>Any company that bans gun related stuff does have a political agenda.
Or isn't a licensed interstate gun dealer and wan't to avoid the legal consequences of dealing in guns without such a license.
Help Help -- I'm being repressed!
As long as Kickstarter doesn't support my Anthrax deployment system -- I'm going to bitch on Slashdot!!!!!!
And let me add some more !!!!!!
I mean, we can't just assume they stay clear of things that require excessive licensing and oversight. Anyone for a Kickstarter fast breeder reactor? Come on, everyone can't be a baby about this.
I wish more companies followed your advice here -- it would mean an end to all the DNS configurations and headaches for the machines in the network to just have a direct connection. You can track the ethernet sig of the machine if you want to catch bad behavior or configurations internally.
Of course, as I become more concerned about the status quo, I'm also heartened that most security at companies is done wrong -- damn wage cutters!;-)
Let me be the first one to congratulate them. So long as those idiots stick to keyboard attacks instead of suicide bombings I think we are moving in the right direction.
If anyone is dumb enough to connect nuclear power plants to the internet... well, let's just say we'll learn that lesson and never make that mistake again.
I think any agency dumb enough to connect a nuclear power plant control to the internet is dumb enough NOT to learn from their mistakes. i.e., We are likely already doomed, DOOMED I say!
This is Best Buy -- of course they drill employees in the art of "selling away." The iPad is glued down and used to draw in the customer. There's a giant spider in back selling extended warrantees and used blood.
"Oh, you want something LIKE an HP? Well, this SpecOps 15,000 is the same thing -- and $50 less today only!"
I suspect - and Apple would probably hate this - that to many people "iPhone" and "smartphone" mean exactly the same thing, in much the same way that all tissues are Kleenex. If you don't give enough of a damn about the differences between square touchscreens called Nexus and iPhone and Galaxy and Lumia to make a purchasing decision between them, you probably don't give enough of a damn to keep their names striaght.
And people say that Apple suing Samsung for copying their interface and interaction for the past decade was based on just a grid of icons, if that were so, then the market would not have made "iPhone" synonymous with "smart phone."
So they've been trying to distinguish themselves in the market and the market looks like Apple -- so let's blame Apple for that? This RIGHT HERE is why lawsuits happen.
They weren't dumbing down the tool -- that has NOT been the point. They wanted to make it discoverable and usable. If there is only one button, you don't click on something with the 2nd button and "find a secret option."
As an expert user, I prefer a two-button mouse -- and people have grown up with technology now. The one button mouse is no longer a good choice -- but in the early days it was.
Geeks use Macs and Windows -- so let's not start this nonsense about training wheels again. It's not dumbing down -- it's usability and people shouldn't have to muck around with an OS if that is not what they are intending to do. A two-button mouse is superior in my opinion, but should not be required to function. Different argument.
There are a lot of people who are not technically literate. They muddle along and learn about how awesome an iPhone is and that their niece wants one. They go into Best Buys and a market droid says; "Oh, you want a smart phone -- well, this is just as good as an iPhone and it's $50 less today only."
"But I wanted to get my niece an iPhone -- you're saying they are compatible and the same thing?"
"Yes, yes this is an iPhone TOO -- it just says Samsung. They made it as same as legally possible and a little bit more."
"Sounds good to me."
"You've made a wise choice. Would you be interested in an extended warranty?"
"Should I get one?"
"Well, you've already saved $50 -- and with this phone, the extended warranty is only $49. You can't afford NOT to get one."
"Wow, I feel so much better -- I've saved money and I have a warranty on an iPhone!"
So get an unlocked phone and install CM. They're readily available. That's not an Android problem. That's a carrier problem. At least with Android you can do something about it.
Yeah, that's the solution; Roll your own Carrier! AS soon as I jailbreak my phone, I'll be ready for when the carrier fixes their end. Problem solved!
I feel so much better now that I've got an Android MyTouch with version well, I don't know, what version does a 4-year-old phone that has never been upgraded have if it's in black? There are a few chrome highlights on it, so it's got to be a LITTLE modern...
