What I find really interesting is that a bunch of foreigners conduct a terrorist attack on USA, and the geniuses in the US government promptly start surveillance on its *own* citizens and promptly treating its *own* citizens as suspected terrorists, without any rhyme or reasons for doing so. And the "intelligent" American public meekly accepts this with just a few grumblings. .
I mean, just a good old x-ray should be sufficient if you prove that you are a citizen(with help of SSN, passport, birthcerificate or whatever). And if the US government thinks that some terrorists(like that guy from pakistan) have acquired US citizenship, then maybe they should fix that process regards granting of citizenship in the first place? If you feel the need to cover fringe cases like the pakistani guy, shouldn't your surveillance and extra security measures cover at least just those first generation immigrants instead, instead of treating the entire populace as terrorist scums?
If someone questions why such a big issue is being made of 5000 people dying when hundreds of thousands die in just road accidents every year, he is slimed for being "insensitive" to the families of those 5000. Fine, but how on earth do you guys turn a blind eye when some rich politicians decide to cash in on the tragedy and suffering of those same families to sell fake expensive equipment in name of security theater and kickbacks? Is THAT not insensitive? Is that not shameful? Is that not a disgrace?
Seriously, why on earth are there no serious protests against folks who decided to start treating the US citizens themselves as suspect terrorists? How can these folks suggest such a thing and still remaining your elected leaders
And then we wonder why Americans are stereotyped as being dumb...
Because what you are unable to comprehend is that *those* sting operations go after the actual pushers. If US Federals were actually conducting sting operations to catch henchmen, or potential drug buyers rather than the actual drug dealers and mafia bosses, it would be considered a complete waste of time.
Hint : Almost anyone can be convinced to commit a crime, if you soften them enough by bribing them or brain-washing them. Plenty of criminals can be bribed to plant a bomb or two for a few hundred thousand dollars, if they are convinced that they can get away with it. Unless you have dreamed up some magic cure for poverty, there is no point stuffing *those* guys into jail. The ones you need to go after are the actual instigators... the actual recruiters.
If they were conducting a sting operation by posing as potential terrorist candidates instead, and entrapping the recruiters, it would be much, much more useful. But that would mean actually risking one's neck and actually doing some real work.
And if you had a conspiracy theorist inclination, the best question to ask will be, why exactly is US government so sure that terrorist threat doesn't requires only real effort anymore... I mean if they can stoop this low, what is to stop them from justifying an actual terrorist attack or two being sponsored by FBI "so that we retain the powers we need by reminding people regards the need for power on terror"...
Who is to say that this sort of slippery slope of justification has not already been used in the past?
Kickbacks. If you as a govt official/senator/president/etc, spend govt. money(on pretext of "wars") to benefit your friends in the industries, you get a golden parachute and get a guaranteed place on the board of directors of some company with a hefty salary, and/or get nominated VP/Chairperson to more openly do your shilling and pimping. If you are a politician with any ambition, you get your next political campaign fully financed, as way of thanks.
If you have laws that pretty much strictly punish the govt. officials for benefiting in this manner, once they leave their jobs, you will find plenty of "wars" and problems out-right disappearing.
You think so? Clearly, you've not thought it through, then. Suppose someone is already subscribed to a social network and their situation changes; a spouse becomes violent, a repressive government decides they have said something too much or too far, they "whistleblow" on some illegal activity thereby making powerful enemies, they become victims of bullying, or perhaps they become a target of a private group such as white supremicists or the like. What then? I guess they should have known beforehand, eh? Or, what if they want to join in order to create a social group that discusses issues of considerable divisiveness? Must they expose their lives and their families to possible retribution from those who disagree, or is it your contention that if they don't hew to some imaginary set of safe subject matter you approve of, that they don't deserve to participate in a social network? Perhaps you're overdue for a re-think.
What you fail to realize is that the market size for these pills is fixed! Only cancer patients will buy the medicine for cancer. No amount of advertising will get a person who does not have cancer, to consume a prescribed drug for cancer. Capiche?
