I'm glad I'm not in that field, but what does this mean for people who are and don't use Google+? Get screwed on a job you're otherwise qualified for because you don't need constant, superficial stimulation?
So her husband couldn't have guns. What about her 2nd amendment right? Where is the NRA now? Shouldn't they be screaming their heads off about the government infringing HER right to bear arms?
When fingerprints fail, they'll be like, 'hmm, what else can we use to authenticate? Hey, DNA! Let's start using DNA for authentication!' So soon all these security consultants and security managers (and sure enough the CROOKS!) will have every last bit of your personally identifiable, physical information. Where does that leave you?
Keep your whizbang fingerprint readers Apple and Mastercard and whoever else. Security was never 100% and giving you a copy of every last molecule is not going to change that. I'll get by with the password and when I get f'ed by that, well, then I guess, I'll have to deal. At least I'll still be able to think of my body as belonging to me.
Probably because with a name like National Institute of Standards and Technology, it sounds like a neutral organization. Some kind of innocuous academic committee or such. Not to mention, when it was first named, there was probably a benevolent view of such government agencies.
Now though, people who seem to be paying attention are distrustful of the government's "national security" policies. And with good reason, considering what the NSA has been doing since (and probably before) 9/11.
Now anything that mentions "NSA" to people who desire liberty sets off alarms and just like the NSA making their (unconstitutional) webs of association of U.S. citizens via (unconstitutional) surveillance, the associations we tie between other orgs and the NSA tell us not to trust previously trusted agencies.
means that it will be harder to decipher what is going on. I realize all reporters have a bias, but they at least go through most of the material and point out the notable items. Now whomever is interested will need to go through the data dumps for the interesting stuff. That will make the "reporting" less effective.
"... Maybe some optional social integration for those who like to be socially encouraged to do better." Perhaps broadcast a msg to all the nearest hotties that you're eating like a pig or working on your cancer quotient?
I'm not a cop, but I'll go out on a limb here and guess that when the cops try to justify their purchases of these weapons, or when the arms industry sales rep comes calling, they justify the weapons with the (limited) examples of the big gang war or drug cartel bust that occurred recently in the next city.
"Many states in the USA have 'stand your ground' laws which are a recipe for disaster. Shoot someone and then just claim you were afraid, or defending yourself."
I don't literally want to see this, but as a mental exercise (the poor defender would probably end up overwhelmed and not make it to a trial), I'd like to know what would happen if someone used this defense with a menacing cop.
Probably 'cause no one is perfect. Everyone messes up at some point in their life. His reluctance to refuse the vitamin C sham doesn't discredit his other accomplishments. Sure, the reluctance doesn't put him in a good light, but his other accomplishments still stand.
I'll play devils advocate for a moment. In part, the cops have attained these capabilities because of the increased capabilities of organized crime and street-level criminals. Something of an arms race going on.
Add to that the fact that the military conglomerates were looking for a way to expand their markets. Police agencies are the perfect answer.
Given the impunity with which these people behave, and the firepower they are enhanced with, people should start to question how the police are a benefit to society.
What is NASA gonna say if another 'Sandy' hits again... in the next 5 years? No, I'm not predicting there will be one within 5 years. I'm just wondering what they'd do if it did occur very soon?
Al Queda's refusal of observing Geneva Conventions doesn't negate the U.S.' responsibility to abide by them in how they handle captives.
Additionally, explain how drones fit into the Geneva Conventions. If you find that they don't and are illegal, then it would appear that the U.S. is contravening Geneva Conventions. Does that mean that U.S. soldiers caught by another party should be mistreated and not afforded humane treatment?
I don't watch much tv, so I don't know what broadcast news says about him, but given the news I see online, there does seem to be a hostile tone toward him. If the majority of major news sources are toeing the govt. line and portraying him as a spy, then it's a wonder the poll numbers aren't more against him.
Who or what are the government officials who want to prosecute Snowden protecting? Are they protecting the Constitution or themselves?
If the founders were so worried about the people's decisions, why did they bother mentioning things like "we the people" that emphasized a nation made up of free citizens?
I'm not sure who you are saying is being attacked when you say "productive class". Are you saying that only people who own business are productive? How do you explain Dept. of Labor reports that say something like 'productivity increased.3% in the last quarter' then? Workers had nothing to do with that? It's not just the owners of capital who are taxed. The workers are taxed too. And last I heard, corporate exec compensation was more than 100x what the average employee pay was. Doesn't sound like they are suffering to me
... albeit one that periodically suffers mass casualty events.
Sounds like the adventure still exists to some extent.
Based on recent media, Everest does sound like it's turned into some kind of tourist trap, instead of a remote, arduous frontier. What frontiers remain that haven't turned into prime time television scenery?
Maybe animosity was too strong a word. However, given that E.U. nations such as Spain and France were trying to force Bolivia's Evo Morales to give him up, if he'd had Snowden on a plane, there is no support from nations that should be helping Snowden. Further, several, not all, but several, nations appear to playing along with the U.S. instead of finding another solution for Snowden.
Slashdot Mirror
Fuck that no-account whore.
I'm glad I'm not in that field, but what does this mean for people who are and don't use Google+? Get screwed on a job you're otherwise qualified for because you don't need constant, superficial stimulation?
I hate that bloody time change. If we just get rid of it, we don't have to worry about what it's called at all.
So her husband couldn't have guns. What about her 2nd amendment right? Where is the NRA now? Shouldn't they be screaming their heads off about the government infringing HER right to bear arms?
No, they meant /. That's all I ever read and considering the drek that ends up here, it means I might as well live in a cave.