Well, for a time, most College educated people voted more for Democratic party -- Republicans are more represented by the lower middle of the Bell Curve. Now that corporations have "informed" a lot of the business schools with supply side nonsense, it's a bit more even. Though I recognize all kinds of intelligence and ways people view what is "compassion" so I won't broad brush this any more. I think a BETTER model of the way people in the US are driven is Modernists and Romantics. Modernists think we can fix things, and Romantics believe in heroes and things done by the heart -- and ironically, describe more modern Conservatives than bleeding heart liberals.
There is NOTHING wrong with voting in your own best interest -- businesses and rich people do it all the time. IN theory, competing interests allow for a compromise system that works for the most people. Owning the media isn't very profitable unless you can use it to rent public opinion -- and that is what is informing voters and why people who watch Fox News could actually say CNN represents liberalism. We now have LESS unionization and LESS public supports and the income gap is higher -- so yes, the tax system needs an overhaul, but when Microsoft and GM PAY NOT TAXES -- it is obviously, intrinsically, demonstrably NOT an "Atlas Shrugged Situation". It's an Atlas stepping on everyone situation. The only thing more "liberal" is gay marriage and maybe pot legalization (though that seems to also be a libertarian ideal as well -- which doesn't fit a straight left-right world view).
In the 1940's we had the most dynamic and powerful economy in the world, and it was done with lots of Socialism. Now we have the income disparity not seen since the last Great Depression and America is behind on a lot of metrics. So while I don't think Democrats are different from what Republicans were 30 years ago -- I don't think the problem is "people voting to get a free handout."
By any measure, there are more handouts going to Oil Companies and Internet Service Providers. And I count our military invasion of Iraq as a hand out to oil companies because I understand how things work in this world. Others have made this point better than I, but it seems really obvious and I can't let someone pass with the "der, things suck because Democrats are stupid voting for handouts!" We vote more for fairness, and opportunity -- but failing having a job, we vote because kids shouldn't have to suffer and starve. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan could have paid for everyone who wanted to to go to college in the USA -- doesn't it seem like we would have had more benefit for that kind of socialism than we got out of making military contractors wealthier?
Honestly, there are some counties in my state where I think we'd be better off with a few more muggers than a few more cops -- they certainly cost less than proving yourself innocent in a court.
Actually, I asked my dad once; "What's the best way to get promoted?"
And he said; "Endorse an idiot and make sure he promotes you before they kick him down."
My dad outsold his entire office complex, but because of politics at IBM, was never promoted to the top position -- apparently he said this in frustration because he'd never actually practiced the Peter principle.
I think there are extremes of being self-serving and being a person of integrity -- I certainly see a downside in being the LAST person with integrity.
Yes, most workers are mediocre because MOST companies are mediocre. I don't think that's JUST because of hiring --- it's MOSTLY because of corporate culture. The only penalty for being a Bozo is when you work for a Bozo -- and if the company is large enough and can game the system (such as a monopoly or Cable company), they can support keeping Bozos in orbit indefinitely. Have you seen amazing innovation from GM or Comcast? Ever? I rest my case.
Really I think the "submit 100 resumes get one reply" model of hiring in the USA makes sure you get someone who is good at making resumes -- every time. Not necessarily someone who is great at working.
It's kind of like how we have an election system that allows us to get politicians who know how to get elected, but after that -- well, we have a politician who will say nice things in 2 or 4 years.
Getting a job is about networking and getting credit. I think a better way might to loosen the requirements, and have some kind of 2 week try out period for more candidates -- but it's clumsy and has HR risks. But it would be better for both the company and workers who were less skilled at getting hired.
i'm not an expert on statistics but I did take a class. In any distribution curve, it's almost impossible to avoid a bell curve. You get a group of geniuses, and there will be one person who is strongest and one who is weakest and most grouped somewhere between -- tadaa! Bell Curve again.
And I don't think hiring practices suck -- I ASSUME they do. People jump through hoops to get jobs and there's a lot of people seeking those who've done X, Y and Z but not much use for people who do X and Y really well and they could pick up Z if someone gave them the chance.
So what we need is better use and support of the bell curve and reality. Reality is; not everyone functions at their peak all the time. So even those people in the middle or the top may be on the bottom on occasion (like just after they have a baby).
I joined a Men's group a few years ago, because I realized I needed to share more than sports scores and work. The teams are often assembled from random every year or so and guess what? It amazes me that when you get to know people, they are almost always wise in some way, they care, and hey have something to offer. Most people in this world are good and most people have some kind of intelligence. You don't realize this in a workplace because everyone is busy fitting in and coping and not getting fired.
