It's great that the E.U. is finally acting outraged about the U.S.'s spying which they probably wouldn't have faced up to without Snowden. I would think they would view Snowden in a positive light for it. Yet they seem to regard Snowden with the same animosity that the U.S. administration does.
The summary confounds 2 stories. The QANTAS story, at face value anyway, has nothing to do with the Australian govt. wanting to draft surveillance legislation.
While they both deal with Internet surveillance, QANTAS is a commercial entity that people can choose to ignore. It is up front about what it is doing.
The govt. on the other hand, while ostensibly public, obscures its activities by using hundreds of pages of documents to legislate laws that will hide behind "security" to keep its citizens in the dark.
Based on the article about QANTAS, the consumer gets shafted in my opinion: "In return for surrendering personal search data, which Qantas will tie to its customers' frequent flyer membership, it plans to award users up to 150 Qantas frequent flyer points a month.
A customer who uses the toolbar and never flies with Qantas would take 35 years to earn the 64,000 points required to fly from Sydney to London's Heathrow Airport."
In my opinion, my privacy is available for trade, but it especially wouldn't come THIS CHEAPLY. Unfortunately, some schmucks probably won't care.
If it doesn't matter when it began, then it doesn't matter who is doing it now; what matters is that it's being done. That's your argument. That's something of my argument too. Leave out the names and just get the stupid thing fixed.
I went to the link and the opening window said this: "... news reports revealed that Barack Obama's NSA is looking through billions of our emails and phone records every day.
I'm OUTRAGED -- and I'm going to do everything I can to END this madness.
That's why I've asked Internet providers and phone companies to join me in a class-action lawsuit to STOP Barack Obama's NSA from snooping on the American people.
So please sign below and join my class-action lawsuit and help stop the government's outrageous spying program on the American people."
My emphasis. So, Obama started all this? I don't see Rand making the point that this illicit activity started with the Shrub. I know it matters less at this point, but he could win a few more points by leaving out the political aspect and make the appeal that this affects everyone equally.
I'll probably still sign the petition, as long the language in the petition either leaves out fault or places the fault where it originally began.
It's one thing to require the troops to sing the king's praises. It's another to criminalize people who might justly criticize the king. From what I (might mis)remember, he's a popular king. But that doesn't mean every Thai likes him.
"... The FEC's spokesperson told me that while the FEC welcomes complaints, it does not typically take enforcement initiative."
The FBI has the means to track laundered money in the banking system. I myself don't know all the ins and outs of laundering, but I'm sure it can get complicated as it takes the Bureau manpower and time to do so. But it can be done.
It seems that the example of Koch and his pay-offs is akin to laundering. Especially if it's breaking laws. If the FEC hasn't been outfitted with means to track laundering, then they should be properly facilitated to do so. That or they should be more easily empowered to request assistance from an agency, such as the FBI, that is capable of tracking the money.
Maybe the FEC has the capability, but the quote doesn't lead me to think so. If it does and its not initiating enforcement, then why act like the Commission is anything of value to anyone?
OTOH, giving the FEC the mandate to monitor pay-offs while not giving them the capability to follow the payola is indicative of a self-serving group of whores playing dress-up as patriotic politicians.
China's hacking and the U.S. federal government's surveillance are two different things. China is foreign entity that is competing with (if not confronting) another international player.
What the feds are doing is spying on its constituents, the people it supposedly is supposed to represent and be beholden to. There SHOULD be no competing interest between a people and its government. Apparently though, our own government seems to hold us all as potential opponents.
So Obama shouldn't be worried about confronting China's electronic intrusions. It's only right to warn off a competitor (opponent) when you catch them doing something illegal and threatening. Comparing China's hacking to federal surveillance is an apples to oranges comparison.
On the other hand, Obama SHOULD be worried about facing up to the citizens about abusing government's ability to surveil its own constituents. However, who is holding his feet to the fire?
I was not puking up drunk when I was 14. Neither were the other kids I hung out with. I don't consider that kind of behavior "kids be[ing] kids". At all.
However, I think this is more the fault of the parents than facebook. Facebook was not the negligent party that let that child get that drunk to begin with. You can yell all you want about kids sneaking around and getting away with stuff, but it's the parents' responsibility to mind the child nonetheless.
Why should virgin forest be destroyed because of a soil map? The virgin forests are probably undisturbed because they exist in remote locations. Are there large agricultural corporations in Africa looking for land? Otherwise it would probably be too expensive for a subsistence farmer to deal with financial and other costs with clearing the land and establishing a farm.
Totally ignorant on this point, but I'm not aware of a correlation between forest land and underground minerals valued in the mining industry.
Chances are the map will point out the degraded farmlands and allow better planning for restoration. There might well be some destruction of virgin forest, but what about grasslands that are still in their native state? In the U.S., it's native prairie that's lost 99% of its area before European settlement. And most of that was to agriculture.
