Well I don't know about this case specifically yet, but prosecutions like this tend to revolve around specific knowledge of clients and intended purposes. It's not illegal to sell a secure phone, but when a guy comes in and says 'I represent x cartel will these phones help me evade law enforcement and can you customize them further to help me with that', you're on the hook if you don't refuse the sale.
And you know, you talk about I presume marijuana reform, but the real key critical component to reducing problematic drug addiction, ODs, gang violence, and wiping out the cartels is realizing that you have to also provide regulated legal access to drugs that are actually dangerous. It saddens me that all the progress made with pot has turned out to be based entirely on the fact it's extremely safe, rather than a broader recognition that if your policy objective is to minimize the harm of a dangerous but recreational and in demand substance, you must legalize, because prohibition at any level only increases the harm of an already harmful substance. Personal use quantities of even heroin and cocaine are decriminalized in Portgual for example, and while the rest of the world has seen the harm from these substances explode, it's declined there.
Well you can't have 911 operators refuse to respond to a call because it originates out of state. For every one of these terrible pranks, there's people who call in because of legitimate emergencies with loved ones in other states. Caller ID, it's quite the redesign. There's too many legit uses to not allow spoofing at all; you'd have to somehow have every 911 center hooked into every phone company system to view the real origin, as well as into every VoIP provider (and with that, you'll only have IP and billing info at best, not geolocation). There's good reasons it's still a problem.
You disgusting authoritarian bootlickers who see no difference between a civil police force that protects its citizens and one that is ultra-violent, militarized, and views citizens as war-time combatants are a disgrace to the principles this country was founded on. Take your "but if police aren't ultra-aggressive soldiers that shoot first, ask questions, and view civil rights as something to work around, the only alternative is anarchy with no police" and fuck right off to PoliceOne you psychotic jackass. Same for whatever jackass who modded that comment up.
Uh, yes we absolutely should make it impossible for Disney to retain perpetual copyrights no matter how much they're willing to pay. And the original 14 years is more than generous enough now that distribution is orders of magnitude faster than when that was enacted; so much so there shouldn't even be a renewal. Copyright is supposed to be a bargain to promote the arts, you've clearly fallen into the modern interpretation of it being a means for corporations to print money. There's no benefit to anyone except Disney for keeping Mickey locked up for centuries-- it's ludicrous to suggest limiting copyright to a term that covers 99% of total revenue for 99% of all works would discourage continued development.
The problem here is when you bring your non-kiddy-porn-laden computer in, and the minimum wage tech knows he can double his weekly paycheck if he just happens to stumble upon your definitely-already-existed cache of CP, which the FBI has actively encouraged him to look for in violation of the service agreement (unless you're specifically requesting a service that involves them looking at your pictures).
The problem is if it's your personal computer, to which only you have access, you're not going to be able to provide a good case that you didn't know unless it's something like a few thumbnails in deleted browser cache files. You can't just say "uh well I didn't know there were 5,000 pics sorted by age and sex act on my desktop, prove I did!". No, the presumption is you knew and it's a high barrier to prove otherwise. Internet providers forward all reports of CP to law enforcement; odds are you didn't do that (definitely not when it's planted), so you can't claim that exemption. Not to mention, making the argument you didn't know requires rejecting all plea offers, trading a certain 3-5 years or so for a chance at maybe convincing a bunch of people to get past their pedo-hysteria and find you not guilty, and if you fail, it will be 15+ years.
Before making 'but technically' comments like that, maybe look into how these type of cases actually play out in our legal system for 99% of defendants.
It's funny that you condemn non-Christian morality on the basis on ancient Greece having an age of consent equivalent to modern Italy and Germany (14), when it's most likely Mary was likely the same age as marriage and child bearing was back then, i.e. even younger- 12, and often to *much* older men-- Joseph was older by decades-- (in practice, where premarital sex was common there were no restrictions whatsoever regarding age before ~1200AD, where the first laws varied from 6 to 12). Funny, 12 was also the age of consent in Vatican City for quite a while wasn't it? Until 2013 (and it still has exceptions for married males 16-17 and females 14-17). Religion has exactly zero legs to stand on when it comes to discussing modern values regarding consent; argue why your particular number is the absolute truth and all others must be condemned, but your 'Christian values' can't back you up unless you pick a fairly low number that I think you'd find even atheists won't agree on.
