Assange is too high profile to kill off. Cue the rape/childporn/furry accusations.
Hardly. Nobody is too high a profile to kill off. That's why people that are really high profile have private security forces, why our President has the Secret Service. If you're too big a problem, you can and will be killed if you piss off the wrong organization. That's pretty much the way it is.
The girls were given an offer they couldn't refuse by assets of the western intelligence community.
Yes, and of course all the other nations, organizations and corporations the world over that Assange has exposed for one thing or another would never consider such a thing. Nope, has to be the "western intelligence community", which I'm assuming is a thinly-veiled reference to "CIA".
Please. The guy has enemies all over the planet. Any of them could have decided to take him out, always assuming that he really is innocent of these charges.
My advice to anyone who is fucking around with the US government... tape yourself 24/7 and never for any reason turn it off. If they want to make it look like you committed a crime, it is trivial.
Oh please. I was going along with you until you decided to America-bash. Let me rephrase your comment slightly:
My advice to anyone who is fucking around with any government or powerful organization... tape yourself 24/7 and never for any reason turn it off. If they want to make it look like you committed a crime, it is trivial.
See? Isn't that more reasonable? I mean, Jesus H. Christ, this is a man who has been exposing secrets year after year, causing endless trouble for banks, governments, corporations the world over. He is accused of a sex crime (which, for all we know at this point, he might have committed) and the first thought in everyone's heads is "oh, it must have been the Americans." Nuts. There are plenty of people in various other governments, as well as the private sector, who would like nothing else than to have this guy put away for a while.
Interestingly, the fact that he's still alive would indicate that the charges may be legitimate. If he's so big a thorn in the side of all these different organizations, they would probably have just had him killed. That's a HELL of a lot easier, cheaper and less traceable than what you were describing. Your scenario requires that the agent of his misfortune make a public accusation and then remain available for interrogation and testimony, which is risky at best.
The US Government plays dirty when you expose their secrets
Insightful? There ought to be a "stupidly obvious" moderation. ALL governments play dirty. It's what they do: people in power like to stay in power, and that's hard to do when your dirty laundry is hanging out.
My question to you is: why pick on the U.S.? If there's some shenanigans going on over there, it's obviously with the collusion of the Swedish Government. Why aren't you pointing that out as well? Or are you just America-bashing to buy a few cheap mod points?
Grow up. Julian Assange has been playing a very dangerous game for a very long time, and has thoroughly pissed off a lot of powerful people over the years. In fact, odds are the United States has nothing whatsoever to do with this, and someone else is using this opportunity to take him down and allow stupid people to assume the United States did it.
Or, he really did rape someone. I don't know enough about the man to know if that's even possible. But your bland assumption that the United States Federal Government was involved doesn't hold water. Put it this way: if it does come out that someone in our government was responsible (and it would have to have been a fairly highly-placed someone to have the authority to influence a foreign power's law enforcement) the political fallout would be huge. Hard to justify after the fact, given that the damage has already been done. Besides, if he were that big a threat we'd have just had him killed and been done with it. A couple of phone calls to Langley and we'd be discussing his obituary.
Poe’s law is in full force today... I can’t tell if you’re serious or being sarcastic.
Yeah. I'm voting for serious, though. I've had a number of friends over the years that spent way more than was necessary on their audio equipment. Sometimes I think it was just so they could brag about their magnificent stereo (I knew one guy whose system drew so much current that all the fluorescents in his basement would flicker in time to the beat.) Others I think were just idiots. As a friend, I would do my best to relieve them of their ignorance: I did notice that the odds of success were in an inverse relationship to the cost of said stereo system.
I hate it when filmmakers are just a little too prophetic.
The purpose of science fiction is not to predict the future, but warn about it.
That's only one of many things that science fiction can do. Not all sci-fi writers are trying to warn us about something. Not all even have anything particularly important to say. Heck, a fantasy novel can warn about the future... it's just that if the storyline is based around real science, well, it's much more plausible.
Soooo, you don't watch SCIFI shows much do you? That's what they are all about.
Actually, I do, and I read even more. But that's irrelevant. Not everything that you read or see that purports to be "science" fiction is likely to occur, ever will occur, or is even possible in the first place. For that matter, much good sci-fi has nothing whatsoever to do with what is likely to happen to us (humanity, I mean.)
