we should, of course. and we should try to model our society on that ideal
and one way we do that is we guarantee a baseline of medical care and education to everyone
but if being poor means your education will be pathetic, you'll stay poor. and if you're rich and are a loser flunkie who never tries in school but still gets ahead due to connections
we WANT to subsidize poor people's healthcare and education, so we can actually and honestly say "you're poor because you don't try." we can't say that with honesty today. if we don't actually have everyone STARTING on level ground. the ideal of meritocracy requires everyone to start at roughly the same spot. then, indeed, you can criticize people for being poor, and laud people for being rich. rather than our increasing classist reality in the usa of a shirnking middle class, a rich kid who cannot fail and does nothing, and a poor person who cannot succeed and works his ass off
in fact, the usa is not the world leader in social mobility, the ability of the poor to get ahead by hard work
that title goes to "gasp" nordic countries, evil "socialist" countries, where people are happier and richer than "capitalist" america, which really isn't capitalist in the meritocratic sense, but more like plutocratic rent-seeking, social darwinistic fuck-you-i-got-mine-die-in-the-street america
sounds like it could also lead to groundbreaking new science along the lines of "hey, that's odd..." discoveries in the past where results were wildly outside expectations
why are you amazed and dismayed at people reacting to a threat?
why aren't you amazed and dismayed at the loser douchebag making the threat?
who needs to threaten people except a malicious person or a stupid and violent person?
most of it is empty, yes, until one asshole delivers. so you have to take it seriously as no one socially normal or well-intentioned makes violent threats
it is MEANT to cause fear
that's the actual problem genius!
that's how freedom is curtailed: by making you question your safety where you should feel secure
franklin's quote is ridiculously overused because security of course is a necessary thing in this world. it of course can go to far, but what amazes me are internet tough guys who think all prudent responsible reaction to threats is hysterical overreaction. these same internet tough guys will be going "the police heard the threats, why didn't they do anything!" because such losers don't argue form the position of right or wrong or logical coherence, just empty criticism without any intelligence or integrity
sniffing ALL of them (or, in practice, at least the great majority) let's you do timing, target, and content analysis: taking the entire firehose of tor exit node packets, inspecting them, profiling them, and drawing the connections
this is obviously not remotely doable for almost all organizations in the world. except an organization with the reach, resources, and abilities of the NSA. would you really be surprised if the NSA was actively seeking and tracking almost all tor exit nodes in the world? i wonder how many tor nodes the NSA just flat out started in the first place on their own initiative to guarantee a sizable chunk of awareness of what is going in and out
such a difficult effort will get you some useful information. not everything, and not all the time. but you *will* find out some interesting things, some of the time
In 2004, the Naval Research Laboratory released the code for Tor under a free licence, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) began funding Dingledine and Mathewson to continue its development.[20]
In December 2006, Dingledine, Mathewson and five others founded The Tor Project, a Massachusetts-based 501(c)(3) research-education nonprofit organization responsible for maintaining Tor.[23] The EFF acted as The Tor Project's fiscal sponsor in its early years, and early financial supporters of The Tor Project included the U.S. International Broadcasting Bureau, Internews, Human Rights Watch, the University of Cambridge, Google, and Netherlands-based Stichting.net.[24][25][26][27][28]
ah yes, those great crushers of freedom: the EFF, human rights watch, and now wikileaks
i'm certain the NSA has enough sniffing going on on enough tor exit nodes to kinda sorta figure out who you might be if it was important enough to them
but the point is simply that without tor, that ability to sniff still applies, but even more so. tor isn't bulletproof. it is but one more tool in your toolbox for cloaking and anonymity. combine it with other tools and methods and it is quite useful
tor is simply a good deal, not perfect. what is?
but if you are in moscow or beijing or tehran, and you want to divulge something nasty about those governments, you're certainly free to not use tor, because apparently only washington dc hurts people to keep secrets?
you're not pointing out logical fallacies you're pointing out side topics. stay on topic and make a relevant point, don't look to the existence of other points and say that somewhere in regards to another topic my point doesn't apply. no shit genius, but that's not the topic before you
Slashdot Mirror
http://developers.slashdot.org...
http://itknowledgeexchange.tec...