A great company, would be one that realizes that people are assets, and knows how to build good teams. I still remember a story about an IQ test given to an indian tribe, and they all pitched in to work on the same IQ test. "No," said the tester; "You've got to each take the test as individuals -- doing it together will give you a higher score and it's cheating." The Indians responded that the test was stupid because a good team always wins. From their perspective, I agree.
I agree with your comment -- but I'd just like to refine a point; We were not attacked by Afghanistan either. In Afghanistan, Bin Ladin "allegedly" trained some al Qaeda. He did live there for a time. But we've got no proof of either allegation. If we do "trust" that the individuals listed as the hijackers were the hijackers, then we've got people from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan who were trained more in Southern Florida than anywhere else. They might have been trained elsewhere first. But you see where I'm going here -- it's wasn't a "government" attacking us -- and if you hold anyone accountable -- it's a long chain before you get to Afghanistan.
A "cynical person" (I'm guilty), might suggest we invaded Afghanistan so UNOCAL could have a natural gas pipeline. We get more influence in Pakistan and keep India from being TOO MUCH in bed with Russia by supplying Natural Gas. Plus, I'm guessing some people made a lot of money.
I also notice that all the Oil Companies Saddam kicked out are back in Iraq -- we left after the negotiated production sharing agreements were made -- apparently that's what was needed to be sure they had enough Democracy and Security before we stood down. A cynical person might think this was all a sham and the "war on terror" was front for "making big bucks for friends".
I'd also extend this cynicism to NSA -- and we cannot prove they won't abuse this power to manipulate the public and elected officials, so WHY give them this power? I don't trust anyone with this power and I think I'm being rational. Don't give powers you don't want used and abused -- like allowing drone strikes without declaring war -- it's just a high tech form of assassination and terror by another name.
You say "hyperbole" and then go on to make a point about Google and Huffingtonpost getting all the information there is about people -- so how is it Hyperbole to assume that the NSA isn't getting at least as much as Google?
You're not defending the practice of Google or the NSA -- you're saying "Everyone is doing it so what is the big deal?"
It's not hyperbole if it is true and if you want a Constitutional Amendment -- which I don't think is necessary when we already have an Right To Privacy our Supreme Court ignores. What we need is more outrage -- not calm. What we need is different people on the Supreme Court who don't legislate for the Plutocracy and bypass Constitutional amendments and guarantees. What we need is election reform so corporations can't use money as "free speech" and take away the voice of the public.
Following the Snowden revelations your NSA inspired dream of cloud computing and total social networking (i.e. full access too all the data in the world) is dead.
Nobody with a brain would even think of storing their data on an American computing resource.
Sincerely yours,
The rest of the world.
Dear World,
Following the Snowden revelations your Marketing Techdroid inspired dreams of cloud computing and total social networking (i.e. full access too all the data in the world) is dead. Did you not notice the stories of how your countries / companies were complicit? If "Multinationals" in the USA rolled over, when for all intents and purposes, they own our politicians -- is it too much of a stretch to think they WANT the pervasive spying? The question to ask is; "What do multinationals get out of knowing everything about people and all the assumed secret messages that smaller companies might send to each other get out of this arrangement."
Nobody with a brain would even think of storing their data on an "Offsite" computing resource that they had no special arrangement with. And aren't their multinational corporations in YOUR country?
Sincerely yours,
Everyone with some common sense.
FTFY
While I was upset at the NSA -- I don't have delusions that other countries aren't doing the same thing. Even Sweden seemed to be happy to piggy back on the information gathering.
So true. Takes all the fun out of everyone on slashdot saying exactly the same thing in response to the article.
The procedure is; Throw the red meat out in front of the rabid dogs -- pull hand back. You put an article out and your hands is at all still on it -- the dogs chew on you.// But all kidding aside -- YES, articles should be submitted without bias -- or with as little bias as possible. This is how we should get our news, and this is how we should start debates. It's just the reality that on Slashdot, there is a home-grown bias against "cloud" or "nano" because they are useless terms for "networked" and "small", and we distrust companies that are sneaky. So a reasonable person can predict which way the conversation is going to go.