Sometimes they get lucky, though, and hit closer to home than we would like. That's not generally by accident: a good sci-fi author keeps up with his science, stays abreast of recent developments, and does his best to project forward along the curve of progress, and make a reasonable prediction. If you can't do that, if you simply make up stuff that sounds cool, well, odds are you aren't writing science-fiction.
I'd be very surprised if the folks responsible for Minority Report hadn't done their due diligence, spent some time getting familiar with the then-current state-of-the art. They then applied that knowledge to make an informed guess as to how the future might pan out. It looks like they weren't that far off the mark in this particular case.
Like I said, sometimes they get lucky. If this technology works as well as is claimed (and I have my doubts about that) this is one of those times.
"I'm sorry Mrs. Rodriquez, it appears that you just purchased those diapers and baby wipes on sale at another Wal-Mart, and are attempting to return them here for a full price refund. Please wait while I summon the police."
I've seen that happen a couple of times at Wal-Mart: the cops came in and hauled one woman and her kids away. She had a huge cartful of stuff she was trying to "return" for profit.
"In the future, whether it's entering your home, opening your car, entering your workspace, getting a pharmacy prescription refilled, or having your medical records pulled up, everything will come off that unique key that is your iris," says Jeff Carter, CDO of Global Rainmakers. Before coming to GRI, Carter headed a think tank partnership between Bank of America, Harvard, and MIT. "Every person, place, and thing on this planet will be connected [to the iris system] within the next 10 years," he says.
BURN IN HELL, MOTHERFUCKER!
Personally, I think that a lot of this crap would just STOP if medical science would find a penis enlargement pill that actually works. Frankly, I think there are a lot of men in government and the private sector that are seriously underendowed, and have to compensate by fucking over the rest of us, as if it's our fault that Nature dealt them a ding instead of a dong.
Much the same may be said of the United States. Out of seven major signs of being a third world country with a first world public image, it is exhibiting seven.
Uh, what? A superpower in decline is NOT the same thing as a third world country. Not yet, anyways
My girlfriend is from the real third world (she emigrated to the U.S. many years ago)... she could tell you how full of crap you are.
It's ironic, isn't it. Out of all of the bogeyman states in the world none of them use this kid of technology.
Well, this is just one school, which got caught flat-footed and won't be doing this again. Nor is it likely that any other schools will be involved in something this stupid, and any that were are probably a might worried at this point. So the irony is somewhat lost on me: I might feel differently if this were widespread and done at the behest of the government. But it's not. It's not even tolerated.
Furthermore, the United States is not a "free democracy". It's not even a democracy. It's a representative republic.
so lets just declare "we found no criminal intent"
And the truth is, there probably was no criminal intent, just a bunch of arrogant administrators whose authority went to their collective heads, who exhibited astoundingly bad judgment. However, that doesn't mean no laws were broken, doesn't mean that a number of people aren't deserving of a little justice.
don't you feel that you are living in an increasingly a police state, where the cops' and generally the government actions are always above the law and justified and the citizens actions are more and more criminalized?
No, not at all, not in the least. Why would you say that?
(Geez, buddy, shut the fuck up, you're gonna get us all disappeared.)
The students did detect this. They saw the light blinking on and off, and reported it. These claims were dismissed as something wrong with the light. Of course, the fact that the claims were dismissed by the very group of people who could be taking the pictures should have made it seem a bit suspicious...
Not to mention the fact that would have been a heck of a lot of laptops with the exact same "malfunction."
Terry Childs didn't have any criminal intent either, and he caused a lot less harm. Look where that got him...
I no longer have any faith in the "justice" system.
The corollary here will be if the school system somehow manages to blame the students for this. I wouldn't put it past them to try (or the legal system to let them get away with it.)
It is very much illegal. It violates so many laws it isn't even funny.
If even one of those pictures caught a kid with their shirt off for example, they just created kiddy porn.
And if that didn't happen, all I have to say is, man, were they lucky. You're right: that would have meant quite a few years in Federal prison for a number of school personnel. And it may happen yet, who knows what will turn up.
In order for the federal government to file charges, a federal law would need to be broken. Laws against taking pictures in a private residence would be state, not federal, laws.