That's what I wondering about: do they define "social network"? The closest I get to a social network is my/. (no friends or enemies here) and my Yahoo! mail account. Are they gonna be restricted to just Facebook/LinkedIn/MySpace or is gonna be a freeforall, with any medium that could allow social interaction? I know either way, I wouldn't support such an amendment.
It's kind of a weird amendment, given the bill it's amending.
40 hr/week X 52 weeks = 2080. Two weeks for vacation leaves 2000 hours of work in a year. I'm not sure where you got your estimate from, but it hardly describes any regular work year I've known.
I know I gave the example of an economic activity, but I also meant stuff like walking through a park where a protest or a crime may be occurring and I had no part in. Now I'm at the scene and nowadays, guilt by association (or presence) is the default reaction of several parties. This is unfair and hard for me to control or counteract.
I personally oppose a ubiquitous source for recording my activity and any accompanying means of data mining such activity. I don't care if it's just me buying groceries, it's none of anyone else's business.
It is nice to see. I wonder though why it's taken this long for a ruling that actually does check some of the over reach of the govt. Does this ruling actually have the legs to make it the SCOTUS and be upheld? I hope so, but I'm not sure the chances are good since all other challenges have been turned aside. But I'm not legal scholar, so perhaps this case has the right details and arguments to last through all the challenges.
To echo others, I'd like to help this case, but the rejection, overruling, or upholding of a case aren't subject to popular vote. Hmmm....
Based on the comment in the summary: what did this person think the military was like? Perhaps the people that recruited him sold him a bill of goods: 'Protect the Fatherland! China faces threats on multiple fronts! It'll be better than World of Warcraft and The Matrix combined! Your skill set and our resources will be cracking secrets everywhere in Europe and the U.S.A. and you'll be a hero and celebrated! You'll be part of the select group protecting us from the evil outside our borders that doesn't recognize our sovereignty."
Slashdot Mirror
It's great that the E.U. is finally acting outraged about the U.S.'s spying which they probably wouldn't have faced up to without Snowden. I would think they would view Snowden in a positive light for it. Yet they seem to regard Snowden with the same animosity that the U.S. administration does.
I honestly don't know, but I thought it was illegal for the FBI to spy on U.S. citizens as well?
The government's number one tool in the fight against terrorism.
The summary confounds 2 stories. The QANTAS story, at face value anyway, has nothing to do with the Australian govt. wanting to draft surveillance legislation.
While they both deal with Internet surveillance, QANTAS is a commercial entity that people can choose to ignore. It is up front about what it is doing.
The govt. on the other hand, while ostensibly public, obscures its activities by using hundreds of pages of documents to legislate laws that will hide behind "security" to keep its citizens in the dark.
Based on the article about QANTAS, the consumer gets shafted in my opinion:
"In return for surrendering personal search data, which Qantas will tie to its customers' frequent flyer membership, it plans to award users up to 150 Qantas frequent flyer points a month.
A customer who uses the toolbar and never flies with Qantas would take 35 years to earn the 64,000 points required to fly from Sydney to London's Heathrow Airport."
In my opinion, my privacy is available for trade, but it especially wouldn't come THIS CHEAPLY. Unfortunately, some schmucks probably won't care.
Like helping the British colonies in the New World circa 1776 helping win independence from the U.K.
Completely a red herring.
If it doesn't matter when it began, then it doesn't matter who is doing it now; what matters is that it's being done. That's your argument. That's something of my argument too. Leave out the names and just get the stupid thing fixed.
I went to the link and the opening window said this:
"... news reports revealed that Barack Obama's NSA is looking through billions of our emails and phone records every day.
I'm OUTRAGED -- and I'm going to do everything I can to END this madness.
That's why I've asked Internet providers and phone companies to join me in a class-action lawsuit to STOP Barack Obama's NSA from snooping on the American people.
So please sign below and join my class-action lawsuit and help stop the government's outrageous spying program on the American people."
My emphasis. So, Obama started all this? I don't see Rand making the point that this illicit activity started with the Shrub. I know it matters less at this point, but he could win a few more points by leaving out the political aspect and make the appeal that this affects everyone equally.
I'll probably still sign the petition, as long the language in the petition either leaves out fault or places the fault where it originally began.
Been to a protest? Lots of people's free speech rights are impinged upon. In at least one case, a few busloads worth.
How do you do that?
I guess they can do what he wants.
It's one thing to require the troops to sing the king's praises. It's another to criminalize people who might justly criticize the king. From what I (might mis)remember, he's a popular king. But that doesn't mean every Thai likes him.
Stuff like this makes me wary of him though.
"... The FEC's spokesperson told me that while the FEC welcomes complaints, it does not typically take enforcement initiative."