in short: guy moves to malaysia (he had no ties to the area, just picked it on economic considerations) and doesn't just survive, but does well, on $16k/yr, working 10 hours a week
if you see dark conspiracies where basic human foibles are at work, you are stupid, and you are paranoid. objectively true
there is no intelligent viewpoint to debate
if you see dark conspiracies where simple human nature obviously dominates, you're a fucking nutcase
not a baseless insult. an objective determination
to think the highly highly improbable is more likely than the spankingly obvious and inevitable is just dumb, and unhinged
violent religious nuts exist. violent religious nuts do what they do
panicky mobs exist. panicky mobs do what they do
overreaching bureaucrats exist. overreaching bureaucrats do what they do
this is all inevitable. there is no cabal. to think so, to not see basic human foibles at work and instead dark plots means you're an idiot and mentally deranged
i stopped reading there
no, you really do
to not see how all of the elements in play here are organic is to not understand human nature, and to see instead vast dark conspiracies is, indeed, mental illness
look, i think this law sucks, but you are paranoid schizophrenic if you think the authorities generated the attack, and generated the outrage
1.violent religious wackjobs are real
2. panicky hysterical mob fear is real
3. overreaching overcontrolling bureaucrats are real
no one designed all those steps, they all actually happened organically, 1, 2, 3
this is all a tragedy of human nature, not some plot by a cabal
and thus we have organic natural step 4: "HERP DERP it's all a secret plot!" says the paranoid nutcases
and someone modded you up to 3?
fucking mentally unhinged losers
it must be a plot behind closed doors! /s
that's called taxes, moron, which all people are required to pay to society to keep it running
you can disagree with how your money is spent, that's fine. then vote for someone who will spend it in another way. but you don't get to make up on your own how much you owe according to your dimwitted uneducated "ideas"
money doesn't magically get in your bank account, dependent only on you, as if you live in an island. in fact, money is nothing more than an abstract value of human society itself. money only exists in the context of a human society, and is directly valuable in reflection of how well run that society is. money for broken down societies where no one pays taxes is worthless, inflation ridden junk. by your thinking, that's what you want your money to be: junk. can you eat your money in an isolated cabin in the woods where you never go to town? but you want to keep your money for yourself, and not give a portion to keep the society running in which your money actually means anything. this is simply revealing how fucking stupid you are about this topic
luckily, no one sane is going to let a stupid douchebag like yourself or the other puerile crackptos like you prevail on this notion, because we like being rich, and we don't morons like yourself making us poor
again, remedial education: your income depends upon a well functioning society. if no one maintains that society, your income shrinks, along with everyone else's. therefore, you must contribute in order to keep society functioning. understand loser?
and, indeed, if you're too stupid or selfish to understand this basic fact of your existence, then yes, men with guns should be sent to take from you what you owe, you freeloading asshole. and if you shoot back, drop your ignorant useless ass dead, please, and liquidate what you own to pay what you owe, the world a better place with one less stupid freeloading loser
the base assumption is that we are dealing with human beings, not factory specifications
there is no civil disagreement between two valid opinions here, there is acceptance of the obvious on my part and a quasireligious blindly exuberant faith in technology on your part that is ruinously insane
let us hope you or anyone who thinks like you never gets near a classroom. those poor kids
everyone is entitled to their own beliefs but no one is entitled to their own facts. you can not educate a human being from an AI which at best is limited to whatever crude specs you fill it in with, in whatever limited timeframe and context, it can never make up for the complex interplay and social feedback of a real human being in the moment
i have no respect for you and your position as a respectful disagreement depends upon both parties acknowledging basic facts and reality beforehand, which you do not
at best, you need a remedial education, ironically, on the basics of human social interaction and information transmission before it can be said you have a respectable, informed opinion on the subject matter
adios, starry eyed cotton candy head futurist
stick to science fiction fantasy please
you're a harmless nutjob at best, and damaging to children's development at worst
we should adopt the finnish model, they have one of the best if the not the best education system in the world
and your denigration of the prussian model is correct, but your lesson form that is counterintuitive. i'm certain the zeal for the mass production successes of the 1800s informed its development in ways that should not be celebrated... so your conclusion is we should pursue automation and remove the teacher from decision making even more? i'm not sure you have thought that out completely
we should never depend on algorithms to analyze and proscribe any model of learning for any student. it is absolutely impossible for such an algorithm to do a better job than a moderately involved, competent teacher, who should be the only one involved in any decision making in any capacity for any student. technology is wonderful as a supplementary tool in many ways, but it must be a teacher behind the what, when, where of how that is invoked
i cannot understand someone who thinks an algorithm, any algorithm, can do better than a decent teacher in a classroom. such a belief defies reason and only tells us about your unbridled technophilia. you really need to rethink what avenues of society are and aren't applicable for improvement by automation and technology
i can think of one parallel that is instructive here: compstat form the 1980s and 1990s that saw the USA break the back of an intense crack ridden crime wave
