Don't forget about them sitting on the warrant-less wiretapping story for over a year. Then there's them not saying that Raymond Davis was a CIA agent because the White house asked them not to. I don't trust them anymore either. My sig is more relevant than ever, and the NYT is doing its best to keep it that way.
The fact that I don't own something does not imply my obligation to provide it to you. There are a number of ways of finding out the information you seek, and none of them involve you paying me. Privacy and ownership can be related, but one does not imply the other.
Exactly. If the authorities are interested in him, he must have done something wrong. I mean, that's just straight up logic. It's not like he should be presumed innocent or someting like that.
Not just whores: temple whores. It is an article of their faith that the free market is always more innovative than the government and no government program has ever done anything good for the economy. The fact that this belief serves the interest of the people lining their pockets is a nice bonus.
The fact that this belief serves the interests of those lining their pockets is the reason this belief is so widely encouraged. It's not just a nice bonus at this point; it's a driver of the propaganda.
I have retained access to two companies after I left (I don't have the access anymore). I was pretty pissed at one at the time; I was laid off. I briefly considered sabotage, but quickly made the calculation that it just wasn't worth it. I would just have been making more work for my former colleagues, whom I still liked. And if I really went nuclear, and was caught, I would have been in really hot water. A lot of people probably realize that the risk just isn't worth the schadenfreude.
I don't know about being funded by the CIA, but I'm sure the various intelligence agencies are interested in information that Google has. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to learn there is some cooperation there. But I don't see that as a reason to not use Google. In the modern security state, if they want to get you, they'll get you. Using Google or not isn't going to be the deciding factor in one's being hauled away.
Maybe now the US will have some... slight qualms... about implementing policies that are provably used by totalitarian governments to crush communications during times of unrest. Go ahead, try to pass it into law. I dare you.
Actually, Obama recently renewed the state of national emergency that the US has been in since 9/11/01. Under a state of national emergency, the President can do pretty much anything he wants, including suspending parts of the Constitution, seizing the means of production, etc. So if the US government wanted to shut down the internet, they could do it tomorrow, no new laws needed.
I will second that. A few years back I went to one of those F1 go-kart racing places. The whole time I was racing I was thinking about Gran Turismo. The physics in that game are very realistic, and the skills I learned in the game transferred directly to the track; when to start braking, when to turn in, what angle to look for, when to start accelerating again, etc. I ended up 2nd out of 20, and the buy who beat me was a German who was used to driving his Porsche on the autobahn.
to your car and less attention to the road. I like my fake-manual transmission when I want to accelerate fast, but I can feel the extra thought it takes to shift.
The reason you can feel the extra thought is that you let the car shift most of the time. In my car with a manual transmission, I will be in third gear and not even remember shifting. It becomes automatic. Plus, one has a lot more control over a car with a manual transmission.
I think it's extreme tribalism. Some folks need to ascribe a purity to the tribe they identify with. It keeps their world stable and helps them sleep at night to know that their country stands for Truth and Justice. It's something good they can be sure of.
So when someone comes along and disrupts that feeling of security, the disruptor is blamed. People aren't so much pissed off that their country does questionable things (to put it lightly), as they are angry at being forced to confront and acknowledge it. It makes things complicated and unsure. The fantasy is more comfortable than reality.
Things were so much easier when we could just assume the USA was right and the other guy was wrong. Why'd that Assange guy have to come along and screw it all up?
Ignorance of a law is not a valid defense. There are currently over 10,000 federal laws. Can you state categorically that you are not breaking any of them? If so, how do you know?
What makes you think we have knowledge of our history? Because the teacher told you? Most Americans (myself included) have very little understanding of the true history of our country, let alone the rest of the world. I have a friend who is studying pre-revolutionary America, and some of the things he tells me are incredible.
I would contend that if we don't know how bad thimgs were and what was neceesary to fix things, we won't understand why things are so good now. Experience is a good teacher, and if you whitewash history, you excise that experience. Next thing you know someone will want to outlaw alcoholic beverages because it sounds like a good idea and we won't remember why it's actually a bad idea.
It was a decent King book, good characters, some interesting mishaps (Suspension of disbelief, but it's a king book). But then the ending was a WTF moment. It was like King had no idea where to end it so he pulled something like BSG did to end their series. Had no idea where it was going so just wrapped it up quick.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget about them sitting on the warrant-less wiretapping story for over a year. Then there's them not saying that Raymond Davis was a CIA agent because the White house asked them not to. I don't trust them anymore either. My sig is more relevant than ever, and the NYT is doing its best to keep it that way.
I wish I had mod points. Yours is an insightful post.
The fact that I don't own something does not imply my obligation to provide it to you. There are a number of ways of finding out the information you seek, and none of them involve you paying me. Privacy and ownership can be related, but one does not imply the other.
