You're making my point..... these things are powerful only because they are private. If I publish all the info that you ask of me I have no protection because I don't have access to everybody elses. However, I don't have a problem letting all that be public (and much more) if it's a two-way street.
Besides, most of the fear of repercussion comes from the fact that the powerful can do things to you with complete anonymity. If they were forced to do their dirty work in the full light of public opinion you'd see a change. How many times have you heard about a company or government office screwing the little guy until his plight became public knowledge and suddenly they reversed their tune? Remember the powerful already have all the anonymity that money can buy. All you have is the illusion of privacy. Privacy laws only protect the rich, the powerful, and the unlawful.... they prevent you from looking into their lives but they do nothing to prevent them from spying into yours.
Sure..... privacy is helpful for an abused wife trying to flee an abusive husband but the only reason she has to flee is because he's able to hide his actions from the public. Does it really matter if the husband is able to spy and GPS his ex-wifes every move if she is able to do the same to him? That type of knowledge will keep her safe and allow her to live a life without fear (no need to look over her shoulder or wonder when he'll find her). Same thing goes for political dissidents, homosexuals or any other persecuted minority..... remove the darkness that surrounds their oppressors and you remove their biggest weapon.
Its taken the luddite politicians 20 years notice the rise and power of the internet. Virtual will mirror real world as power is rested from the techies into corporate and gorvernments. Privacy will never be mainstream. Although it will still exist for those willing to go the extra mile. Enjoy it while it lasts.
Privacy should disappear. It's the darkness that allows evil to grow and spread. What the techies should do is set up a system that eliminates the illusion of privacy that the masses currently enjoy and finally starts to spread a light into the lives of the powerful. If we don't start working on a system that eliminates privacy for everyone the only one's who will have privacy are the rich and powerful, you can bet on that.
How is it tha I pirate music all the time and nobody comes after me, but the RIAA seems to go after many people who clearly have no evidence against them?
I've never heard about anyone being prosecuted for downloading copyrighted material. Uploading, however is a different story. I think the take home message is that as long as you leech off the P2P networks and never share what you have then you're safe (at least from the RIAA).
Doubtful. Although most police departments faught against the idea of installing cameras in police vehicles they have since discovered that recording arrests protects officers more often than not. People tend to act more professionally when they know they are being watch and I see this new ruling as a step in the right direction. Here's to more cameras! I look forward to the day when everyone carries around a small personal recorder that wireless beams home everything that they see or hear in a given day.
The thing is, if the man is correct, his device will be able to send messages back through time. But it will only be able to send messages back as far as when the device was first created. As a result, the reason we've never received messages from the future is because he has not built his device yet. Think of it as a time radio or a time bridge.... messages from the future can't arrive until those of us in the "past" finish work on our end.
The only problem is that it does not go far enough. Put the feeds on the internet too, open up all the cameras, and install more in all government buildings (if you're a public servant the public should be able to monitor you while you're on the clock). If someone wants to track my movements with a camera I say go ahead.... but only if I get to know who's watching me and I have the ability to watch them back. An open and transparent society can make the world both safe and free. The only thing wrong with traditional surveillance is the imbalence of power between the watchers and the watched.
Privacy should become a dirty word....
on
The Death of Privacy
·
· Score: 3, Funny
This is why I hope privacy will become a dirty word in the future. The only thing wrong with traditional surveillance is the imbalence of power between the watchers and the watched. However, technology is finally starting to level the playing field. What we need to do is encourage their use and stop lobbying for things like strong encryption, which only gives the illusion of privacy and strive to make a completely transparent society. The strongest cipher is useless if a fly on the wall records your password as you type it. Such methods only encourage an arms race that we cannot win. Currently the rich, powerful and crooked have the ability to peek behind your veil of "privacy".... let's work to turn this situation around!
Weird..... these cancer cells have evolved an ability not only to metastasized to different parts of a dog's body but to other dogs too. At this point I really don't think we should call them cancer cells anymore..... they are a new type of free living organism.... like a parasite. I wonder why they are restricted to only infecting other dogs? Does interspecies transmission produce too much of an immune response in a different host?
If there was a god, I would pray to be a network engineer at Google's server farms. Man, how awesome that would be.
Don't worry.... it sounds like Google is planning on building one. Of course, this new omniscient diety (All glory to the GoogleGod! ®) will be in beta for the first thousand years.
What seems more likely.... that the NSA tried to strong arm Qwest and when that failed decided not to try and get information from the other telecoms or the other telecoms are lying about not handing over our information? Qwest has no reason to lie while the other companies have 200 billion reasons to do so.
The only problem is that it does not go far enough. Put the feeds on the internet too, open up all the cameras, and install more in all government buildings (if you're a public servant the public should be able to monitor you while you're on the clock). If someone wants to track my movements with a camera I say go ahead.... but only if I get to know who's watching me and I have the ability to watch them back. An open and transparent society can make the world both safe and free. The only thing wrong with traditional surveillance is the imbalence of power between the watchers and the watched.
