And you might sound a little less like a coward if you simply read the section of the Illinois state constitution that was linked to (remove the last slash), and scrolled on down to "Right to Bear Arms."
And my point throughout this has been that if the public is aware of the monitoring devices - in this case, microphones and cameras mounted on probably not-so-discreet poles - there's no reason as to why the collection of public conversations would be particularly bad.
Or we could just write bills in simple sentences understood by all, leaving no room for the wonderful interpretations that lead to statements such as "We don't have to," and the ensueing uproar.
By making such a system publicly viewable, the information is now available to a theoretically unlimited number of corrupt individuals, as opposed to the limited number in the police or government.
When you speak in public, you accept the chance that passers-by will overhear you. If you are aware of these devices (which you should be), you are also accepting the chance that they are recording you - thus adding the government.
If you make this information publicly available, you're adding a group of people that were not specifically accepted. I may be willing to let Joe Schmoe overhear what I say as he walks past, and I may be willing to let Uncle Sam hear the same. But I don't want Aunt Judy to hear this.
Unless you plan complete anonymity in the public offerings, you're infringing on privacy.
Slashdot Mirror
And how many people on that plane will actually know that? They'll believe the Hollywood depictions and be too afraid to risk it.
And you might sound a little less like a coward if you simply read the section of the Illinois state constitution that was linked to (remove the last slash), and scrolled on down to "Right to Bear Arms."
More probable that demand is going up.
Uh .. only an issue if he waits until the next outage, hm?
Explain to me how first post can possibly be marked 'redundant' ?
Tensing up in an accident actually increases injuries and blanking out the windows for the scary parts might help.
Isn't that what your towel is for?
theducknamedhuey at gmail.com
1) Buy beer
2) Drink beer
3) Vomit beer
4) Drink the new, "free" beer that has just appeared.
Or the great Slashdot 503s of '04
wait, there's an article?
And my point throughout this has been that if the public is aware of the monitoring devices - in this case, microphones and cameras mounted on probably not-so-discreet poles - there's no reason as to why the collection of public conversations would be particularly bad.
My mistake, perhaps I wasn't specific enough that there exists a difference between public conversations and the privacy of one's home.
Or we could just write bills in simple sentences understood by all, leaving no room for the wonderful interpretations that lead to statements such as "We don't have to," and the ensueing uproar.
By making such a system publicly viewable, the information is now available to a theoretically unlimited number of corrupt individuals, as opposed to the limited number in the police or government.
And if you're doing nothing illegal, the police and/or government won't care either, and they'll keep on listening for others.
When you speak in public, you accept the chance that passers-by will overhear you. If you are aware of these devices (which you should be), you are also accepting the chance that they are recording you - thus adding the government.
If you make this information publicly available, you're adding a group of people that were not specifically accepted. I may be willing to let Joe Schmoe overhear what I say as he walks past, and I may be willing to let Uncle Sam hear the same. But I don't want Aunt Judy to hear this.
Unless you plan complete anonymity in the public offerings, you're infringing on privacy.
His argument, however, is that it could pick up the conversations of anybody - including those who aren't suspects.
I do however agree with legitimate reasons - had I checked a few minutes sooner, I would have said the same thing.
You know, it's called going out in public for a reason. You seem to have no worries about the people walking by hearing your conversation.
That too ..
And I fail to see how my first post was off topic
Someone's been watching too much Stargate ..
-- Most thieves are opportunists. Even a crappy Kensington lock will stop most thefts. I believe the term you're looking for is 'lazy' :)