it requires that you retain control of your information and be notified of every bit of your life that is accessed by any node
the question is why you think this is possible, or, why do you want to destroy the internet. you do realize the same set of controls, when proposed by media companies, was decried as freedom destruction
then the real question is why you define your social information, that you chose to release to an open network, as something to be defined as property that can somehow be "stolen", nevermind controlled
go ahead, enter conditions and contracts with your public data
how are you going to enforce that, nevermind that the contract is an absurdity because it's similar to saying "i'm going to give you this water in a sieve, and i want you to control how it comes out of the sieve"
you expect the impossible, because the condition your data exists in is not in a controlled environment. go talk to a music industry executive if you don't understand what i am saying
it's exactly the same point this same slashdot crowd makes about intellectual property: "information wants to be free man"
that's an ugly truth for music conglomerates. it's also an ugly truth for dumb teenagers. manage your private info, and don't share with the internet details you don't want the world to know. it's as simple as that: it falls upon YOU to manage your private details
what's insane is freely giving your private details to a public network, then deciding it's up to a corporation or a government to keep your shit private
what?
why do you trust them with your private details? how about you don't share your private details on a public network in a first place?
they call it disruptive technology for a reason. like the printing press, or the gun, or the atom bomb, it dramatically changes the status quo
it's simple: if you don't want it to live forever, don't put it on the internet. if you put it on the internet, it lives for ever
that's about the truth of it
but i suppose many people out there are like music company executives trying to impose legal constructs from the cassette tape age on the internet: unwelcome to accept ugly reality on the subject
well i'm sorry, you need to accept this as reality, no matter your feelings
one other point: privacy is NOT dead
all you have to do is stop offering parts of your life to the internet
the insane part is feeding private parts of your life to the internet, and then whining about a lack of privacy
rather than a nice straight acceleration curve, "poison" the rocket fuel so it sputters and weakens in flight on purpose. Yes, the rocket won't be accurate, but I don't think accuracy is the point. Meanwhile, the goofy microaccelerations and microdecelerations would make the rocket impossible to target accurately.
yes, overachievers are respected in the east. but bullying is just as strong in the east
so who is bullied?
the misfits
stupidity is the rallying cry of the western bully. conformity is the rallying cry of the eastern bully
and i will assert to you that the misfits hold more of the keys to cultural, political, social, and technological advancement in society than a mindlessly conforming unoriginal egghead
furthermore, we'll just wait for the asian eggheads to come to the west:
the west has problems, but let's keep some perspective here: china has no political freedom. those smart enough and rich enough to flee, do
for all the west's problems, we have a well-entrenched respect for the individual and political expression. as long as the west has that, our governments will be a lot more stable than in the east. a government has to rule by consensus, not fear, or it's time on this earth is limited. when china's economic growth cools in the long term, watch the real fun begin
i honestly believe eastern emphasis on conformity (aka "harmony") is far more deadly to social advancement and stability than the west's championing of the stupid
"hey kid, you laughing at me? you think i'm naked? no, i'm wearing the finest clothes in the land you ingrate. if that makes me a rich moron, then seriously fuck off"
the guy you're responding to is probably the kind of clueless fuck who sits with his friend complaining about the freeloading poor getting things they didn't work for, right after thanking his friend for his dad getting him that nice position at his dad's company
or complains about evil socialist redistribution, but not companies that redistribute wages lower than livability so the CEOs wife can have another vacation home
* some restrictions and limitations apply. please familiarize yourself with the 659 page legal rider. if you don't have your own private legion of lawyer goons to ensure full legal compliance with our modest conditions, it is our right to take you for all you are worth
the ultimate real world "emperor's new clothes" joke
1. the dutch colonists didn't let the indonesian farmers enjoy their own coffee crop (consider them lucky, the dutch committed genocide to protect their nutmeg trade: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banda_Islands#Massacre_of_the_Bandanese ). the farmers knew jungle civet cats raided the crops and ate coffee beans and shat them out mostly undigested. so, to enjoy coffee, the farmers processed cat shit to take the coffee beans out and brew coffee
cut to: clueless westerners, seeing locals drinking cat shit coffee, and thinking this is some exotic folkloric way to enhance coffee taste, start clamoring for this "authentic" way to enjoy coffee. add some marketing mumbo jumbo bullshit (i mean, catshit) about the civet cat digestive enzymes enhancing taste, and you have the birth of the world's most expensive coffee
rich morons deserve to fooled and fleeced of their money
in other words, i support the use of intellectual property law by poor states against the assholes who made up this lame legal framework. intellectual property law is of course a joke. and those who created it should, and shall, suffer for foisting this bullshit on the world
be careful what you create, western legal trolls. it has a way of coming back to bite you in the ass (out of which comes delicious coffee)
the hysterics and the prudes do care. so you are apparently ceding control of drug policy to them. the only way you wrest control from the prudes and hysterics is someone starts caring about responsible drug use. if no one does that, then the hysterics and prudes win in terms of social policy. social policy is not set by logic and reason by magic. it is set by those who care enough to make the effort to fight for and to define social policy. if you want a world with better drug policy, step up
people who dig in their heels and concede not even the obvious (about language evolving, about words with complex meanings, about no one controlling a word's meaning) are the exact opposite of rational. they are called stubborn fools
Slashdot Mirror
as long as you treat half of your society like cattle, you are never going to have a happy, prosperous, or just culture.
