Funny how you seem to think that the only way to deal with someone you disagree with is silencing them. Having Libya on the Human Rights Council only means they get to cast a vote and lose properly rather than being completely ignored. I means they have someone there to coordinate operations shall the UN decide to enforce changes. It means they have a negotiator shall the UN sanction them.
It DOES NOT mean that Libya gets to dictate humans rights internationally.
Ironic how you claim to speak for human rights but seem to deny a lawyer to a criminal.
*cough* *cough* UPDATE political_party p, political_party_owner o SET p.value = 0 WHERE o.political_party = p.id AND o.type =:corporations AND p.id IN (SELECT e.political_party FROM election WHERE election_date >= '1960-01-01')
While I approve of privacy oriented legislation, I'm more concerned with regulating humans than software.
A good analogy is how a doctor wouldn't get in trouble for collecting your medical history, but will get in trouble if he sell that information to advertisers. I don't think making it illegal to store cookies is the right way about it. Rather make it illegal to sell this information to others, or to retain it for periods longer than a certain threshold.
Regulate the use of the information collected, not the technology used to collect it.
Basically, it's stupid to allow any incumbent intercontinental despotic dictatorship to have powers you wouldn't trust to a democratically elected government of your own.
It's crazy to say --for instance-- that the FBI shouldn't be allowed to put a GPS tracker in your vehicle without a warrant, but having your phone company keep logs of your every location is fine and dandy.
There is a solution, legislation. Enforce built-in privacy from the device manufacturing to the service provider. There is nothing crazy about limiting the power of business. We do it all the fucking time with construction codes, sanitary permits et cetera. Why not this? The free market won't solve this because it's a damned oligarchy and all the corporations are just as evil.
Don't let articles like this sell you the idea that privacy has no value and is impossible to defend anyway. That's what they want you to think. Nothing more.
My dream GUI would be for all windows to have a (collapsible) "command window" printing a history of commands after every GUI event, commands that would be reproduced later by copy pasting.
Think like selecting a snippet in a word processor and choosing the option "Bold" from the "Format" menu, a command would be printed at the bottom like:
It's great to see the innovation our corporate fathers are providing us in marketing, first Google invents chrome, now Apple invents Launchpad! I hear rumors Microsoft is going to invent a new virtual assistant called Firefox! What new names will they come up with tomorrow?
Ok let me try to make the TSA ban everything under the sky until it breaks down: I heard a terrorist say they are going to hide lock-picking equipment in white people teeth during dental cleanings. They found a way to build a sufficiently harmful plastic gun and hiding it within the frame of luggage and laptops. They found a way to make a bomb out of a cellphone battery, including tables. They found a way to use shoe laces to take a hostage long enough for a them of terrorist to draw out more complicated plans, including new ways to hide explosives, like getting C4 inside stuffed chocolates and M&Ms....
Why? Because apparently the public won't react until you have to strip naked and remain handcuffed to your seat for the duration of the flight.
Except it doesn't work. We find out anyway and they just end up looking dumb and evil instead of just evil. As much blackslash Google got because of the WiFi thing, it is still regarded higher in the Do No Evil department than its competitors.
It's worth noting (of course IMHO) that the reason they've failed at social networking has much to do with their refusal to be evil. They could have forced buzz on the vast, vast userbases of gmail and youtube. And used its immense search powers to build social profiles for everyone else, prepopulated with friends even.
Compared with facebook, Google has been squeakily clean.
Not true. Many are making this mistake, assuming this is about elitist decrying Ubuntu because it's mainstremish. Also, as some have noted. Ubuntu is still one of the most popular distros. At the same time it's true that there is an appreciable change in critical reception. You just don't hear people praising it as much as before. Like the post says, the love is gone.
What happened? What happened is that Canonical...Mark, alienated a lot of the evangelist types in community by a series of bad decisions.
For starters Mark overthrow the work the community had done massaging Ubuntu's identity into something nice, they just finally worked the earth tones into something gorgeous (pic Karmic) and hired as designers a bunch of Apple rejects who changed ubuntu into this colorblind abomination (pic Lucid). This by itself was no big deal, it's just a theme.