Just pop into any story about gender or race issues and you'll find no shortage of logged in (and not brand new) users who have gone full-SJW with denying facts, calling facts racist/sexist, labeling anyone disagreeing as supporting rape/discrimination, and just generally fully embracing overtly false representations to push the narrative. They make those pushing back against that kind of stuff seem conservative, but that's really not the case. You don't have to be conservative to not go batshit insane and dismiss all rules of logic and evidence when it comes to race and gender issues, especially given the desired outcomes are the same. Though the politics threads do bring out some people who inexplicably believe some of the shit Republicans are shoveling these days...
Really small sites don't have 24-hour coverage of staff to respond to flags. You actually have to be fairly large for that, because most people on e.g. an English-language site are in the US and Europe, and there's a few hours a day where most of your volunteer moderators (paid staff? yeah right) are either going to be asleep or at work; I've seen lots of cases where atrocious unquestionably illegal content that's normally gone in minutes stays for over an hour at 3-5AM EST on some sites with dozens of moderators: At those hours, most US users are sleeping, and the UK users are just starting work/school (and the ones without either of those are still sleeping); so some nights the few people you can find to moderate just might not catch things fast enough because they're doing other things too. This problem compounds when you cater to a non-English crowd concentrated in even fewer time zones in other European countries.
Frustration was probably the most common thing. Not about the outage itself, but the lack of communication during it. Couldn't find a word about what was going on anywhere, nor could the small groups of us users who found eachother elsewhere. That's really not cool for an outage that exceeds 24 hours, and had updates been provided during, I'm sure there would have been a lot less of the conspiracy theories, anger, and vitriol too.
The article didn't make this any clearer either, I thought one of the basic principles of bitcoin was that transactions can't be reversed? Did they not immediately transfer to a wallet they controlled? Or did their cash balance go negative and the company is going to ask for/sue for the balance? Anyone know more about this?
Your plan will work fine right up until someone is killed and a lawyer files a suit alleging that had the confidence rating not been so low, it would have been taken more seriously and the death prevented, and then the family gets on TV to vilify the police not taking calls seriously.
Maybe all new schools being built are designed like that, but this one and countless others are more like college campuses; made up of a bunch of different buildings, some very small, and none of them locked because students need to go between them during class. The only schools I've even seen that could reasonably be locked to a couple access points are where I live now in the dense northeast. I went to school in Florida, and traveled to countless schools for various academic and tennis competitions, and with the exception of the big city schools, they were all open, from elementary schools through highschools.
Yeah visitors or early pickups had to go to the office; but nothing would physically stop you from just walking around the side and going into any room you wanted.
Ah yes, the classic 'this regulation doesn't prevent every possible abuse, so we should overturn it and let ISPs do whatever they want instead of taking some protections now and fixing the problem later' argument. Good one.
I'm sick of lying trolls like that. Everyone sees right through you. When a regulation doesn't go far enough, or a law should address it (because team (R) is in power and you actually want anti-NN to be the law), you don't strip all protections in the mean time. That's being disingenuous, you want full repeal and no NN regs and you damn well know it.
Most schools have an open layout (the one in FL being that) making securing it impractical (fence it off and have patrols, really? Maybe some barbed wire too, since otherwise someone can easily climb it). And believe it or not, most people don't like feeling like they're entering a prison with ID checks, metal detectors, searches, etc, to secure against ultra-rare events. Some would even argue that those measures are harmful to kids' development. They shouldn't get accustomed to living under that level of control. You wonder where civil rights stomping authoritarianism starts? With well-meaning but misguided people like h4ck7h3p13n37. Turning schools into locked down facilities is insanity. People here used to recognize the problems with responding to rare tragedies by turning to a police state.
By the time this technology is commercially available, large companies will still need rooms full of equipment because they now require yottabytes for the 64K SuperHyperHDR 4D Holovideo everyone's iPhone 128 is recording.
Piracy should absolutely not be a crime. Sharing some mp3s is not an offense that should be responded to by armed men with guns dragging you off to a cage. It should be a civil issue.