Yes, I know: "honor," "dignity." Well why don't you let your women take care of that for themselves on their own.
The Chinese, the Indians, the Americans, the Europeans, they will advance. And you will fester. Because of your poor choices.
Regards,
the rest of the world
it requires that you retain control of your information and be notified of every bit of your life that is accessed by any node
the question is why you think this is possible, or, why do you want to destroy the internet. you do realize the same set of controls, when proposed by media companies, was decried as freedom destruction
then the real question is why you define your social information, that you chose to release to an open network, as something to be defined as property that can somehow be "stolen", nevermind controlled
I am not concerned about wide open internet, I am concerned about my data as used by a particular company.
"i am not concerned about the ocean. i only care about what happens in this boat"
what a stupid question. it's a wide open internet, not one company server
look:
do you understand why the music industry is dying because of the internet?
good
now apply that understanding to your proposal, because you are asking for the same damn unenforceable impossible thing
go ahead, enter conditions and contracts with your public data
how are you going to enforce that, nevermind that the contract is an absurdity because it's similar to saying "i'm going to give you this water in a sieve, and i want you to control how it comes out of the sieve"
you expect the impossible, because the condition your data exists in is not in a controlled environment. go talk to a music industry executive if you don't understand what i am saying
so you don't want to manage your private details
you want to give your private info to governments and corporations on a public network
then you want to trust those entities and expect them to manage your private details according to your desires
good luck dude
it's exactly the same point this same slashdot crowd makes about intellectual property: "information wants to be free man"
that's an ugly truth for music conglomerates. it's also an ugly truth for dumb teenagers. manage your private info, and don't share with the internet details you don't want the world to know. it's as simple as that: it falls upon YOU to manage your private details
what's insane is freely giving your private details to a public network, then deciding it's up to a corporation or a government to keep your shit private
what?
why do you trust them with your private details? how about you don't share your private details on a public network in a first place?
and assume you aren't purposefully twisting the words i say, just not understanding them
if you don't want everyone to know about your large dildo collection, don't store it on your front porch
it's not "if you have nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear", it's "if you don't want the world to know about it, hide it"
it has nothing to do with corporate entities or evil governments, it has to do with you managing your own social existence
you don't get to put something on a public network and then complain about that thing not being private
manage your social existence. and certainly don't complain when YOU decide to trust your private details with a corporation on a public network
true before the internet, true now
that's a separate point from mine
not any government policy or commercial entity
they call it disruptive technology for a reason. like the printing press, or the gun, or the atom bomb, it dramatically changes the status quo
it's simple: if you don't want it to live forever, don't put it on the internet. if you put it on the internet, it lives for ever
that's about the truth of it
but i suppose many people out there are like music company executives trying to impose legal constructs from the cassette tape age on the internet: unwelcome to accept ugly reality on the subject
well i'm sorry, you need to accept this as reality, no matter your feelings
one other point: privacy is NOT dead
all you have to do is stop offering parts of your life to the internet
the insane part is feeding private parts of your life to the internet, and then whining about a lack of privacy
"goofy" rocket fuel
rather than a nice straight acceleration curve, "poison" the rocket fuel so it sputters and weakens in flight on purpose. Yes, the rocket won't be accurate, but I don't think accuracy is the point. Meanwhile, the goofy microaccelerations and microdecelerations would make the rocket impossible to target accurately.