Reagan showed the World what America was all about; "provincial prejudice and backwater pride."
They'll move the venue and some other nation will become a beacon of enlightenment.
Now there are people who say we can't tax wealthy people because they will all move -- and somehow they understand THAT concept but not this one. I'd rather have a lot of enlightened smart people, than people with money. The one makes the other regardless of who is talented with money.
Bar members of the Chinese military from attending. Even that is purely symbolic. Someone should tell Obama that in American we don't bar people based on race or nationality alone.
This is all highly unconstitutional. If they are allowed to enter the united states, AND they are not being arrested or detained, then they have the rights and privileges that those present in the US have...
Including the right to freedom of speech, which includes the right to organize and assemble.
The Defcon. and Blackhat conferences are an exercise of free speech rights. The government cannot lawfully prohibit those conferences or prevent anyone from attending; doing so is in direct violation of the bill of rights due to interference with and abridgement constitutionally protected activities and rights and privileges.
I didn't even need to read TFA to know that this will be accomplished by denying visas to those folks, not by posting law enforcement personnel at the doors to the conference and checking IDs. The US can (and does) deny visas to all sorts of people, and for many reasons, including this kind of thing. As do most other countries.
Perhaps you should think about what you say before you say it? That's not meant to be an insult, just a suggestion.
I don't need to RTFA or read your prior comment to understand that barring Visas for this sort of thing is STUPID. They'll just pay some white guy to give them the data while a few hundred thousand Chinese who MIGHT have learned we are a great nation will become annoyed and say; "Well, I guess they saved me from visiting a ridiculous police state."
Making America act like the old USSR or some banana Republic isn't the way to win anything. By the time you protect virginity of your daughters, they've been walking the streets giving BJs to hobos.
Slashdot Mirror
>Any company that bans gun related stuff does have a political agenda.
Or isn't a licensed interstate gun dealer and wan't to avoid the legal consequences of dealing in guns without such a license.
Help Help -- I'm being repressed!
As long as Kickstarter doesn't support my Anthrax deployment system -- I'm going to bitch on Slashdot!!!!!!
And let me add some more !!!!!!
I mean, we can't just assume they stay clear of things that require excessive licensing and oversight. Anyone for a Kickstarter fast breeder reactor? Come on, everyone can't be a baby about this.
A bell curve?
Only if someone gives this person security clearance as a "like-minded" individual.
I wish more companies followed your advice here -- it would mean an end to all the DNS configurations and headaches for the machines in the network to just have a direct connection. You can track the ethernet sig of the machine if you want to catch bad behavior or configurations internally.
Of course, as I become more concerned about the status quo, I'm also heartened that most security at companies is done wrong -- damn wage cutters! ;-)
Stuxnet is kind of proving the wisdom in not connecting vital systems to a network with open access to the internet.
Yeah, because having another check to launching a weapon is a bad thing?
Put all the control in the hands of the military and LIE about the password, what could go wrong?
I'm still upset about the whole "standing armies" thing, so I don't think I can handle a debate of why we want civilian control of the military.
Let me be the first one to congratulate them. So long as those idiots stick to keyboard attacks instead of suicide bombings I think we are moving in the right direction.
If anyone is dumb enough to connect nuclear power plants to the internet ... well, let's just say we'll learn that lesson and never make that mistake again.
I think any agency dumb enough to connect a nuclear power plant control to the internet is dumb enough NOT to learn from their mistakes.
i.e., We are likely already doomed, DOOMED I say!
This is Best Buy -- of course they drill employees in the art of "selling away." The iPad is glued down and used to draw in the customer. There's a giant spider in back selling extended warrantees and used blood.
"Oh, you want something LIKE an HP? Well, this SpecOps 15,000 is the same thing -- and $50 less today only!"
I suspect - and Apple would probably hate this - that to many people "iPhone" and "smartphone" mean exactly the same thing, in much the same way that all tissues are Kleenex. If you don't give enough of a damn about the differences between square touchscreens called Nexus and iPhone and Galaxy and Lumia to make a purchasing decision between them, you probably don't give enough of a damn to keep their names striaght.
And people say that Apple suing Samsung for copying their interface and interaction for the past decade was based on just a grid of icons, if that were so, then the market would not have made "iPhone" synonymous with "smart phone."