But Ubuntu was a community process. The active community rejected the change. Mark response was "Ubuntu is not a democracy". That was the big deal. He might as well just have said "fuck u lolololol". And it got worse. People in the community tried hard to avert this change by using the proper channels. The forum and the brainstorm sites. The forum threads got locked, the brainstorm issue was safely ignored. This in turn turned attention to the fact that the brainstorm site is being dutifully ignored. The feature list of new releases is all about Ubuntu One, Ubuntu store, preparation to sell stuff through the package manager, and other unasked for changes like all the fidgety with the notification area, with Ubuntu basically reinventing its own notification area and trying to integrate media players, twitter, OS management and facebook into the same spot.
Ubuntu still has an active community but it used to have a "movement" that it no longer has. At least for myself, I can describe the change from "Woot best OS in the world!!" to "Uhm, yes it's one of the most acceptable Linux implementations out there."
It is sad use because Linux support depends on Linux popularity. In other words, the probability of printer makers writing Linux drivers increases whit the number of Linux desktops that would use it. Germany dropping Linux means printer makers in Germany won't ever make Linux drivers now that they know they can wait for the client to get tired and revert to Windows. Of course less incentive for hardware support means less incentive for desktop software support. It all spirals in reducing Linux support --and more to the point-- freedom from vendor-lock-in.
They simply see a tool which could be abused and therefore assume this is its only intent, and that therefore makes the tool unjustified (demonstrated so by construction of a straw man example of a child who has outgrown the need for the tool).
That sensibility of yours would be more appreciated if the strawmen were uncalled for. When people start they post with: "my children have no expectations of privacy", images of strip searching and hidden night vision cameras come to mind. If you don't want to be caricaturized don't act like a damned cartoon. And if you look above there are even posters that defend denial of privacy until age 18 or even "until they leave my house", the strawmen are meaty indeed.
In a way though, that's good, it teaches them that there are people who deem their betters who won't treat them with the same respect than they demand. Kinda like how Santa Claus teaches that your parents are lying bastards.
Your kids will ask around, how can I by pass my parents total invasion of privacy? They'll learn about usb linux distros, root kits and of course, key logging. Etc.
Well that's the best case scenario. The worst case scenario is that living in a no privacy world will numb them to invasion of privacy to the point that they'll tolerate having a camera installed in their skull by the government. Kinda like all the slashdoters screaming "privacy is dead, give up" everytime Google or Facebook screw up. But they might just be employees.
Ok, on a more serious note, how long do you think 'til such a backdoor will be sniffed out and abused by people with even less concern for constitutional rights and fewer qualms to abuse such a privilege?
Considering there isn't just one anonymous, the magnitude of their attacks a.k.a. trolling. Is proportional to the number of people committed to a target. Anyone can take a photoshop an embarrassing pic of their neighbor, post it to/b/ and call himself anonymous. The big fights, the kind that make it to news sites are companies that definitively had it coming. Medium mobilizations like those related to animal abusers are still pretty much justificated. The only people I remember they targeting that didn't completelly absolutely deserve it was Habbo Hotel, and that's just trolling..
I'm sure you won't appreciate the irony that none of the people who actually DDoSed Wikileaks got persecuted. They, *they* are the real defenders of free speech, the people attacking Wikileaks, the corporations suffocating it's lifelines, pressing Wikileaks to shut up and retire. They are the real victims.
I also feel for the poor victims of anonymous, those righteous Scientologists harassing ex-members for talking and suing anyone who discloses their religious text, and the poor church ministers who are having their free hate speech disturbed. They are the real victims, our prayers and our hearts are with them!
Slashdot Mirror
No it's not a case of "all change is bad" It's plain old Americanitis.
Then form yet another anti-muslim bloc, don't just unilaterally decide they don get a vote. Non muslim countries outnumber muslim ones.
Funny how you seem to think that the only way to deal with someone you disagree with is silencing them. Having Libya on the Human Rights Council only means they get to cast a vote and lose properly rather than being completely ignored. I means they have someone there to coordinate operations shall the UN decide to enforce changes. It means they have a negotiator shall the UN sanction them.
It DOES NOT mean that Libya gets to dictate humans rights internationally.