So all you are doing is just taking the customer base of your competitor. i.e. do not buy his pills, buy mine instead. This may or may not be avoidable, but it is virtually of zero benefit to the customer. If your pill was significantly better, the doctors will prescribe it and customer will even prefer it, without requiring aggressive marketing. Results will speak for themselves, and what matters most to the doctors is having a good reputation, so they will prescribe what is known to give really good results. If it is just nearly same as what competition has got, customer does not really benefits. You have just increased the cost for both yourself and your competitor, and ultimately the customer.
"Mr Sibal was angered by morphed photos of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi, as well as pigs running through Islam's holy city of Mecca"
They are just trying to avoid specifically referring to the Mohammed cartoons, to not kick up a shit-storm. But yeah, this is coming from the Muslims.
Feel free to be politically correct and mod me down.
But elections being this close, and due to the victory being uncertain because of corruption scandals, the ruling congress party in India is out to appease the muslims who vote en-masse.
And muslims have long since been against freedom of speech and expression of non-muslims. If Google complies, it gives them a tool to get those mohammed cartoons removed from internet permanently. "Gods worshiped in India" indeed. Save for some lunatic fringe groups, hindus in general, tend to usually ignore such stuff. Or at least, barring some peaceful protest, they are at least not out to kill the heretics.
You and Hollywood have been taking the word piracy a tad too literally. "Pirates" were guys who boarded your transport vehicle and made away with your goods.
The word what is actually applicable here is "theft" or "smuggling". Now tell me again, how theft/smuggling has ever been marginalized in the world "after some time", at any point in history.
If you try to regulate/restrict something that can be "stolen" easily, then no matter how many laws you pass, it will not stop that specific crime in any way. For most people, temptation is difficult to resist, and they will continuously find a way to commit the "crime" without being detected. And when inevitably such a way is found, they *will* commit the said "crime".
1. Anonymous should simply change their demand then. "We will continue to DDOS the websites unless the all the ministers in present government continue to occupy their position and stay in politics".
2. The Polish government will then announce that they refuse to give in to cyber terrorists and shall immediately resign en masse,and quit politics...
You seem to be logic impaired... or are not much familiar with USA. In USA it is completely legal to possess guns/weapons, unlike some of the other countries. In fact, it is a constitutional right. It is perfectly fine, for the government/TSA to however, not allow you to bring weapons in areas like airports or the white-house. But they cannot arrest you for merely carrying a legal registered weapon in USA. Much like smoking is legal, but you are not allowed to smoke in a plane from safety point of view. But you seem to be suggesting that TSA should supersede the constitution itself and arrest you for merely carrying weapons(registered or otherwise). (If not, then on what basis are you asking for TSA to detain people?).
Declaring cyber-war? Are you an illiterate or a total idiot? Did you even read the article you posted?
They said they are gearing up to defend themselves against the undeclared cyber-war that is being waged against them. Namely Pakistani/Chinese hacker groups.
Defending yourself against attacks is declaring cyber-war now? Wow! You are an idiot, regardless of whatever "connections" you see.
It is interesting that you think that India is an enemy for you. Last I checked, the only few countries which actually consider India an enemy were Pakistan and China. And that might explain your entire garbage post I guess.
The only bombshell here is that you fail to realize that Indian military wouldn't trust foreign companies like Norton, Symantec etc. without having access to source code, to ensure there is no key-logger style functionality etc. transmitting sensitive stuff to USA spy agencies.
And why do you think it is unreliable or will stop working? Slow is not an issue for most of the educational apps. There is also a difference in expectation of speed when reading a book, and when playing angry birds.
What you are unable to grasp is that these tablets are intended for kids/folks who have NOT used a tablet/PC ever in their life. They do not have any per-conceived expectations regards speed/responsiveness. The computers that were around in the 80s and 90s, in no way compare to the laptops you may own now. You will throw those old ones in trash, if someone gave you one for free. But back in that time period, they were just fine.
I really cannot understand the "let them eat cake" mentality. There ARE kids in rural areas of India, who want to study but usually don't get the opportunity due to school being many miles away(with no roads) and inability to even buy books. And you have no idea about the sheer population v/s size of India either. The government just doesn't have the kinds of resources to make it happen. But put in a solar panel in a village(already done in many places), and even one such tablet can help those kids, if government can make it cheap enough for mass distribution...
