Good luck close-sourcing Python code, anyway... reverse-engineering.pyc is beyond trivial. If there's anything really useful in there, it will be reverse-engineered and mysteriously make its way back into the BitTorrent OSS fork, anyway.
They need evidence to convict you of crimes against children in Germany? Wow, it must be way tougher for the police there than here in America. We only require actual evidence for minor things like murder.
anything to do "with the children" here = guilty until proven innocent.McMartin,anyone?
Actually, McMartin was 20 years ago. These days it's "guilty even after proven innocent" (you'll just be "released on a technicality" and somehow manage to accidentally slip and fall into a noose your neighbors hung from a tree in your front yard).
Well, numerous Slashdot posters such as this one have taught me that "freedom of speech only protects your right to say something, not the consequences of saying it". So if, as in Burma, the consequences are immediate execution, that's still not repression and censorship, since you got to say it just before they put a bullet in your brain.
And if the consequence is being beaten with rubber hoses and thrown in jail by the police, the first amendment doesn't protect you from that consequence either, eh? Well, you just lost my nomination to the supreme court.
Why should you, or any government, get to dictate what a woman can or can not do with her own body?
Oh, they don't believe women should be restricted in what they can and can't do, they just believe men should be restricted in what they can and can't watch. The movement is about women's rights, not men's rights.
Actually, you didn't specify if you meant exclusive or inclusive or, leaving open the possibility that you meant less than and equal to at the same time, rendering the remainder of your post meaningless.
Who's complaining? Maybe the OP was suggesting that those 3.5% of agents ought to be focusing on priorities 4-10 and getting the FUCK off of my internet.
Thanks a lot, jerk. You're the reason I have to stand around for fifteen minutes waiting for one of the few employees in the store to open up the glass case where they have to keep everything since you make any other means of preventing shoplifting impossible. I hope you get run over by a cement truck after you save the two seconds it would have taken you to let the guy see the damned receipt.
I don't think this is offtopic at all - he's making an important point. You either censor nothing, or you censor arbitrarily. If you want to preserve your right to read 9/11 conspiracy theories, scientology documents, and holocaust deniers, you have to be prepared to come across the occasional goatse or tubgirl. And guess what, folks? As unpleasant as it is, that stuff won't kill you.
Yeah, exactly - I can't encrypt my google searches if https://www.google.com/ redirects to an unencrypted URL.
Your best bet is to install, run and support (financially) FreeNet. Unfortunately, that will never happen, because Freenet can be used to bypass "good" censorship (i.e. the kind of content that some random person agrees should be censored) as well as "bad" censorship. The point that too few people seem to understand is that censorship is all or nothing - either everything is on the table to eventually be censored (and we have to rely on the goodwill of our government as well as our unelected "representatives" at AT&T and the MPAA to decide what we can and can't read), or nothing is censored, even if you think it ought to be.
Erm... you might want to give that some more careful thought. You could easily be charged with possession or even distribution if somebody else misread your intent.
Absolutely you're allowed to! In fact, you're not only allowed to, it's required! No "understanding" or "analysis of what causes it" is allowed here! Just blind, reflexive, thoughtless mob mentality! Plus, you can safely apply the label to pretty much anybody you don't like and safely hate them, too. It's not required to actually do it to be one, after all - just thinking about it, or being somebody that looks like they might be thinking about it, is enough to be deserving of anything from spiteful contempt right up to instant death. Plus which, "child" refers to anybody under 18, and "rape" refers to any activity, consensual or not. It doesn't even have to be sex - it can just be something kind of like sex. In fact, it doesn't even have to be kind of like sex, it can be, you know, "talking to", "looking at" or "being in the vicinity of". When it comes to hate, in America, just say the magic words, "the children" and the sky's the limit!
If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear
Buildings with security guards are rarely robbed or broken into. A naive building owner may say, "you know, there haven't been any break-ins in years - I'm wasting my money paying the security guards to guard this place!" when in fact it was the deterrent of the security guard that prevented the break-in in the first place. Civil liberties (such as privacy safeguards) are a bit like security guards - the fact that you have them means you probably don't need them, but if you get rid of them, you'll want them back in a big hurry.
Interview a kid at a nudist colony.
Interview a normal kid.
Actually, it doesn't much matter what they say. I remember listening to Howard Stern not too long ago, and he had Jack Black (who grew up in a nudist colony) on as a guest. Of course, it being Howard Stern, he wanted to know a lot about the nudist colony. And he kept asking, over and over again, "so, how messed up are you now from having grown up on a nudist colony?" Jack just laughed it off and said, "I'm as messed up as everybody else I know," or something along those lines. Howard refused to believe him. The next day he said something to the effect of, "and that poor Jack Black - so screwed up from growing up in a nudist colony that he doesn't even realize how screwed up he is."
Once the average person believes something, no amount of so-called "evidence" or "rigorous scientific proof" is going to convince them otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
Good luck close-sourcing Python code, anyway... reverse-engineering .pyc is beyond trivial. If there's anything really useful in there, it will be reverse-engineered and mysteriously make its way back into the BitTorrent OSS fork, anyway.