1TB of hard drive space is useless unless you stream everything or watch and delete, and there's still plenty of us resisting the 'must always be connected' 'can't format shift' 'selection limited to whatever the providers offer at that particular moment, with things you like constantly disappearing' model that streaming offers. My graphics card, 8GB of RAM, and mobo/CPU are practically ancient being from my last new build in 2010, but hard drive space? Always need more. The 16TB I have now is nearly full; will have to triple that when going to 4K.
The NLRB female lawyer who majored in history dismissed the science, it wasn't actually unsupported. Did you only read the version of the memo Gizmodo used when it first published the story, with all the scientific citations stripped out, in a not-at-all-shocking display of journalistic integrity from a Gawker-owned blog. The science in his paper was sound, as everyone actually examining the claims in the paper instead of what people are pretending is there had to admit (AmiMoJo keeps posting that the authors of the papers Damore cites are saying that he's wrong, but that's based on a couple quotes in a Wired article that don't support his contention, see my post here for details).
The person to blame for the shitstorm is the one who took the internal discussion and made it public as part of a smear campaign; yet no action was taken against that person.
This will ultimately advance his ideas, as it's made a big show of how far progressives will go to silence scientific debate and unfairly smear anyone who questions their methods even when the outcome desired is the same (Damore was not opposed to diversity, the memo was about better ways to achieve it). It's exposing the deep schism between progressives- who will lie, deny science, and trash others on the left- and liberals for whom logic, science, and reason still matter.
They don't enroll in courses of study for white collar office careers because of sexism and the patriarchy. I wonder if that's also what prevents them from taking jobs as trash collectors, or if there it's ok to admit that maybe women just generally don't want to be trash collectors. There's a serious lack of men in early childhood education; have no idea how someone could see that and suggest that there's no gender-linked preference at play.
Well since you *are* lying about what the authors said, can you blame him? You misrepresented a few quotes in a Wired article as the basis for your 5000 posts claiming the authors of papers Damore cited disagree with him. The quotes support no such conclusion, and the way you've characterized them is intellectually dishonest.
Slashdot Mirror
Well I don't know about this case specifically yet, but prosecutions like this tend to revolve around specific knowledge of clients and intended purposes. It's not illegal to sell a secure phone, but when a guy comes in and says 'I represent x cartel will these phones help me evade law enforcement and can you customize them further to help me with that', you're on the hook if you don't refuse the sale.
And you know, you talk about I presume marijuana reform, but the real key critical component to reducing problematic drug addiction, ODs, gang violence, and wiping out the cartels is realizing that you have to also provide regulated legal access to drugs that are actually dangerous. It saddens me that all the progress made with pot has turned out to be based entirely on the fact it's extremely safe, rather than a broader recognition that if your policy objective is to minimize the harm of a dangerous but recreational and in demand substance, you must legalize, because prohibition at any level only increases the harm of an already harmful substance. Personal use quantities of even heroin and cocaine are decriminalized in Portgual for example, and while the rest of the world has seen the harm from these substances explode, it's declined there.
Because it's only bad when China does it right. NYPD, to name one, isn't using (and abusing) facial recognition cameras. The US needs EMPs too!
Well you can't have 911 operators refuse to respond to a call because it originates out of state. For every one of these terrible pranks, there's people who call in because of legitimate emergencies with loved ones in other states.
Caller ID, it's quite the redesign. There's too many legit uses to not allow spoofing at all; you'd have to somehow have every 911 center hooked into every phone company system to view the real origin, as well as into every VoIP provider (and with that, you'll only have IP and billing info at best, not geolocation). There's good reasons it's still a problem.
You disgusting authoritarian bootlickers who see no difference between a civil police force that protects its citizens and one that is ultra-violent, militarized, and views citizens as war-time combatants are a disgrace to the principles this country was founded on. Take your "but if police aren't ultra-aggressive soldiers that shoot first, ask questions, and view civil rights as something to work around, the only alternative is anarchy with no police" and fuck right off to PoliceOne you psychotic jackass. Same for whatever jackass who modded that comment up.
Uh, yes we absolutely should make it impossible for Disney to retain perpetual copyrights no matter how much they're willing to pay. And the original 14 years is more than generous enough now that distribution is orders of magnitude faster than when that was enacted; so much so there shouldn't even be a renewal. Copyright is supposed to be a bargain to promote the arts, you've clearly fallen into the modern interpretation of it being a means for corporations to print money. There's no benefit to anyone except Disney for keeping Mickey locked up for centuries-- it's ludicrous to suggest limiting copyright to a term that covers 99% of total revenue for 99% of all works would discourage continued development.