Sure.... the phone and cable companies put a lot of money into installing their lines and normally I'd say they should be free to do whatever they like with them. However, lets look where most of these lines are. Do the phone and cable companies own all of the land where their lines run? Hell no! They got an easements from the government and that gives the government some say in how these lines are used. If the cable and phone companies don't like that they can damn well buy all of the bloody land that their lines run through!
I think the porn industry has realized that HD-porn is a bad idea.... porn requires some level of fantasy to be successful and HD destroyes that. While some porn specializes in realism most mainstream stuff attempts to sell an ideal of physical perfection that you can't fake with HD.
High-definition DVD and TV makes everything look fake and makes actors look like regular people. When you watch a program made for HDTV it's so easy to tell that the actors are on a set.... it completely destroys my suspension of disbelief. Plus.... you can see every pore, wrinkle, scar and tattoo of the actors, which is not pretty. I want my pretty people back!
Of course they suck..... it's a camera-phone! All manufactured goods have limits.... size.... cost... etc.... If phone makers wanted to integrate a camera that was as good as a standalone digital they'd either have to sacrifice something... like battery life or call quality. Since people still buy camera-phones primarily as phones of course the camera function is going to suck.
Dr Michael Persinger, of Laurentian University in Ontario, Canada also claims that particular frequencies of EM fields can make people who are susceptible to them think they are being haunted or being watched.
Many politicians defended the new law, amongst them Günther Krings, the Christian Democrat legal affairs spokesman, who claimed: "There should be no legal distinction between stealing chewing gum from a shop and performing an illegal download".
Does that mean in Germany you can be sent to prison for two years for stealing a pack of gum? Now I understand how they managed to start two world wars. Yikes!
The Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) report says doubling nuclear capacity would make only a small impact on reducing carbon emissions by 2035.
Okay... if doubling nuclear capacity won't help how about we triple it? Seriously, would 4x our current capacity help? How many nuclear power plants would we need to make a difference?
I think this is the best example that we are actually living in a virtual, simulated universe and the programmers still have a few bugs to work out. It's the bloody Matrix but without all the cool clothes...
If police chief Harold Hurtt wants to put a camera in my home be my guest.... so long as I can watch a live feed of him in his home and at the police station. If someone wants to track my movements with a camera I say go ahead.... but only if I get to know who's watching me and I have the ability to watch them back. An open and transparent society can make the world both safe and free. The only thing wrong with traditional surveillance is the imbalence of power between the watchers and the watched.
Slashdot Mirror
You're making my point..... these things are powerful only because they are private. If I publish all the info that you ask of me I have no protection because I don't have access to everybody elses. However, I don't have a problem letting all that be public (and much more) if it's a two-way street.
That's why we have the 2nd amendment.
Besides, most of the fear of repercussion comes from the fact that the powerful can do things to you with complete anonymity. If they were forced to do their dirty work in the full light of public opinion you'd see a change. How many times have you heard about a company or government office screwing the little guy until his plight became public knowledge and suddenly they reversed their tune? Remember the powerful already have all the anonymity that money can buy. All you have is the illusion of privacy. Privacy laws only protect the rich, the powerful, and the unlawful.... they prevent you from looking into their lives but they do nothing to prevent them from spying into yours.
Sure..... privacy is helpful for an abused wife trying to flee an abusive husband but the only reason she has to flee is because he's able to hide his actions from the public. Does it really matter if the husband is able to spy and GPS his ex-wifes every move if she is able to do the same to him? That type of knowledge will keep her safe and allow her to live a life without fear (no need to look over her shoulder or wonder when he'll find her). Same thing goes for political dissidents, homosexuals or any other persecuted minority..... remove the darkness that surrounds their oppressors and you remove their biggest weapon.
Privacy should disappear. It's the darkness that allows evil to grow and spread. What the techies should do is set up a system that eliminates the illusion of privacy that the masses currently enjoy and finally starts to spread a light into the lives of the powerful. If we don't start working on a system that eliminates privacy for everyone the only one's who will have privacy are the rich and powerful, you can bet on that.
I've never heard about anyone being prosecuted for downloading copyrighted material. Uploading, however is a different story. I think the take home message is that as long as you leech off the P2P networks and never share what you have then you're safe (at least from the RIAA).
Doubtful. Although most police departments faught against the idea of installing cameras in police vehicles they have since discovered that recording arrests protects officers more often than not. People tend to act more professionally when they know they are being watch and I see this new ruling as a step in the right direction. Here's to more cameras! I look forward to the day when everyone carries around a small personal recorder that wireless beams home everything that they see or hear in a given day.
The thing is, if the man is correct, his device will be able to send messages back through time. But it will only be able to send messages back as far as when the device was first created. As a result, the reason we've never received messages from the future is because he has not built his device yet. Think of it as a time radio or a time bridge.... messages from the future can't arrive until those of us in the "past" finish work on our end.
