Ah, the old "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide" argument. A sure sign that you can't trust someone is that you hear this from them.
Ironic in what respect? Hong Kong actually cherishes and nurtures their freedoms in ways that Beijing knows they can't control. There's a reason Beijing hasn't tried to step Hong Kong slowly into their own system. They know ruining Hong Kong with it would expose the destructive nature of their programs and heavy-handed authority. You know, the kind of programs Snowden exposed.
Indeed, this morning during my commute, the radio hosts tried to play this as if the program were already completely known, and the only problem is that we "don't trust Obama having access to it". Fools.
I would hope that if he had anything further, it's already in the hands of third parties. This guy's not stupid, and the people at The Guardian probably have it. If not others.
The constitution is the highest law of this nation. Particularly the specific protections the constitution contains. If government uses "security clearance" to hide breaches of the constitution, anyone with clearance has an obligation to act. The constitution is above the government, not the other way around.
Also, I refuse your argument that this was in any way treason. The government will call it that, but the definition of treason does not fit this action, except in its weakest and most stretched-thin definition.
I question the justification for most "top secret" government information. The track record of declassified information ever having been material that justified the classified status is pretty poor.
Even Snowden knew this would happen. There's a reason he's gone public with his identity. Now he can't be killed or disappeared without everyone knowing exactly what's going on.
There's a reason people have been cracking jokes for years about merely saying certain things getting them "on a list" without having to specify and everybody knows what they are referring to...
Semantics. The government is a collection of mostly corrupt individuals, while the government itself is whatever the sum of their actions becomes. Whatever those individuals make the official story is what the government "believes". Even if the individuals know it to be completely false.
Amazon has made a fortune by understanding the marketplace. Publishers only care about controlling the works they release. I think often they forget that the reason people purchase books, and just assume they'll buy them. There's a reason I frequent used bookstores and only pick up ebooks for free or for a very, very low price. I like lending my books, I like selling my books if I don't like them, and I like not having to worry about whether my device is charged.
People know when they're getting ripped off. $15 to copy a file which can be sold an unlimited number of times by the publisher with no further cost or effort is ridiculous, especially when compared to the price of waiting for a physical paperback or a used copy.
I didn't take offense in any way, nor did I think you were doing so. Most current elected officials rely heavily on false logic of various stripes, running the full range including "for the children", "fair share", "unless you want the terrorists to win", and so on. i think more often than not, everyone agrees on the Good Thing®, but where the people differ from the government is the "how" and "at what cost" (not just monetary, but not exclusive of it either). parts.
I entirely caught your jest, I actually meant my last post as more of a clarification for anyone who didn't share our dry and frank humor.
Regardless, "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." This is a lot broader net than any constitutional warrant. I don't see anything in that clause describing this widespread of a search as valid for a warrant to be issued per the protections described in the fourth amendment.
If our government believes throwing out the Constitution is what it takes to protect our nation from terrorist threats, I'm less scared of the terrorists than I am of the government.
I don't think IBM should take your insults lying down. IBM knew when to shift. They may not be high-profile in the PC world anymore, but they've certainly spun off their product lines to companies that could handle them. Meanwhile, IBM themselves haven't exactly disappeared. A quick cut-and-paste from Wikipedia: "In 2012, Fortune ranked IBM the #2 largest U.S. firm in terms of number of employees (433,362),[7] the #4 largest in terms of market capitalization,[8] the #9 most profitable,[9] and the #19 largest firm in terms of revenue.[10] Globally, the company was ranked the #31 largest in terms of revenue by Forbes for 2011.[11][12] Other rankings for 2011/2012 include #1 company for leaders (Fortune), #1 green company worldwide (Newsweek), #2 best global brand (Interbrand), #2 most respected company (Barron's), #5 most admired company (Fortune), and #18 most innovative company (Fast Company).[13]"
On a test like this? Yes, I can blame them. The thing is, we can't assume it's the teachers themselves doing it. There would be a bit less consistency.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure that it would make China look that way at all. This will turn on the US far more than it ever could on China.
Ah, the old "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide" argument. A sure sign that you can't trust someone is that you hear this from them.