Seriously, I doubt that. Federal wiretapping laws are pretty explicit about who gets to spy on whom (they get to spy on us, but we don't get to spy on them, or on each other.)
its a civil matter and thus should be settled in civil court with such charges of fraud, breach of contract, etc.
Again I ask, why would you say that? I doubt you're an attorney (neither am I, for that matter) but if you were to sneak into someone's home and hide a remote video camera in their children's bedroom, just what do you think would happen when the cam is discovered? For one thing, I can guarantee that law enforcement will be damned interested in charging you with criminal behavior. Parents can file civil suits if they wish, but the cops will nail you to the cross as a criminal, and rightfully so. Your plaintive cries of "But officer, I was just watching to make sure they were okay, and following school rules" might elicit a few chuckles from the arresting officers but wouldn't mean squat.
Frankly, I don't really see how this is different, regardless of "intent", and there should have been some arrests made. Granted, I personally am sick to death of "think of the children" but this is one case where I think that's legitimate. These people were illegally spying on children, and need to be taught a lesson. The only reason I can see that the Feds declined to prosecute is because they a. don't think they have a good enough case or b. figure State and local authorities will do better or c. have more important things to attend to. Probably "c", I'd say. Furthermore, I'd be very surprised if some criminal charges weren't forthcoming, if only as a deterrent against similar actions by those in charge of other schools. If it were my kids? I'd sue the fuckers dead, just as a matter of principle. I have to wonder if there are any members of law enforcement who have children under the guidance (and I use the term loosely) of these educators. I hope so.
At this point, if I were underage and my school had issued me a computer, it'd be FORMAT C: for me, baby. They can complain about my removal of their illegal spying tools after I graduate.
Odds are, they're getting a hell of a lot more exposure to ionizing radiation from the cell phones they have jammed into the sides of their pretty little heads that from some roof-mounted WAP that's fifty or sixty feet away.
Since neither produces ionizing radiation, your statement seems inaccurate.
Slashdot Mirror
Assange is too high profile to kill off. Cue the rape/childporn/furry accusations.
Hardly. Nobody is too high a profile to kill off. That's why people that are really high profile have private security forces, why our President has the Secret Service. If you're too big a problem, you can and will be killed if you piss off the wrong organization. That's pretty much the way it is.
The girls were given an offer they couldn't refuse by assets of the western intelligence community.
Yes, and of course all the other nations, organizations and corporations the world over that Assange has exposed for one thing or another would never consider such a thing. Nope, has to be the "western intelligence community", which I'm assuming is a thinly-veiled reference to "CIA".
Please. The guy has enemies all over the planet. Any of them could have decided to take him out, always assuming that he really is innocent of these charges.
Geek heroes can do no wrong in the eyes of some
You misspelled "greek".
My advice to anyone who is fucking around with the US government... tape yourself 24/7 and never for any reason turn it off. If they want to make it look like you committed a crime, it is trivial.
Oh please. I was going along with you until you decided to America-bash. Let me rephrase your comment slightly:
My advice to anyone who is fucking around with any government or powerful organization... tape yourself 24/7 and never for any reason turn it off. If they want to make it look like you committed a crime, it is trivial.
See? Isn't that more reasonable? I mean, Jesus H. Christ, this is a man who has been exposing secrets year after year, causing endless trouble for banks, governments, corporations the world over. He is accused of a sex crime (which, for all we know at this point, he might have committed) and the first thought in everyone's heads is "oh, it must have been the Americans." Nuts. There are plenty of people in various other governments, as well as the private sector, who would like nothing else than to have this guy put away for a while.
Interestingly, the fact that he's still alive would indicate that the charges may be legitimate. If he's so big a thorn in the side of all these different organizations, they would probably have just had him killed. That's a HELL of a lot easier, cheaper and less traceable than what you were describing. Your scenario requires that the agent of his misfortune make a public accusation and then remain available for interrogation and testimony, which is risky at best.
The US Government plays dirty when you expose their secrets
Insightful? There ought to be a "stupidly obvious" moderation. ALL governments play dirty. It's what they do: people in power like to stay in power, and that's hard to do when your dirty laundry is hanging out.