Rights can't be revoked or suspended for convenience.
Have you looked around lately? Sure they can.
Exactly. If the authorities are interested in him, he must have done something wrong. I mean, that's just straight up logic. It's not like he should be presumed innocent or someting like that.
Not just whores: temple whores. It is an article of their faith that the free market is always more innovative than the government and no government program has ever done anything good for the economy. The fact that this belief serves the interest of the people lining their pockets is a nice bonus.
The fact that this belief serves the interests of those lining their pockets is the reason this belief is so widely encouraged. It's not just a nice bonus at this point; it's a driver of the propaganda.
If you can accept something after you die, it seems you are immortal!
I have retained access to two companies after I left (I don't have the access anymore). I was pretty pissed at one at the time; I was laid off. I briefly considered sabotage, but quickly made the calculation that it just wasn't worth it. I would just have been making more work for my former colleagues, whom I still liked. And if I really went nuclear, and was caught, I would have been in really hot water. A lot of people probably realize that the risk just isn't worth the schadenfreude.
My thoughts exactly. And thanks for spelling hare-brained correctly!
Unfortunately, what you are saying rings true to me.
I don't know about being funded by the CIA, but I'm sure the various intelligence agencies are interested in information that Google has. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to learn there is some cooperation there. But I don't see that as a reason to not use Google. In the modern security state, if they want to get you, they'll get you. Using Google or not isn't going to be the deciding factor in one's being hauled away.
It's European!
Representative of whom?
Try it sometime...
Maybe now the US will have some... slight qualms... about implementing policies that are provably used by totalitarian governments to crush communications during times of unrest. Go ahead, try to pass it into law. I dare you.
Actually, Obama recently renewed the state of national emergency that the US has been in since 9/11/01. Under a state of national emergency, the President can do pretty much anything he wants, including suspending parts of the Constitution, seizing the means of production, etc. So if the US government wanted to shut down the internet, they could do it tomorrow, no new laws needed.
I will second that. A few years back I went to one of those F1 go-kart racing places. The whole time I was racing I was thinking about Gran Turismo. The physics in that game are very realistic, and the skills I learned in the game transferred directly to the track; when to start braking, when to turn in, what angle to look for, when to start accelerating again, etc. I ended up 2nd out of 20, and the buy who beat me was a German who was used to driving his Porsche on the autobahn.
to your car and less attention to the road. I like my fake-manual transmission when I want to accelerate fast, but I can feel the extra thought it takes to shift.
The reason you can feel the extra thought is that you let the car shift most of the time. In my car with a manual transmission, I will be in third gear and not even remember shifting. It becomes automatic. Plus, one has a lot more control over a car with a manual transmission.
My thoughts exactly. The list of reasons for me avoiding Facebook gets longer by the day.
I think it's extreme tribalism. Some folks need to ascribe a purity to the tribe they identify with. It keeps their world stable and helps them sleep at night to know that their country stands for Truth and Justice. It's something good they can be sure of.
So when someone comes along and disrupts that feeling of security, the disruptor is blamed. People aren't so much pissed off that their country does questionable things (to put it lightly), as they are angry at being forced to confront and acknowledge it. It makes things complicated and unsure. The fantasy is more comfortable than reality.
Things were so much easier when we could just assume the USA was right and the other guy was wrong. Why'd that Assange guy have to come along and screw it all up?
Ignorance of a law is not a valid defense. There are currently over 10,000 federal laws. Can you state categorically that you are not breaking any of them? If so, how do you know?
What makes you think we have knowledge of our history? Because the teacher told you? Most Americans (myself included) have very little understanding of the true history of our country, let alone the rest of the world. I have a friend who is studying pre-revolutionary America, and some of the things he tells me are incredible.
I would contend that if we don't know how bad thimgs were and what was neceesary to fix things, we won't understand why things are so good now. Experience is a good teacher, and if you whitewash history, you excise that experience. Next thing you know someone will want to outlaw alcoholic beverages because it sounds like a good idea and we won't remember why it's actually a bad idea.
It was a decent King book, good characters, some interesting mishaps (Suspension of disbelief, but it's a king book). But then the ending was a WTF moment. It was like King had no idea where to end it so he pulled something like BSG did to end their series. Had no idea where it was going so just wrapped it up quick.
So, it was like every other Stephen King book? ;-P
Actually, even without Obamacare we'd all be paying for idiots like this.
Documents that should be released according to whom? You? The President? Leon Panetta? The New York Times?
While secrecy can be abused (that's why Congressional oversight exists in America btw), it is needed.
You may want to look again. In most ways that matter, Congressional oversight does not exist in America.