The FBI has the means to track laundered money in the banking system. I myself don't know all the ins and outs of laundering, but I'm sure it can get complicated as it takes the Bureau manpower and time to do so. But it can be done.
It seems that the example of Koch and his pay-offs is akin to laundering. Especially if it's breaking laws. If the FEC hasn't been outfitted with means to track laundering, then they should be properly facilitated to do so. That or they should be more easily empowered to request assistance from an agency, such as the FBI, that is capable of tracking the money.
Maybe the FEC has the capability, but the quote doesn't lead me to think so. If it does and its not initiating enforcement, then why act like the Commission is anything of value to anyone?
OTOH, giving the FEC the mandate to monitor pay-offs while not giving them the capability to follow the payola is indicative of a self-serving group of whores playing dress-up as patriotic politicians.
China's hacking and the U.S. federal government's surveillance are two different things. China is foreign entity that is competing with (if not confronting) another international player.
What the feds are doing is spying on its constituents, the people it supposedly is supposed to represent and be beholden to. There SHOULD be no competing interest between a people and its government. Apparently though, our own government seems to hold us all as potential opponents.
So Obama shouldn't be worried about confronting China's electronic intrusions. It's only right to warn off a competitor (opponent) when you catch them doing something illegal and threatening. Comparing China's hacking to federal surveillance is an apples to oranges comparison.
On the other hand, Obama SHOULD be worried about facing up to the citizens about abusing government's ability to surveil its own constituents. However, who is holding his feet to the fire?
... if the faculty could figure how to get this kid to coach others.
Regardless, it does seem like he'll have a bright future if he's that motivated.
I was not puking up drunk when I was 14. Neither were the other kids I hung out with. I don't consider that kind of behavior "kids be[ing] kids". At all.
However, I think this is more the fault of the parents than facebook. Facebook was not the negligent party that let that child get that drunk to begin with. You can yell all you want about kids sneaking around and getting away with stuff, but it's the parents' responsibility to mind the child nonetheless.
Why should virgin forest be destroyed because of a soil map? The virgin forests are probably undisturbed because they exist in remote locations. Are there large agricultural corporations in Africa looking for land? Otherwise it would probably be too expensive for a subsistence farmer to deal with financial and other costs with clearing the land and establishing a farm.
Totally ignorant on this point, but I'm not aware of a correlation between forest land and underground minerals valued in the mining industry.
Chances are the map will point out the degraded farmlands and allow better planning for restoration. There might well be some destruction of virgin forest, but what about grasslands that are still in their native state? In the U.S., it's native prairie that's lost 99% of its area before European settlement. And most of that was to agriculture.
A congress-critter who doesn't understand legislation's effect on technology. Will wonders never cease!
That's what I wondering about: do they define "social network"? The closest I get to a social network is my /. (no friends or enemies here) and my Yahoo! mail account. Are they gonna be restricted to just Facebook/LinkedIn/MySpace or is gonna be a freeforall, with any medium that could allow social interaction? I know either way, I wouldn't support such an amendment.
It's kind of a weird amendment, given the bill it's amending.
40 hr/week X 52 weeks = 2080. Two weeks for vacation leaves 2000 hours of work in a year. I'm not sure where you got your estimate from, but it hardly describes any regular work year I've known.
I know I gave the example of an economic activity, but I also meant stuff like walking through a park where a protest or a crime may be occurring and I had no part in. Now I'm at the scene and nowadays, guilt by association (or presence) is the default reaction of several parties. This is unfair and hard for me to control or counteract.
Sounds like Credo deserves to get more business. I think it might be time to switch my carrier, now that I have a good reason.
I personally oppose a ubiquitous source for recording my activity and any accompanying means of data mining such activity. I don't care if it's just me buying groceries, it's none of anyone else's business.
It is nice to see. I wonder though why it's taken this long for a ruling that actually does check some of the over reach of the govt. Does this ruling actually have the legs to make it the SCOTUS and be upheld? I hope so, but I'm not sure the chances are good since all other challenges have been turned aside. But I'm not legal scholar, so perhaps this case has the right details and arguments to last through all the challenges.
To echo others, I'd like to help this case, but the rejection, overruling, or upholding of a case aren't subject to popular vote. Hmmm....
Oklahoma's ballot for POTUS didn't list any 3rd parties, nor did it have any space for a write-in.
Based on the comment in the summary: what did this person think the military was like? Perhaps the people that recruited him sold him a bill of goods: 'Protect the Fatherland! China faces threats on multiple fronts! It'll be better than World of Warcraft and The Matrix combined! Your skill set and our resources will be cracking secrets everywhere in Europe and the U.S.A. and you'll be a hero and celebrated! You'll be part of the select group protecting us from the evil outside our borders that doesn't recognize our sovereignty."