I have no mod points at the moment, but still wanted you to know you deserve a +1 Funny for making me laugh.
The problem here is when you bring your non-kiddy-porn-laden computer in, and the minimum wage tech knows he can double his weekly paycheck if he just happens to stumble upon your definitely-already-existed cache of CP, which the FBI has actively encouraged him to look for in violation of the service agreement (unless you're specifically requesting a service that involves them looking at your pictures).
The problem is if it's your personal computer, to which only you have access, you're not going to be able to provide a good case that you didn't know unless it's something like a few thumbnails in deleted browser cache files. You can't just say "uh well I didn't know there were 5,000 pics sorted by age and sex act on my desktop, prove I did!". No, the presumption is you knew and it's a high barrier to prove otherwise. Internet providers forward all reports of CP to law enforcement; odds are you didn't do that (definitely not when it's planted), so you can't claim that exemption. Not to mention, making the argument you didn't know requires rejecting all plea offers, trading a certain 3-5 years or so for a chance at maybe convincing a bunch of people to get past their pedo-hysteria and find you not guilty, and if you fail, it will be 15+ years.
Before making 'but technically' comments like that, maybe look into how these type of cases actually play out in our legal system for 99% of defendants.
"I'd been a hero amongst my peers"... and you don't understand how they're getting caught?
It's funny that you condemn non-Christian morality on the basis on ancient Greece having an age of consent equivalent to modern Italy and Germany (14), when it's most likely Mary was likely the same age as marriage and child bearing was back then, i.e. even younger- 12, and often to *much* older men-- Joseph was older by decades-- (in practice, where premarital sex was common there were no restrictions whatsoever regarding age before ~1200AD, where the first laws varied from 6 to 12). Funny, 12 was also the age of consent in Vatican City for quite a while wasn't it? Until 2013 (and it still has exceptions for married males 16-17 and females 14-17). Religion has exactly zero legs to stand on when it comes to discussing modern values regarding consent; argue why your particular number is the absolute truth and all others must be condemned, but your 'Christian values' can't back you up unless you pick a fairly low number that I think you'd find even atheists won't agree on.
"Identify as"? That's great news, since you don't have to technically be a group to identify as that group anymore.
Just pop into any story about gender or race issues and you'll find no shortage of logged in (and not brand new) users who have gone full-SJW with denying facts, calling facts racist/sexist, labeling anyone disagreeing as supporting rape/discrimination, and just generally fully embracing overtly false representations to push the narrative. They make those pushing back against that kind of stuff seem conservative, but that's really not the case. You don't have to be conservative to not go batshit insane and dismiss all rules of logic and evidence when it comes to race and gender issues, especially given the desired outcomes are the same. Though the politics threads do bring out some people who inexplicably believe some of the shit Republicans are shoveling these days...
Really small sites don't have 24-hour coverage of staff to respond to flags. You actually have to be fairly large for that, because most people on e.g. an English-language site are in the US and Europe, and there's a few hours a day where most of your volunteer moderators (paid staff? yeah right) are either going to be asleep or at work; I've seen lots of cases where atrocious unquestionably illegal content that's normally gone in minutes stays for over an hour at 3-5AM EST on some sites with dozens of moderators: At those hours, most US users are sleeping, and the UK users are just starting work/school (and the ones without either of those are still sleeping); so some nights the few people you can find to moderate just might not catch things fast enough because they're doing other things too. This problem compounds when you cater to a non-English crowd concentrated in even fewer time zones in other European countries.
Frustration was probably the most common thing. Not about the outage itself, but the lack of communication during it. Couldn't find a word about what was going on anywhere, nor could the small groups of us users who found eachother elsewhere. That's really not cool for an outage that exceeds 24 hours, and had updates been provided during, I'm sure there would have been a lot less of the conspiracy theories, anger, and vitriol too.
The article didn't make this any clearer either, I thought one of the basic principles of bitcoin was that transactions can't be reversed? Did they not immediately transfer to a wallet they controlled? Or did their cash balance go negative and the company is going to ask for/sue for the balance? Anyone know more about this?