So they've been trying to distinguish themselves in the market and the market looks like Apple -- so let's blame Apple for that? This RIGHT HERE is why lawsuits happen.
They weren't dumbing down the tool -- that has NOT been the point. They wanted to make it discoverable and usable. If there is only one button, you don't click on something with the 2nd button and "find a secret option."
As an expert user, I prefer a two-button mouse -- and people have grown up with technology now. The one button mouse is no longer a good choice -- but in the early days it was.
Geeks use Macs and Windows -- so let's not start this nonsense about training wheels again. It's not dumbing down -- it's usability and people shouldn't have to muck around with an OS if that is not what they are intending to do. A two-button mouse is superior in my opinion, but should not be required to function. Different argument.
There are a lot of people who are not technically literate. They muddle along and learn about how awesome an iPhone is and that their niece wants one. They go into Best Buys and a market droid says; "Oh, you want a smart phone -- well, this is just as good as an iPhone and it's $50 less today only."
"But I wanted to get my niece an iPhone -- you're saying they are compatible and the same thing?"
"Yes, yes this is an iPhone TOO -- it just says Samsung. They made it as same as legally possible and a little bit more."
"Sounds good to me."
"You've made a wise choice. Would you be interested in an extended warranty?"
"Should I get one?"
"Well, you've already saved $50 -- and with this phone, the extended warranty is only $49. You can't afford NOT to get one."
"Wow, I feel so much better -- I've saved money and I have a warranty on an iPhone!"
So basically, is Apple's CEO saying that Apple users are idiots?
No, he's saying that accidental Android users are idiots and those are the best customers. ;-)
What's in your pocket?
So get an unlocked phone and install CM. They're readily available.
That's not an Android problem. That's a carrier problem. At least with Android you can do something about it.
Yeah, that's the solution; Roll your own Carrier! AS soon as I jailbreak my phone, I'll be ready for when the carrier fixes their end. Problem solved!
I feel so much better now that I've got an Android MyTouch with version well, I don't know, what version does a 4-year-old phone that has never been upgraded have if it's in black? There are a few chrome highlights on it, so it's got to be a LITTLE modern...
Well, for a time, most College educated people voted more for Democratic party -- Republicans are more represented by the lower middle of the Bell Curve. Now that corporations have "informed" a lot of the business schools with supply side nonsense, it's a bit more even. Though I recognize all kinds of intelligence and ways people view what is "compassion" so I won't broad brush this any more. I think a BETTER model of the way people in the US are driven is Modernists and Romantics. Modernists think we can fix things, and Romantics believe in heroes and things done by the heart -- and ironically, describe more modern Conservatives than bleeding heart liberals.
There is NOTHING wrong with voting in your own best interest -- businesses and rich people do it all the time. IN theory, competing interests allow for a compromise system that works for the most people. Owning the media isn't very profitable unless you can use it to rent public opinion -- and that is what is informing voters and why people who watch Fox News could actually say CNN represents liberalism. We now have LESS unionization and LESS public supports and the income gap is higher -- so yes, the tax system needs an overhaul, but when Microsoft and GM PAY NOT TAXES -- it is obviously, intrinsically, demonstrably NOT an "Atlas Shrugged Situation". It's an Atlas stepping on everyone situation. The only thing more "liberal" is gay marriage and maybe pot legalization (though that seems to also be a libertarian ideal as well -- which doesn't fit a straight left-right world view).
In the 1940's we had the most dynamic and powerful economy in the world, and it was done with lots of Socialism. Now we have the income disparity not seen since the last Great Depression and America is behind on a lot of metrics. So while I don't think Democrats are different from what Republicans were 30 years ago -- I don't think the problem is "people voting to get a free handout."
By any measure, there are more handouts going to Oil Companies and Internet Service Providers. And I count our military invasion of Iraq as a hand out to oil companies because I understand how things work in this world. Others have made this point better than I, but it seems really obvious and I can't let someone pass with the "der, things suck because Democrats are stupid voting for handouts!" We vote more for fairness, and opportunity -- but failing having a job, we vote because kids shouldn't have to suffer and starve. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan could have paid for everyone who wanted to to go to college in the USA -- doesn't it seem like we would have had more benefit for that kind of socialism than we got out of making military contractors wealthier?