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
but the technology was only used to improve reporting and tracking
it was more of management philosophy change than a technology overhaul that, in parallel to what you are proposing, moved computers at the heart of decision making in police work
that's kind of insane actually
it was still cop grunts that had to fight crime with blood and sweat, and police brass that made decisions
no one, outside of a dystopian robocop fantasy movie, would have suggested that an actual computer make decisions about crime fighting. in fact, you should watch that movie as a good lesson about blindly optimistic technophilia and how simple human corporate greed and shortsightedness makes a mockery of that
i'm sorry but it really is just plain insane that you assert AI should drive the classroom. it might make a good science fiction premise. a miserable, depressing, maddening science fiction premise
write a dystopian fantasy book. don't fuck with kids heads to prove something to yourself that you need to learn the hard way, not them. please
no AI can ever do a better job than a competent teacher. the problem you describe is not some amazing new problem no one ever dealt with before, you only reveal the novelty the idea is to just you. all AI will do is hamstring a teacher's effectiveness by proscribing "solutions" according to an algorithm which cannot possibly see the status quo better than a moderately involved human being. as well as saddling the classroom with unnecessary intrusive and burdensome measurements to justify the inaccurate AI's solution
your words speak of blind technophilia
technology has the power to solve many problems in this world. but other types of problems are still beyond, and maybe forever beyond technology. i am not a luddite, i work in technology. the problem is not fear of technology here, the problem is this quasireligious overly evangelical faith that technology can solve all things, even things it obviously cannot
i think technology has wonderful promise in hobby learning and catch up. but no AI and no delivery method will ever do better than an involved human being, a competent teacher, in a classroom. at best technology is supplementary, probationary tool, with an involved teacher proscribing when and where it is used
education is not a factory floor, and never will be, and trying to force it into that mold will just turn students off and they will hate learning. they will learn how to manipulate the algorithm and make a mockery of the AI solution you think is superior, wrongly
http://www.verisi.com/resource...
of note, the *perception* the usa is the country where you can work hard and get ahead is higher than the *reality*. we can and should close that gap by opposing the rent-seeking corporations and plutocrats that are destroying this country. we need to save this country from their corrupt predations. back to how it used to be
end the legalized corruption that makes the corporations and plutocrats buy our congresscritters and use them to write rent seeking laws that siphon off a couple extra billion for no extra effort, while shafting everyone else. somehow they believe this is better for their bottom line than a growing and healthy middle class that actually buys their fucking products and would make them many many more billions rich than the rent seeking, middle class destroying laws. short sightedly stupid and corrupt
you're welcome
please stand up and oppose the rent-seeking corporations and plutocrats that are destroying this country, whenever you can. we need to save this country from their corrupt predations
we are approaching that, we aren't completely there yet. we still have some social mobility, although it is shrinking and we are becoming a classist, stratified society
our social mobility is not as good as nordic countries. every country has corruption but we have far worse, legalized corruption, unlike the nordic countries. actual sane laws can be made against the commingling of money and power, as places like canada and europe show. at least laws against the perverse ways money infects and weakens our government, that the usa tolerates for some unnknown reason. corporations and plutocrats buy our congresscritters and use them to write rent seeking laws that siphon off a couple extra billion for no extra effort, while shafting everyone else. somehow they believe this is better for their bottom line than a growing and healthy middle class that actually buys their fucking products, and would make them many many more billions rich than the rent seeking, middle class destroying laws. short sightedly stupid and corrupt
the idea is stop this madness by outlawing such commingling of money and power (i wish we had a supreme court on the people's side) and reclaim the usa's claim as the country where the poor go to work hard and succeed, and increase our social mobility ranking back to where it used to be
that's unjust and immoral
unless we live in a society where the rich are born that way and stay that way even if they are lazy, and the poor are born that way and stay that way even if they are hard working
then, indeed, people will revolt and rich people's houses will be ransacked. not because the people are unjust, but because society is unjust
the point is to AVOID that, because revolutions are horrible for everyone. and we avoid that by having a just society. which was the point of my post. and that's why you *should* care
not that you do care, as your post demonstrates. if you don't think we should live in meritocracy, good for you. but if you think we should just treat everyone like shit, not try to be fair in society, and revolts and mobbing rich people's houses is inevitable and unavoidable and we can't do anything about that, then, objectively speaking and not as a baseless insult, you are stupid and malicious
the ideal is a meritocracy- if you work hard, you're rich. if you don't work, you're poor
that's the ideal
of course reality means we have rich kids who don't do shit and can't fail, or whose dad gets them a cushy do nothing job with his friends at the golf club