Ironic how you claim to speak for human rights but seem to deny a lawyer to a criminal.
*cough* *cough*
:corporations
UPDATE political_party p, political_party_owner o
SET p.value = 0
WHERE o.political_party = p.id
AND o.type =
AND p.id IN (SELECT e.political_party FROM election WHERE election_date >= '1960-01-01')
Isn't this the same issue raised here http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/03/09/1332202/Ask-Slashdot-Privacy-Paranoiaare we going to start dismissing the value of privacy twice a week now?
While I approve of privacy oriented legislation, I'm more concerned with regulating humans than software.
A good analogy is how a doctor wouldn't get in trouble for collecting your medical history, but will get in trouble if he sell that information to advertisers. I don't think making it illegal to store cookies is the right way about it. Rather make it illegal to sell this information to others, or to retain it for periods longer than a certain threshold.
Regulate the use of the information collected, not the technology used to collect it.
Basically, it's stupid to allow any incumbent intercontinental despotic dictatorship to have powers you wouldn't trust to a democratically elected government of your own.
It's crazy to say --for instance-- that the FBI shouldn't be allowed to put a GPS tracker in your vehicle without a warrant, but having your phone company keep logs of your every location is fine and dandy.
There is a solution, legislation. Enforce built-in privacy from the device manufacturing to the service provider. There is nothing crazy about limiting the power of business. We do it all the fucking time with construction codes, sanitary permits et cetera. Why not this? The free market won't solve this because it's a damned oligarchy and all the corporations are just as evil.
Don't let articles like this sell you the idea that privacy has no value and is impossible to defend anyway. That's what they want you to think. Nothing more.
Am I the only one who finds it outrageous that you put harming children at the same level than knocking down a web server?
Ok maybe it's not you but the government. Still WTF..
I'm pretty sure there was a story just like this less than a month ago.
My dream GUI would be for all windows to have a (collapsible) "command window" printing a history of commands after every GUI event, commands that would be reproduced later by copy pasting.
Think like selecting a snippet in a word processor and choosing the option "Bold" from the "Format" menu, a command would be printed at the bottom like:
>>> selection = mouse.select(x=200, y=300)
>>> selection.format.bold()
This of course would be optional and off by default.
Maybe we should create rules against these actions for the sake of it, instead of reusing individual rights attributed to an imaginary person.
You would be less of a troll if you provide some examples of individual rights that can't be protected without granting corporate personhood. Please.
Perspective?
This. Is. Apple!
It's great to see the innovation our corporate fathers are providing us in marketing, first Google invents chrome, now Apple invents Launchpad! I hear rumors Microsoft is going to invent a new virtual assistant called Firefox! What new names will they come up with tomorrow?
Gives a new meaning to butt-hurt.
Ok let me try to make the TSA ban everything under the sky until it breaks down: ...
I heard a terrorist say they are going to hide lock-picking equipment in white people teeth during dental cleanings.
They found a way to build a sufficiently harmful plastic gun and hiding it within the frame of luggage and laptops.
They found a way to make a bomb out of a cellphone battery, including tables.
They found a way to use shoe laces to take a hostage long enough for a them of terrorist to draw out more complicated plans, including new ways to hide explosives, like getting C4 inside stuffed chocolates and M&Ms.
Why? Because apparently the public won't react until you have to strip naked and remain handcuffed to your seat for the duration of the flight.
Except it doesn't work. We find out anyway and they just end up looking dumb and evil instead of just evil. As much blackslash Google got because of the WiFi thing, it is still regarded higher in the Do No Evil department than its competitors.
It's worth noting (of course IMHO) that the reason they've failed at social networking has much to do with their refusal to be evil. They could have forced buzz on the vast, vast userbases of gmail and youtube. And used its immense search powers to build social profiles for everyone else, prepopulated with friends even.
Compared with facebook, Google has been squeakily clean.
Not true. Many are making this mistake, assuming this is about elitist decrying Ubuntu because it's mainstremish. Also, as some have noted. Ubuntu is still one of the most popular distros. At the same time it's true that there is an appreciable change in critical reception. You just don't hear people praising it as much as before. Like the post says, the love is gone.