Ironic in what respect? Hong Kong actually cherishes and nurtures their freedoms in ways that Beijing knows they can't control. There's a reason Beijing hasn't tried to step Hong Kong slowly into their own system. They know ruining Hong Kong with it would expose the destructive nature of their programs and heavy-handed authority. You know, the kind of programs Snowden exposed.
Indeed, this morning during my commute, the radio hosts tried to play this as if the program were already completely known, and the only problem is that we "don't trust Obama having access to it". Fools.
I would hope that if he had anything further, it's already in the hands of third parties. This guy's not stupid, and the people at The Guardian probably have it. If not others.
The constitution is the highest law of this nation. Particularly the specific protections the constitution contains. If government uses "security clearance" to hide breaches of the constitution, anyone with clearance has an obligation to act. The constitution is above the government, not the other way around.
Also, I refuse your argument that this was in any way treason. The government will call it that, but the definition of treason does not fit this action, except in its weakest and most stretched-thin definition.
I question the justification for most "top secret" government information. The track record of declassified information ever having been material that justified the classified status is pretty poor.
Even Snowden knew this would happen. There's a reason he's gone public with his identity. Now he can't be killed or disappeared without everyone knowing exactly what's going on.
That's not a sure indicator. Sometimes their mouth doesn't move at all while they're lying.
Their identities are such a secret that the author managed to track them down fifty years later.
that the terminology will change again? that happens every several years anyway, more or less.
There's a reason people have been cracking jokes for years about merely saying certain things getting them "on a list" without having to specify and everybody knows what they are referring to...
Semantics. The government is a collection of mostly corrupt individuals, while the government itself is whatever the sum of their actions becomes. Whatever those individuals make the official story is what the government "believes". Even if the individuals know it to be completely false.
Amazon has made a fortune by understanding the marketplace. Publishers only care about controlling the works they release. I think often they forget that the reason people purchase books, and just assume they'll buy them. There's a reason I frequent used bookstores and only pick up ebooks for free or for a very, very low price. I like lending my books, I like selling my books if I don't like them, and I like not having to worry about whether my device is charged.
People know when they're getting ripped off. $15 to copy a file which can be sold an unlimited number of times by the publisher with no further cost or effort is ridiculous, especially when compared to the price of waiting for a physical paperback or a used copy.
I figured as much ^_^
That doesn't account for literally zero of many thousands falling on those numbers.
I didn't take offense in any way, nor did I think you were doing so. Most current elected officials rely heavily on false logic of various stripes, running the full range including "for the children", "fair share", "unless you want the terrorists to win", and so on. i think more often than not, everyone agrees on the Good Thing®, but where the people differ from the government is the "how" and "at what cost" (not just monetary, but not exclusive of it either). parts.
I entirely caught your jest, I actually meant my last post as more of a clarification for anyone who didn't share our dry and frank humor.
I've worked that gig, and it's great for resume-building, but getting in was mostly about who you know, not what you know.
See, I believe that when we give up our freedoms because we're afraid of terrrorists...now, that's when the terrorists win.
Exactly, I like the way you put that.
Regardless, "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." This is a lot broader net than any constitutional warrant. I don't see anything in that clause describing this widespread of a search as valid for a warrant to be issued per the protections described in the fourth amendment.
If our government believes throwing out the Constitution is what it takes to protect our nation from terrorist threats, I'm less scared of the terrorists than I am of the government.
I don't think IBM should take your insults lying down. IBM knew when to shift. They may not be high-profile in the PC world anymore, but they've certainly spun off their product lines to companies that could handle them. Meanwhile, IBM themselves haven't exactly disappeared. A quick cut-and-paste from Wikipedia: "In 2012, Fortune ranked IBM the #2 largest U.S. firm in terms of number of employees (433,362),[7] the #4 largest in terms of market capitalization,[8] the #9 most profitable,[9] and the #19 largest firm in terms of revenue.[10] Globally, the company was ranked the #31 largest in terms of revenue by Forbes for 2011.[11][12] Other rankings for 2011/2012 include #1 company for leaders (Fortune), #1 green company worldwide (Newsweek), #2 best global brand (Interbrand), #2 most respected company (Barron's), #5 most admired company (Fortune), and #18 most innovative company (Fast Company).[13]"
On a test like this? Yes, I can blame them. The thing is, we can't assume it's the teachers themselves doing it. There would be a bit less consistency.