Your plan will work fine right up until someone is killed and a lawyer files a suit alleging that had the confidence rating not been so low, it would have been taken more seriously and the death prevented, and then the family gets on TV to vilify the police not taking calls seriously.
Maybe all new schools being built are designed like that, but this one and countless others are more like college campuses; made up of a bunch of different buildings, some very small, and none of them locked because students need to go between them during class. The only schools I've even seen that could reasonably be locked to a couple access points are where I live now in the dense northeast. I went to school in Florida, and traveled to countless schools for various academic and tennis competitions, and with the exception of the big city schools, they were all open, from elementary schools through highschools.
Yeah visitors or early pickups had to go to the office; but nothing would physically stop you from just walking around the side and going into any room you wanted.
Ah yes, the classic 'this regulation doesn't prevent every possible abuse, so we should overturn it and let ISPs do whatever they want instead of taking some protections now and fixing the problem later' argument. Good one.
I'm sick of lying trolls like that. Everyone sees right through you. When a regulation doesn't go far enough, or a law should address it (because team (R) is in power and you actually want anti-NN to be the law), you don't strip all protections in the mean time. That's being disingenuous, you want full repeal and no NN regs and you damn well know it.
Most schools have an open layout (the one in FL being that) making securing it impractical (fence it off and have patrols, really? Maybe some barbed wire too, since otherwise someone can easily climb it). And believe it or not, most people don't like feeling like they're entering a prison with ID checks, metal detectors, searches, etc, to secure against ultra-rare events. Some would even argue that those measures are harmful to kids' development. They shouldn't get accustomed to living under that level of control. You wonder where civil rights stomping authoritarianism starts? With well-meaning but misguided people like h4ck7h3p13n37. Turning schools into locked down facilities is insanity. People here used to recognize the problems with responding to rare tragedies by turning to a police state.
By the time this technology is commercially available, large companies will still need rooms full of equipment because they now require yottabytes for the 64K SuperHyperHDR 4D Holovideo everyone's iPhone 128 is recording.
Piracy should absolutely not be a crime. Sharing some mp3s is not an offense that should be responded to by armed men with guns dragging you off to a cage. It should be a civil issue.
1TB of hard drive space is useless unless you stream everything or watch and delete, and there's still plenty of us resisting the 'must always be connected' 'can't format shift' 'selection limited to whatever the providers offer at that particular moment, with things you like constantly disappearing' model that streaming offers. My graphics card, 8GB of RAM, and mobo/CPU are practically ancient being from my last new build in 2010, but hard drive space? Always need more. The 16TB I have now is nearly full; will have to triple that when going to 4K.
The NLRB female lawyer who majored in history dismissed the science, it wasn't actually unsupported. Did you only read the version of the memo Gizmodo used when it first published the story, with all the scientific citations stripped out, in a not-at-all-shocking display of journalistic integrity from a Gawker-owned blog. The science in his paper was sound, as everyone actually examining the claims in the paper instead of what people are pretending is there had to admit (AmiMoJo keeps posting that the authors of the papers Damore cites are saying that he's wrong, but that's based on a couple quotes in a Wired article that don't support his contention, see my post here for details).
The person to blame for the shitstorm is the one who took the internal discussion and made it public as part of a smear campaign; yet no action was taken against that person.
This will ultimately advance his ideas, as it's made a big show of how far progressives will go to silence scientific debate and unfairly smear anyone who questions their methods even when the outcome desired is the same (Damore was not opposed to diversity, the memo was about better ways to achieve it). It's exposing the deep schism between progressives- who will lie, deny science, and trash others on the left- and liberals for whom logic, science, and reason still matter.
They don't enroll in courses of study for white collar office careers because of sexism and the patriarchy. I wonder if that's also what prevents them from taking jobs as trash collectors, or if there it's ok to admit that maybe women just generally don't want to be trash collectors. There's a serious lack of men in early childhood education; have no idea how someone could see that and suggest that there's no gender-linked preference at play.
Well since you *are* lying about what the authors said, can you blame him? You misrepresented a few quotes in a Wired article as the basis for your 5000 posts claiming the authors of papers Damore cited disagree with him. The quotes support no such conclusion, and the way you've characterized them is intellectually dishonest.