Honestly, there are some counties in my state where I think we'd be better off with a few more muggers than a few more cops -- they certainly cost less than proving yourself innocent in a court.
Actually, I asked my dad once; "What's the best way to get promoted?"
And he said; "Endorse an idiot and make sure he promotes you before they kick him down."
My dad outsold his entire office complex, but because of politics at IBM, was never promoted to the top position -- apparently he said this in frustration because he'd never actually practiced the Peter principle.
I think there are extremes of being self-serving and being a person of integrity -- I certainly see a downside in being the LAST person with integrity.
LOL.
I truly wish I had mod points.
Yes, most workers are mediocre because MOST companies are mediocre. I don't think that's JUST because of hiring --- it's MOSTLY because of corporate culture. The only penalty for being a Bozo is when you work for a Bozo -- and if the company is large enough and can game the system (such as a monopoly or Cable company), they can support keeping Bozos in orbit indefinitely. Have you seen amazing innovation from GM or Comcast? Ever? I rest my case.
Really I think the "submit 100 resumes get one reply" model of hiring in the USA makes sure you get someone who is good at making resumes -- every time. Not necessarily someone who is great at working.
It's kind of like how we have an election system that allows us to get politicians who know how to get elected, but after that -- well, we have a politician who will say nice things in 2 or 4 years.
Getting a job is about networking and getting credit. I think a better way might to loosen the requirements, and have some kind of 2 week try out period for more candidates -- but it's clumsy and has HR risks. But it would be better for both the company and workers who were less skilled at getting hired.
i'm not an expert on statistics but I did take a class. In any distribution curve, it's almost impossible to avoid a bell curve. You get a group of geniuses, and there will be one person who is strongest and one who is weakest and most grouped somewhere between -- tadaa! Bell Curve again.
And I don't think hiring practices suck -- I ASSUME they do. People jump through hoops to get jobs and there's a lot of people seeking those who've done X, Y and Z but not much use for people who do X and Y really well and they could pick up Z if someone gave them the chance.
So what we need is better use and support of the bell curve and reality. Reality is; not everyone functions at their peak all the time. So even those people in the middle or the top may be on the bottom on occasion (like just after they have a baby).
I joined a Men's group a few years ago, because I realized I needed to share more than sports scores and work. The teams are often assembled from random every year or so and guess what? It amazes me that when you get to know people, they are almost always wise in some way, they care, and hey have something to offer. Most people in this world are good and most people have some kind of intelligence. You don't realize this in a workplace because everyone is busy fitting in and coping and not getting fired.
A great company, would be one that realizes that people are assets, and knows how to build good teams. I still remember a story about an IQ test given to an indian tribe, and they all pitched in to work on the same IQ test. "No," said the tester; "You've got to each take the test as individuals -- doing it together will give you a higher score and it's cheating." The Indians responded that the test was stupid because a good team always wins. From their perspective, I agree.
I agree with your comment -- but I'd just like to refine a point;
We were not attacked by Afghanistan either. In Afghanistan, Bin Ladin "allegedly" trained some al Qaeda. He did live there for a time. But we've got no proof of either allegation. If we do "trust" that the individuals listed as the hijackers were the hijackers, then we've got people from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan who were trained more in Southern Florida than anywhere else. They might have been trained elsewhere first. But you see where I'm going here -- it's wasn't a "government" attacking us -- and if you hold anyone accountable -- it's a long chain before you get to Afghanistan.
A "cynical person" (I'm guilty), might suggest we invaded Afghanistan so UNOCAL could have a natural gas pipeline. We get more influence in Pakistan and keep India from being TOO MUCH in bed with Russia by supplying Natural Gas. Plus, I'm guessing some people made a lot of money.
I also notice that all the Oil Companies Saddam kicked out are back in Iraq -- we left after the negotiated production sharing agreements were made -- apparently that's what was needed to be sure they had enough Democracy and Security before we stood down. A cynical person might think this was all a sham and the "war on terror" was front for "making big bucks for friends".
I'd also extend this cynicism to NSA -- and we cannot prove they won't abuse this power to manipulate the public and elected officials, so WHY give them this power? I don't trust anyone with this power and I think I'm being rational. Don't give powers you don't want used and abused -- like allowing drone strikes without declaring war -- it's just a high tech form of assassination and terror by another name.