it also means there are poor people who are busting their asses at two full time jobs who will never get ahead, barely tread water, and are one accident or medical problem away from losing everything, due to depressed wages because of power imbalances, and an insane healthcare system. and poor people on assistance who don't work simply because the financial incentive is to stay not working: it pays more
so we do not live in a meritocracy
we should, of course. and we should try to model our society on that ideal
and one way we do that is we guarantee a baseline of medical care and education to everyone
but if being poor means your education will be pathetic, you'll stay poor. and if you're rich and are a loser flunkie who never tries in school but still gets ahead due to connections
we WANT to subsidize poor people's healthcare and education, so we can actually and honestly say "you're poor because you don't try." we can't say that with honesty today. if we don't actually have everyone STARTING on level ground. the ideal of meritocracy requires everyone to start at roughly the same spot. then, indeed, you can criticize people for being poor, and laud people for being rich. rather than our increasing classist reality in the usa of a shirnking middle class, a rich kid who cannot fail and does nothing, and a poor person who cannot succeed and works his ass off
in fact, the usa is not the world leader in social mobility, the ability of the poor to get ahead by hard work
that title goes to "gasp" nordic countries, evil "socialist" countries, where people are happier and richer than "capitalist" america, which really isn't capitalist in the meritocratic sense, but more like plutocratic rent-seeking, social darwinistic fuck-you-i-got-mine-die-in-the-street america
it's overheated technophilia
if their idea is for software to guide children's education rather than, you know, teachers, they are proposing subpar education
just copy finland
finnish education is amongst the best in the world and has a number of novel differences that beg inspection and perhaps adoption
and they don't automate education like a drone flightplan
interesting
sounds like it could also lead to groundbreaking new science along the lines of "hey, that's odd..." discoveries in the past where results were wildly outside expectations
why are you amazed and dismayed at people reacting to a threat?
why aren't you amazed and dismayed at the loser douchebag making the threat?
who needs to threaten people except a malicious person or a stupid and violent person?
most of it is empty, yes, until one asshole delivers. so you have to take it seriously as no one socially normal or well-intentioned makes violent threats
it is MEANT to cause fear
that's the actual problem genius!
that's how freedom is curtailed: by making you question your safety where you should feel secure
franklin's quote is ridiculously overused because security of course is a necessary thing in this world. it of course can go to far, but what amazes me are internet tough guys who think all prudent responsible reaction to threats is hysterical overreaction. these same internet tough guys will be going "the police heard the threats, why didn't they do anything!" because such losers don't argue form the position of right or wrong or logical coherence, just empty criticism without any intelligence or integrity
do you understand what a threat is?
this must be the social disability speaking here, to not understand what a threat is
are you autistic or do you have asperger's syndrome? honest, serious question
we either have
1. another cold fusion debacle
2. groundbreaking fundamentally new science
do i understand the em drive status quo correctly?
it is
which is why you should use tor if you're trying to hide something
just don't expect to be completely foolproof if you think you would attract the attention of something like the NSA
ideally, throw in another tool/ methodology, and change them up
sniffing one node won't help
sniffing a lot of nodes won't help
sniffing ALL of them (or, in practice, at least the great majority) let's you do timing, target, and content analysis: taking the entire firehose of tor exit node packets, inspecting them, profiling them, and drawing the connections
this is obviously not remotely doable for almost all organizations in the world. except an organization with the reach, resources, and abilities of the NSA. would you really be surprised if the NSA was actively seeking and tracking almost all tor exit nodes in the world? i wonder how many tor nodes the NSA just flat out started in the first place on their own initiative to guarantee a sizable chunk of awareness of what is going in and out
such a difficult effort will get you some useful information. not everything, and not all the time. but you *will* find out some interesting things, some of the time
thus, "kinda sorta figure out who you might be"
yes, exactly
i don't understand how someone couldn't understand your point
all freedoms have natural, logical limitations: where they impinge on someone else's freedoms
there is some weakness of intelligence or social ability going on in a person who can't conceive this
yes, it was originally intended for spies and dissidents in regimes hostile to the free flow of information to share information
that the us government is plugged into it from the ground floor doesn't change that fact
since then
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
ah yes, those great crushers of freedom: the EFF, human rights watch, and now wikileaks
i'm certain the NSA has enough sniffing going on on enough tor exit nodes to kinda sorta figure out who you might be if it was important enough to them
but the point is simply that without tor, that ability to sniff still applies, but even more so. tor isn't bulletproof. it is but one more tool in your toolbox for cloaking and anonymity. combine it with other tools and methods and it is quite useful
tor is simply a good deal, not perfect. what is?
but if you are in moscow or beijing or tehran, and you want to divulge something nasty about those governments, you're certainly free to not use tor, because apparently only washington dc hurts people to keep secrets?
you're not pointing out logical fallacies you're pointing out side topics. stay on topic and make a relevant point, don't look to the existence of other points and say that somewhere in regards to another topic my point doesn't apply. no shit genius, but that's not the topic before you