You mean you got a refund from the laptop manufacturer? Otherwise, Microsoft has your money.
Like the insistence that you "turn off that damned computer!"
So, uh... are we or aren't we all going to die?
That's why they always say it's for a child exploitation case.
They need evidence to convict you of crimes against children in Germany? Wow, it must be way tougher for the police there than here in America. We only require actual evidence for minor things like murder.
Actually, McMartin was 20 years ago. These days it's "guilty even after proven innocent" (you'll just be "released on a technicality" and somehow manage to accidentally slip and fall into a noose your neighbors hung from a tree in your front yard).
And...?
Well, numerous Slashdot posters such as this one have taught me that "freedom of speech only protects your right to say something, not the consequences of saying it". So if, as in Burma, the consequences are immediate execution, that's still not repression and censorship, since you got to say it just before they put a bullet in your brain.
Well, I hear their ad revenue is through the roof.
And if the consequence is being beaten with rubber hoses and thrown in jail by the police, the first amendment doesn't protect you from that consequence either, eh? Well, you just lost my nomination to the supreme court.
Oh, they don't believe women should be restricted in what they can and can't do, they just believe men should be restricted in what they can and can't watch. The movement is about women's rights, not men's rights.
Actually, you didn't specify if you meant exclusive or inclusive or, leaving open the possibility that you meant less than and equal to at the same time, rendering the remainder of your post meaningless.
Out-pedant that!
Who's complaining? Maybe the OP was suggesting that those 3.5% of agents ought to be focusing on priorities 4-10 and getting the FUCK off of my internet.
Thanks a lot, jerk. You're the reason I have to stand around for fifteen minutes waiting for one of the few employees in the store to open up the glass case where they have to keep everything since you make any other means of preventing shoplifting impossible. I hope you get run over by a cement truck after you save the two seconds it would have taken you to let the guy see the damned receipt.
I don't think this is offtopic at all - he's making an important point. You either censor nothing, or you censor arbitrarily. If you want to preserve your right to read 9/11 conspiracy theories, scientology documents, and holocaust deniers, you have to be prepared to come across the occasional goatse or tubgirl. And guess what, folks? As unpleasant as it is, that stuff won't kill you.
Yeah, exactly - I can't encrypt my google searches if https://www.google.com/ redirects to an unencrypted URL.
Your best bet is to install, run and support (financially) FreeNet. Unfortunately, that will never happen, because Freenet can be used to bypass "good" censorship (i.e. the kind of content that some random person agrees should be censored) as well as "bad" censorship. The point that too few people seem to understand is that censorship is all or nothing - either everything is on the table to eventually be censored (and we have to rely on the goodwill of our government as well as our unelected "representatives" at AT&T and the MPAA to decide what we can and can't read), or nothing is censored, even if you think it ought to be.
Says Mr. "Posting on Slashdot at 1:28 in the afternoon."
Erm... you might want to give that some more careful thought. You could easily be charged with possession or even distribution if somebody else misread your intent.
Particularly fascinating given that the OP was referring to hate-mongering of people who had not, in fact, ever done anything illegal or even immoral.
Absolutely you're allowed to! In fact, you're not only allowed to, it's required! No "understanding" or "analysis of what causes it" is allowed here! Just blind, reflexive, thoughtless mob mentality! Plus, you can safely apply the label to pretty much anybody you don't like and safely hate them, too. It's not required to actually do it to be one, after all - just thinking about it, or being somebody that looks like they might be thinking about it, is enough to be deserving of anything from spiteful contempt right up to instant death. Plus which, "child" refers to anybody under 18, and "rape" refers to any activity, consensual or not. It doesn't even have to be sex - it can just be something kind of like sex. In fact, it doesn't even have to be kind of like sex, it can be, you know, "talking to", "looking at" or "being in the vicinity of". When it comes to hate, in America, just say the magic words, "the children" and the sky's the limit!
Fight back - run Freenet.
Buildings with security guards are rarely robbed or broken into. A naive building owner may say, "you know, there haven't been any break-ins in years - I'm wasting my money paying the security guards to guard this place!" when in fact it was the deterrent of the security guard that prevented the break-in in the first place. Civil liberties (such as privacy safeguards) are a bit like security guards - the fact that you have them means you probably don't need them, but if you get rid of them, you'll want them back in a big hurry.
Actually, from what I've seen in the past few years (with few exceptions), the first rule of Usenet is "don't post anything on Usenet any more."
Actually, it doesn't much matter what they say. I remember listening to Howard Stern not too long ago, and he had Jack Black (who grew up in a nudist colony) on as a guest. Of course, it being Howard Stern, he wanted to know a lot about the nudist colony. And he kept asking, over and over again, "so, how messed up are you now from having grown up on a nudist colony?" Jack just laughed it off and said, "I'm as messed up as everybody else I know," or something along those lines. Howard refused to believe him. The next day he said something to the effect of, "and that poor Jack Black - so screwed up from growing up in a nudist colony that he doesn't even realize how screwed up he is."
Once the average person believes something, no amount of so-called "evidence" or "rigorous scientific proof" is going to convince them otherwise.