You say "hyperbole" and then go on to make a point about Google and Huffingtonpost getting all the information there is about people -- so how is it Hyperbole to assume that the NSA isn't getting at least as much as Google?
You're not defending the practice of Google or the NSA -- you're saying "Everyone is doing it so what is the big deal?"
It's not hyperbole if it is true and if you want a Constitutional Amendment -- which I don't think is necessary when we already have an Right To Privacy our Supreme Court ignores. What we need is more outrage -- not calm. What we need is different people on the Supreme Court who don't legislate for the Plutocracy and bypass Constitutional amendments and guarantees. What we need is election reform so corporations can't use money as "free speech" and take away the voice of the public.
Dear America,
Following the Snowden revelations your NSA inspired dream of cloud computing and total social networking (i.e. full access too all the data in the world) is dead.
Nobody with a brain would even think of storing their data on an American computing resource.
Sincerely yours,
The rest of the world.
Dear World,
Following the Snowden revelations your Marketing Techdroid inspired dreams of cloud computing and total social networking (i.e. full access too all the data in the world) is dead. Did you not notice the stories of how your countries / companies were complicit? If "Multinationals" in the USA rolled over, when for all intents and purposes, they own our politicians -- is it too much of a stretch to think they WANT the pervasive spying? The question to ask is; "What do multinationals get out of knowing everything about people and all the assumed secret messages that smaller companies might send to each other get out of this arrangement."
Nobody with a brain would even think of storing their data on an "Offsite" computing resource that they had no special arrangement with. And aren't their multinational corporations in YOUR country?
Sincerely yours,
Everyone with some common sense.
FTFY
While I was upset at the NSA -- I don't have delusions that other countries aren't doing the same thing. Even Sweden seemed to be happy to piggy back on the information gathering.
So true. Takes all the fun out of everyone on slashdot saying exactly the same thing in response to the article.
The procedure is; Throw the red meat out in front of the rabid dogs -- pull hand back. You put an article out and your hands is at all still on it -- the dogs chew on you. // But all kidding aside -- YES, articles should be submitted without bias -- or with as little bias as possible. This is how we should get our news, and this is how we should start debates. It's just the reality that on Slashdot, there is a home-grown bias against "cloud" or "nano" because they are useless terms for "networked" and "small", and we distrust companies that are sneaky. So a reasonable person can predict which way the conversation is going to go.
Great point.
Reagan showed the World what America was all about; "provincial prejudice and backwater pride."
They'll move the venue and some other nation will become a beacon of enlightenment.
Now there are people who say we can't tax wealthy people because they will all move -- and somehow they understand THAT concept but not this one. I'd rather have a lot of enlightened smart people, than people with money. The one makes the other regardless of who is talented with money.
Bar members of the Chinese military from attending. Even that is purely symbolic.
Someone should tell Obama that in American we don't bar people based on race or nationality alone.
This is all highly unconstitutional. If they are allowed to enter the united states, AND they are not being
arrested or detained, then they have the rights and privileges that those present in the US have...
Including the right to freedom of speech, which includes the right to organize and assemble.
The Defcon. and Blackhat conferences are an exercise of free speech rights.
The government cannot lawfully prohibit those conferences or prevent anyone from attending;
doing so is in direct violation of the bill of rights due to interference with and abridgement constitutionally protected activities
and rights and privileges.
I didn't even need to read TFA to know that this will be accomplished by denying visas to those folks, not by posting law enforcement personnel at the doors to the conference and checking IDs. The US can (and does) deny visas to all sorts of people, and for many reasons, including this kind of thing. As do most other countries.
Perhaps you should think about what you say before you say it? That's not meant to be an insult, just a suggestion.
I don't need to RTFA or read your prior comment to understand that barring Visas for this sort of thing is STUPID. They'll just pay some white guy to give them the data while a few hundred thousand Chinese who MIGHT have learned we are a great nation will become annoyed and say; "Well, I guess they saved me from visiting a ridiculous police state."
Making America act like the old USSR or some banana Republic isn't the way to win anything. By the time you protect virginity of your daughters, they've been walking the streets giving BJs to hobos.