What happened? What happened is that Canonical...Mark, alienated a lot of the evangelist types in community by a series of bad decisions.
For starters Mark overthrow the work the community had done massaging Ubuntu's identity into something nice, they just finally worked the earth tones into something gorgeous (pic Karmic) and hired as designers a bunch of Apple rejects who changed ubuntu into this colorblind abomination (pic Lucid). This by itself was no big deal, it's just a theme.
But Ubuntu was a community process. The active community rejected the change. Mark response was "Ubuntu is not a democracy". That was the big deal. He might as well just have said "fuck u lolololol". And it got worse. People in the community tried hard to avert this change by using the proper channels. The forum and the brainstorm sites. The forum threads got locked, the brainstorm issue was safely ignored. This in turn turned attention to the fact that the brainstorm site is being dutifully ignored. The feature list of new releases is all about Ubuntu One, Ubuntu store, preparation to sell stuff through the package manager, and other unasked for changes like all the fidgety with the notification area, with Ubuntu basically reinventing its own notification area and trying to integrate media players, twitter, OS management and facebook into the same spot.
Ubuntu still has an active community but it used to have a "movement" that it no longer has. At least for myself, I can describe the change from "Woot best OS in the world!!" to "Uhm, yes it's one of the most acceptable Linux implementations out there."
It is sad use because Linux support depends on Linux popularity. In other words, the probability of printer makers writing Linux drivers increases whit the number of Linux desktops that would use it. Germany dropping Linux means printer makers in Germany won't ever make Linux drivers now that they know they can wait for the client to get tired and revert to Windows.
Of course less incentive for hardware support means less incentive for desktop software support. It all spirals in reducing Linux support --and more to the point-- freedom from vendor-lock-in.
That isn't sad news for you?
They simply see a tool which could be abused and therefore assume this is its only intent, and that therefore makes the tool unjustified (demonstrated so by construction of a straw man example of a child who has outgrown the need for the tool).
That sensibility of yours would be more appreciated if the strawmen were uncalled for. When people start they post with: "my children have no expectations of privacy", images of strip searching and hidden night vision cameras come to mind. If you don't want to be caricaturized don't act like a damned cartoon. And if you look above there are even posters that defend denial of privacy until age 18 or even "until they leave my house", the strawmen are meaty indeed.
In a way though, that's good, it teaches them that there are people who deem their betters who won't treat them with the same respect than they demand. Kinda like how Santa Claus teaches that your parents are lying bastards.
Your kids will ask around, how can I by pass my parents total invasion of privacy? They'll learn about usb linux distros, root kits and of course, key logging. Etc.
Well that's the best case scenario. The worst case scenario is that living in a no privacy world will numb them to invasion of privacy to the point that they'll tolerate having a camera installed in their skull by the government. Kinda like all the slashdoters screaming "privacy is dead, give up" everytime Google or Facebook screw up. But they might just be employees.
Ok, on a more serious note, how long do you think 'til such a backdoor will be sniffed out and abused by people with even less concern for constitutional rights and fewer qualms to abuse such a privilege?
Divorce lawyers?
Considering there isn't just one anonymous, the magnitude of their attacks a.k.a. trolling. Is proportional to the number of people committed to a target. Anyone can take a photoshop an embarrassing pic of their neighbor, post it to /b/ and call himself anonymous. The big fights, the kind that make it to news sites are companies that definitively had it coming. Medium mobilizations like those related to animal abusers are still pretty much justificated. The only people I remember they targeting that didn't completelly absolutely deserve it was Habbo Hotel, and that's just trolling..
Well anyone misses one or forty three characters.
I'm sure you won't appreciate the irony that none of the people who actually DDoSed Wikileaks got persecuted. They, *they* are the real defenders of free speech, the people attacking Wikileaks, the corporations suffocating it's lifelines, pressing Wikileaks to shut up and retire. They are the real victims.
I also feel for the poor victims of anonymous, those righteous Scientologists harassing ex-members for talking and suing anyone who discloses their religious text, and the poor church ministers who are having their free hate speech disturbed. They are the real victims, our prayers and our hearts are with them!
God bless America!