My question to you is: why pick on the U.S.? If there's some shenanigans going on over there, it's obviously with the collusion of the Swedish Government. Why aren't you pointing that out as well? Or are you just America-bashing to buy a few cheap mod points?
Grow up. Julian Assange has been playing a very dangerous game for a very long time, and has thoroughly pissed off a lot of powerful people over the years. In fact, odds are the United States has nothing whatsoever to do with this, and someone else is using this opportunity to take him down and allow stupid people to assume the United States did it.
Or, he really did rape someone. I don't know enough about the man to know if that's even possible. But your bland assumption that the United States Federal Government was involved doesn't hold water. Put it this way: if it does come out that someone in our government was responsible (and it would have to have been a fairly highly-placed someone to have the authority to influence a foreign power's law enforcement) the political fallout would be huge. Hard to justify after the fact, given that the damage has already been done. Besides, if he were that big a threat we'd have just had him killed and been done with it. A couple of phone calls to Langley and we'd be discussing his obituary.
Indeed, it means that the law in question remains in place, and legally so.
No, it just means the law in question remains in place.
Poe’s law is in full force today... I can’t tell if you’re serious or being sarcastic.
Yeah. I'm voting for serious, though. I've had a number of friends over the years that spent way more than was necessary on their audio equipment. Sometimes I think it was just so they could brag about their magnificent stereo (I knew one guy whose system drew so much current that all the fluorescents in his basement would flicker in time to the beat.) Others I think were just idiots. As a friend, I would do my best to relieve them of their ignorance: I did notice that the odds of success were in an inverse relationship to the cost of said stereo system.
I hate it when filmmakers are just a little too prophetic.
The purpose of science fiction is not to predict the future, but warn about it.
That's only one of many things that science fiction can do. Not all sci-fi writers are trying to warn us about something. Not all even have anything particularly important to say. Heck, a fantasy novel can warn about the future ... it's just that if the storyline is based around real science, well, it's much more plausible.
Exactly. Dick is the prophet here, not a crappy movie
{sigh} you're nitpickers, both of you.
Soooo, you don't watch SCIFI shows much do you? That's what they are all about.
Actually, I do, and I read even more. But that's irrelevant. Not everything that you read or see that purports to be "science" fiction is likely to occur, ever will occur, or is even possible in the first place. For that matter, much good sci-fi has nothing whatsoever to do with what is likely to happen to us (humanity, I mean.)
Sometimes they get lucky, though, and hit closer to home than we would like. That's not generally by accident: a good sci-fi author keeps up with his science, stays abreast of recent developments, and does his best to project forward along the curve of progress, and make a reasonable prediction. If you can't do that, if you simply make up stuff that sounds cool, well, odds are you aren't writing science-fiction.
I'd be very surprised if the folks responsible for Minority Report hadn't done their due diligence, spent some time getting familiar with the then-current state-of-the art. They then applied that knowledge to make an informed guess as to how the future might pan out. It looks like they weren't that far off the mark in this particular case.
Like I said, sometimes they get lucky. If this technology works as well as is claimed (and I have my doubts about that) this is one of those times.
Hello Mr. Rodriguez and welcome back to the GAP!
"I'm sorry Mrs. Rodriquez, it appears that you just purchased those diapers and baby wipes on sale at another Wal-Mart, and are attempting to return them here for a full price refund. Please wait while I summon the police."
I've seen that happen a couple of times at Wal-Mart: the cops came in and hauled one woman and her kids away. She had a huge cartful of stuff she was trying to "return" for profit.
BURN IN HELL, MOTHERFUCKER!
Personally, I think that a lot of this crap would just STOP if medical science would find a penis enlargement pill that actually works. Frankly, I think there are a lot of men in government and the private sector that are seriously underendowed, and have to compensate by fucking over the rest of us, as if it's our fault that Nature dealt them a ding instead of a dong.
Much the same may be said of the United States. Out of seven major signs of being a third world country with a first world public image, it is exhibiting seven.
Uh, what? A superpower in decline is NOT the same thing as a third world country. Not yet, anyways
... she could tell you how full of crap you are.
My girlfriend is from the real third world (she emigrated to the U.S. many years ago)
I hate it when filmmakers are just a little too prophetic.