The only problem is that it does not go far enough. Put the feeds on the internet too, open up all the cameras, and install more in all government buildings (if you're a public servant the public should be able to monitor you while you're on the clock). If someone wants to track my movements with a camera I say go ahead.... but only if I get to know who's watching me and I have the ability to watch them back. An open and transparent society can make the world both safe and free. The only thing wrong with traditional surveillance is the imbalence of power between the watchers and the watched.
This is why I hope privacy will become a dirty word in the future. The only thing wrong with traditional surveillance is the imbalence of power between the watchers and the watched. However, technology is finally starting to level the playing field. What we need to do is encourage their use and stop lobbying for things like strong encryption, which only gives the illusion of privacy and strive to make a completely transparent society. The strongest cipher is useless if a fly on the wall records your password as you type it. Such methods only encourage an arms race that we cannot win. Currently the rich, powerful and crooked have the ability to peek behind your veil of "privacy".... let's work to turn this situation around!
Weird..... these cancer cells have evolved an ability not only to metastasized to different parts of a dog's body but to other dogs too. At this point I really don't think we should call them cancer cells anymore..... they are a new type of free living organism.... like a parasite. I wonder why they are restricted to only infecting other dogs? Does interspecies transmission produce too much of an immune response in a different host?
If there was a god, I would pray to be a network engineer at Google's server farms. Man, how awesome that would be.
Don't worry.... it sounds like Google is planning on building one. Of course, this new omniscient diety (All glory to the GoogleGod! ®) will be in beta for the first thousand years.
What seems more likely.... that the NSA tried to strong arm Qwest and when that failed decided not to try and get information from the other telecoms or the other telecoms are lying about not handing over our information? Qwest has no reason to lie while the other companies have 200 billion reasons to do so.
The only problem is that it does not go far enough. Put the feeds on the internet too, open up all the cameras, and install more in all government buildings (if you're a public servant the public should be able to monitor you while you're on the clock). If someone wants to track my movements with a camera I say go ahead.... but only if I get to know who's watching me and I have the ability to watch them back. An open and transparent society can make the world both safe and free. The only thing wrong with traditional surveillance is the imbalence of power between the watchers and the watched.
Sure.... the phone and cable companies put a lot of money into installing their lines and normally I'd say they should be free to do whatever they like with them. However, lets look where most of these lines are. Do the phone and cable companies own all of the land where their lines run? Hell no! They got an easements from the government and that gives the government some say in how these lines are used. If the cable and phone companies don't like that they can damn well buy all of the bloody land that their lines run through!
I think the porn industry has realized that HD-porn is a bad idea.... porn requires some level of fantasy to be successful and HD destroyes that. While some porn specializes in realism most mainstream stuff attempts to sell an ideal of physical perfection that you can't fake with HD.
High-definition DVD and TV makes everything look fake and makes actors look like regular people. When you watch a program made for HDTV it's so easy to tell that the actors are on a set.... it completely destroys my suspension of disbelief. Plus.... you can see every pore, wrinkle, scar and tattoo of the actors, which is not pretty. I want my pretty people back!
Of course they suck..... it's a camera-phone! All manufactured goods have limits.... size.... cost... etc.... If phone makers wanted to integrate a camera that was as good as a standalone digital they'd either have to sacrifice something... like battery life or call quality. Since people still buy camera-phones primarily as phones of course the camera function is going to suck.
Dr Michael Persinger, of Laurentian University in Ontario, Canada also claims that particular frequencies of EM fields can make people who are susceptible to them think they are being haunted or being watched.
. stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3046179
Many politicians defended the new law, amongst them Günther Krings, the Christian Democrat legal affairs spokesman, who claimed: "There should be no legal distinction between stealing chewing gum from a shop and performing an illegal download".
Does that mean in Germany you can be sent to prison for two years for stealing a pack of gum? Now I understand how they managed to start two world wars. Yikes!
Wow.... an external harddrive. Color me impressed!
The Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) report says doubling nuclear capacity would make only a small impact on reducing carbon emissions by 2035.
Okay... if doubling nuclear capacity won't help how about we triple it? Seriously, would 4x our current capacity help? How many nuclear power plants would we need to make a difference?
The Patriot Act provides the same tools for counter-terrorism officials that anti-narcotics officials have been using for years.
And we all know how successful the War on Drugs has been...
How do you moderate a submitted article as flamebait? Is there any reason why I should care about Thomas Hawk and what he posts on his blog?
Is PayPal still evil? Was the ripping off of small-time eBayers part of the great good of getting Mankind into space?
I think this is the best example that we are actually living in a virtual, simulated universe and the programmers still have a few bugs to work out. It's the bloody Matrix but without all the cool clothes...
If police chief Harold Hurtt wants to put a camera in my home be my guest.... so long as I can watch a live feed of him in his home and at the police station. If someone wants to track my movements with a camera I say go ahead.... but only if I get to know who's watching me and I have the ability to watch them back. An open and transparent society can make the world both safe and free. The only thing wrong with traditional surveillance is the imbalence of power between the watchers and the watched.