overwhelm the system by launching many multiple rockets at the same time.
yes, overachievers are respected in the east. but bullying is just as strong in the east
so who is bullied?
the misfits
stupidity is the rallying cry of the western bully. conformity is the rallying cry of the eastern bully
and i will assert to you that the misfits hold more of the keys to cultural, political, social, and technological advancement in society than a mindlessly conforming unoriginal egghead
furthermore, we'll just wait for the asian eggheads to come to the west:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/world/asia/wary-of-future-many-professionals-leave-china.html?pagewanted=all
the west has problems, but let's keep some perspective here: china has no political freedom. those smart enough and rich enough to flee, do
for all the west's problems, we have a well-entrenched respect for the individual and political expression. as long as the west has that, our governments will be a lot more stable than in the east. a government has to rule by consensus, not fear, or it's time on this earth is limited. when china's economic growth cools in the long term, watch the real fun begin
i honestly believe eastern emphasis on conformity (aka "harmony") is far more deadly to social advancement and stability than the west's championing of the stupid
in the american parlance, it's the shit!
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=the%20shit
"hey kid, you laughing at me? you think i'm naked? no, i'm wearing the finest clothes in the land you ingrate. if that makes me a rich moron, then seriously fuck off"
what's worse than preening egotism?
blind preening egotism
i'm sure there are plenty of clueless easterners who pay sky high prices to eat shit too
the guy you're responding to is probably the kind of clueless fuck who sits with his friend complaining about the freeloading poor getting things they didn't work for, right after thanking his friend for his dad getting him that nice position at his dad's company
or complains about evil socialist redistribution, but not companies that redistribute wages lower than livability so the CEOs wife can have another vacation home
some people just don't fucking get it
* some restrictions and limitations apply. please familiarize yourself with the 659 page legal rider. if you don't have your own private legion of lawyer goons to ensure full legal compliance with our modest conditions, it is our right to take you for all you are worth
no what is going to happen is that china is going to start playing this game as it creates it's own "intellectual property"
and then wield this weapon internationally to autocratic extremes usually reserved for domestic considerations
look at their rare earth monopoly grab as a foreshadowing
western complaints will be accurately be labeled hypocrisy
the west created this absurd legal monstrosity. the west will suffer for it
considering the peculiar ethics that the plutocrats openly stand for, it's more appropriately called fair game
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kopi_Luwak
the ultimate real world "emperor's new clothes" joke
1. the dutch colonists didn't let the indonesian farmers enjoy their own coffee crop (consider them lucky, the dutch committed genocide to protect their nutmeg trade: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banda_Islands#Massacre_of_the_Bandanese ). the farmers knew jungle civet cats raided the crops and ate coffee beans and shat them out mostly undigested. so, to enjoy coffee, the farmers processed cat shit to take the coffee beans out and brew coffee
cut to: clueless westerners, seeing locals drinking cat shit coffee, and thinking this is some exotic folkloric way to enhance coffee taste, start clamoring for this "authentic" way to enjoy coffee. add some marketing mumbo jumbo bullshit (i mean, catshit) about the civet cat digestive enzymes enhancing taste, and you have the birth of the world's most expensive coffee
rich morons deserve to fooled and fleeced of their money
in other words, i support the use of intellectual property law by poor states against the assholes who made up this lame legal framework. intellectual property law is of course a joke. and those who created it should, and shall, suffer for foisting this bullshit on the world
be careful what you create, western legal trolls. it has a way of coming back to bite you in the ass (out of which comes delicious coffee)
just like Hussein did from Iraq in the first Gulf War
it changes the subject in people's minds: "it's not about Assad, it's about Israel"
Israel, Israel, Israel, Israel, Israel... obsession.
Am I the only person left on the planet who just doesn't care that much about Israel, for or against?
then there are epic lulz
the hysterics and the prudes do care. so you are apparently ceding control of drug policy to them. the only way you wrest control from the prudes and hysterics is someone starts caring about responsible drug use. if no one does that, then the hysterics and prudes win in terms of social policy. social policy is not set by logic and reason by magic. it is set by those who care enough to make the effort to fight for and to define social policy. if you want a world with better drug policy, step up
people who dig in their heels and concede not even the obvious (about language evolving, about words with complex meanings, about no one controlling a word's meaning) are the exact opposite of rational. they are called stubborn fools