It's ironic, isn't it. Out of all of the bogeyman states in the world none of them use this kid of technology.
Well, this is just one school, which got caught flat-footed and won't be doing this again. Nor is it likely that any other schools will be involved in something this stupid, and any that were are probably a might worried at this point. So the irony is somewhat lost on me: I might feel differently if this were widespread and done at the behest of the government. But it's not. It's not even tolerated.
Furthermore, the United States is not a "free democracy". It's not even a democracy. It's a representative republic.
so lets just declare "we found no criminal intent"
And the truth is, there probably was no criminal intent, just a bunch of arrogant administrators whose authority went to their collective heads, who exhibited astoundingly bad judgment. However, that doesn't mean no laws were broken, doesn't mean that a number of people aren't deserving of a little justice.
don't you feel that you are living in an increasingly a police state, where the cops' and generally the government actions are always above the law and justified and the citizens actions are more and more criminalized?
No, not at all, not in the least. Why would you say that?
(Geez, buddy, shut the fuck up, you're gonna get us all disappeared.)
The students did detect this. They saw the light blinking on and off, and reported it. These claims were dismissed as something wrong with the light. Of course, the fact that the claims were dismissed by the very group of people who could be taking the pictures should have made it seem a bit suspicious...
Not to mention the fact that would have been a heck of a lot of laptops with the exact same "malfunction."
Terry Childs didn't have any criminal intent either, and he caused a lot less harm. Look where that got him... I no longer have any faith in the "justice" system.
The corollary here will be if the school system somehow manages to blame the students for this. I wouldn't put it past them to try (or the legal system to let them get away with it.)
This would really harm the students and the county as a hole.
You know what? It sounds like your county already is a hole. I certainly won't be moving there, and I don't even have kids.
It is very much illegal. It violates so many laws it isn't even funny.
If even one of those pictures caught a kid with their shirt off for example, they just created kiddy porn.
And if that didn't happen, all I have to say is, man, were they lucky. You're right: that would have meant quite a few years in Federal prison for a number of school personnel. And it may happen yet, who knows what will turn up.
In order for the federal government to file charges, a federal law would need to be broken. Laws against taking pictures in a private residence would be state, not federal, laws.
Seriously, I doubt that. Federal wiretapping laws are pretty explicit about who gets to spy on whom (they get to spy on us, but we don't get to spy on them, or on each other.)
its a civil matter and thus should be settled in civil court with such charges of fraud, breach of contract, etc.
Again I ask, why would you say that? I doubt you're an attorney (neither am I, for that matter) but if you were to sneak into someone's home and hide a remote video camera in their children's bedroom, just what do you think would happen when the cam is discovered? For one thing, I can guarantee that law enforcement will be damned interested in charging you with criminal behavior. Parents can file civil suits if they wish, but the cops will nail you to the cross as a criminal, and rightfully so. Your plaintive cries of "But officer, I was just watching to make sure they were okay, and following school rules" might elicit a few chuckles from the arresting officers but wouldn't mean squat.
Frankly, I don't really see how this is different, regardless of "intent", and there should have been some arrests made. Granted, I personally am sick to death of "think of the children" but this is one case where I think that's legitimate. These people were illegally spying on children, and need to be taught a lesson. The only reason I can see that the Feds declined to prosecute is because they a. don't think they have a good enough case or b. figure State and local authorities will do better or c. have more important things to attend to. Probably "c", I'd say. Furthermore, I'd be very surprised if some criminal charges weren't forthcoming, if only as a deterrent against similar actions by those in charge of other schools. If it were my kids? I'd sue the fuckers dead, just as a matter of principle. I have to wonder if there are any members of law enforcement who have children under the guidance (and I use the term loosely) of these educators. I hope so.
At this point, if I were underage and my school had issued me a computer, it'd be FORMAT C: for me, baby. They can complain about my removal of their illegal spying tools after I graduate.
Its not a criminal matter
Why would you say that?
Odds are, they're getting a hell of a lot more exposure to ionizing radiation from the cell phones they have jammed into the sides of their pretty little heads that from some roof-mounted WAP that's fifty or sixty feet away.
Since neither produces ionizing radiation, your statement seems inaccurate.
Sorry, my bad.