When fingerprints fail, they'll be like, 'hmm, what else can we use to authenticate? Hey, DNA! Let's start using DNA for authentication!' So soon all these security consultants and security managers (and sure enough the CROOKS!) will have every last bit of your personally identifiable, physical information. Where does that leave you?
Keep your whizbang fingerprint readers Apple and Mastercard and whoever else. Security was never 100% and giving you a copy of every last molecule is not going to change that. I'll get by with the password and when I get f'ed by that, well, then I guess, I'll have to deal. At least I'll still be able to think of my body as belonging to me.
Probably because with a name like National Institute of Standards and Technology, it sounds like a neutral organization. Some kind of innocuous academic committee or such. Not to mention, when it was first named, there was probably a benevolent view of such government agencies.
Now though, people who seem to be paying attention are distrustful of the government's "national security" policies. And with good reason, considering what the NSA has been doing since (and probably before) 9/11.
Now anything that mentions "NSA" to people who desire liberty sets off alarms and just like the NSA making their (unconstitutional) webs of association of U.S. citizens via (unconstitutional) surveillance, the associations we tie between other orgs and the NSA tell us not to trust previously trusted agencies.
It's hard to believe you're right, especially since automated trading never fouls up or causes any problems.
"... Just to make sure that their government is free of ties to terrorism... "
Do you mean terrorism like the kind that involves killing unknowing bystanders? The U.S. doesn't do that. Oh wait...
Joe Isuzu voice:
"Trust Us. We're the Government."
means that it will be harder to decipher what is going on. I realize all reporters have a bias, but they at least go through most of the material and point out the notable items. Now whomever is interested will need to go through the data dumps for the interesting stuff. That will make the "reporting" less effective.
Sometimes it's more important who you know and not what you know.
"... Maybe some optional social integration for those who like to be socially encouraged to do better."
Perhaps broadcast a msg to all the nearest hotties that you're eating like a pig or working on your cancer quotient?
the feds will require all laptops to be registered and have a remote kill switch installed. Can't let the terrorists win!!
I'm not a cop, but I'll go out on a limb here and guess that when the cops try to justify their purchases of these weapons, or when the arms industry sales rep comes calling, they justify the weapons with the (limited) examples of the big gang war or drug cartel bust that occurred recently in the next city.
"Many states in the USA have 'stand your ground' laws which are a recipe for disaster. Shoot someone and then just claim you were afraid, or defending yourself."
I don't literally want to see this, but as a mental exercise (the poor defender would probably end up overwhelmed and not make it to a trial), I'd like to know what would happen if someone used this defense with a menacing cop.
Probably 'cause no one is perfect. Everyone messes up at some point in their life. His reluctance to refuse the vitamin C sham doesn't discredit his other accomplishments. Sure, the reluctance doesn't put him in a good light, but his other accomplishments still stand.
I'll play devils advocate for a moment. In part, the cops have attained these capabilities because of the increased capabilities of organized crime and street-level criminals. Something of an arms race going on.
Add to that the fact that the military conglomerates were looking for a way to expand their markets. Police agencies are the perfect answer.
Done with the advocate thing.
Not only are the cops armed like small armies, they act without regard for law. Here is an egregious example. A court's marshal in Clark County, NV, sexually assaults a woman in family court and then arrests her when she tried to confront him about it, IN FRONT OF A JUDGE. Who then proceeds to act as if nothing happened.
Given the impunity with which these people behave, and the firepower they are enhanced with, people should start to question how the police are a benefit to society.
What is NASA gonna say if another 'Sandy' hits again... in the next 5 years? No, I'm not predicting there will be one within 5 years. I'm just wondering what they'd do if it did occur very soon?
Al Queda's refusal of observing Geneva Conventions doesn't negate the U.S.' responsibility to abide by them in how they handle captives.
Additionally, explain how drones fit into the Geneva Conventions. If you find that they don't and are illegal, then it would appear that the U.S. is contravening Geneva Conventions. Does that mean that U.S. soldiers caught by another party should be mistreated and not afforded humane treatment?
With all this surveillance, it's a wonder there are any large crime rings at all. Yet the rings still seem to thrive.
I don't watch much tv, so I don't know what broadcast news says about him, but given the news I see online, there does seem to be a hostile tone toward him. If the majority of major news sources are toeing the govt. line and portraying him as a spy, then it's a wonder the poll numbers aren't more against him.
Who or what are the government officials who want to prosecute Snowden protecting? Are they protecting the Constitution or themselves?
If the founders were so worried about the people's decisions, why did they bother mentioning things like "we the people" that emphasized a nation made up of free citizens?
I'm not sure who you are saying is being attacked when you say "productive class". Are you saying that only people who own business are productive? How do you explain Dept. of Labor reports that say something like 'productivity increased .3% in the last quarter' then? Workers had nothing to do with that? It's not just the owners of capital who are taxed. The workers are taxed too. And last I heard, corporate exec compensation was more than 100x what the average employee pay was. Doesn't sound like they are suffering to me
... albeit one that periodically suffers mass casualty events.
Sounds like the adventure still exists to some extent.
Based on recent media, Everest does sound like it's turned into some kind of tourist trap, instead of a remote, arduous frontier. What frontiers remain that haven't turned into prime time television scenery?
Maybe animosity was too strong a word. However, given that E.U. nations such as Spain and France were trying to force Bolivia's Evo Morales to give him up, if he'd had Snowden on a plane, there is no support from nations that should be helping Snowden. Further, several, not all, but several, nations appear to playing along with the U.S. instead of finding another solution for Snowden.
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/jul/05/tp-snowden-still-seeking-asylum-offer/