See the kids gathered around the screens? Those are actual really really low end PCs embedded in the walls. They work just fine for the purpose intended. They do not stop working and are pretty usable, for the definition of use intended.
I am not venting off at you in particular. It is the simply non-comprehending, patronizing "let them eat cake" attitude of folks like you, who for some reason make assumptions that if it is not the latest Samsung galaxy tab or the IPhone 4gs, it just won't work, and the people in Indian government are just dumb folks, who are investing in tablets that stop working after 2 weeks. (Hint : they are just very very slow, and you need patience to work with them. But they are reliable).
>>They already know how to run their lives, thank you very much. They don't need me to tell them anything.
But you seem pretty content to tell us what we should or should not buy, and what we should be allowed to have, eh?
Here is a clue. One of the many uses for this tablet is to get them on internet, and have educational apps/websites to help teach poor illiterate kids in villages, where there is serious lack of educational material, and even teachers. It is about giving them an opportunity.
Having a cheap affordable tablet can help the government to distribute one in practically every village, and provide current information to those who would not have it otherwise.
It is incredible, how an arrogant know-it-all like you, who has no idea whatsoever about the ground realities in India, feels compelled to spout off his patronizing opinions in any case, without understanding the least bit what use these tablets are meant for. (hint : it is not for playing angry birds!).
Because if US companies are the ones writing USA laws, in total disregard for jurisdictions or possibility of abuse, etc. then it is entirely feasible that they can eventually move this up a notch and get a kill-switch enabled in say microsoft windows, MS Office. Oracle databases, whathaveyou and simply put the Competitor's entire network/infra-structure out of commission. "Pay up or we disable that oracle database, the moment it connects to internet for updates, license be damned".
Internet, like say managing international flights, is too much of a global thing to be controlled by any one country. World was playing along on the premise that USA was not abusing its control of internet, so far, and thus was trusted to follow a fair approach. The moment you start abusing that power, you lose everyone's trust and force them to look for alternative solutions, thus causing the internet to splinter. Worse, it says that "we don't at all respect your own laws or even international trade laws/norms etc!"
And when USA abuses in such a blatant manner, the trust in one thing, why should it at all be trusted in others? Is it supposed to be "Oh we screwed you with the internet thing, but please become entrenched with our proprietary software, till you just can't function without them, and do continue hoping we won't screw you there as well"?
>>There will always be a doomsday scenario about why Russia is better than the US or will nuke the US, Japan is better, South America, China, whoever. It's always the same crap.
Are you old enough to have been around the Cuban missile crisis? Just wondering...
If your law makers are already this insane and so blatantly for sale, who is to say that they may not pass a law enabling a built-in kill-switch for say whatever proprietary OS or telecommunications solution is being used heavily in some other country, just so that they can enforce their latest extortion scheme?
Any country with slightest amount of sense will dump US based proprietary software products immediately, and move to open-source to escape this.
Let me see... I have a site that does not violate any of the laws of *my* country... but a company in USA can just cook up a case and get it shut down regardless, in an instant.
And all this because, the internet is controlled by USA. So does this law passes out of any US national security concerns? Does it take into account of juridictions etc? Nope. This is done at behest of some corporate suits, who want to buy yet another island somewhere.
Direct implication : USA based companies are writing the US laws, and if I use US based products, my competitor can simply disrupt my business, if someday, they manage to pass yet another law that gives such a power to them. Inference. Do NOT use USA based products, since US laws can now be simply purchased by your competitors, and can be completely in violation of international norms or even fairness.
One of the major arguments for SOPA have been the trillions of dollars of theoretical losses of sales by the Media companies. As has been pointed out repeatedly ad nauseum, these losses are only theoretical.
But has someone on the senate actually done some estimation of possible loss of revenue, if the internet actually becomes splintered and USA loses its control? Or of even more foreign governments just turning to open source solutions, instead of to, say Microsoft? China, for example, is a big competitor already for the control of internet. They control a sizable part of it already. Let us say that they actually get it in their head to actually set up an alternate mechanism and act as the controlling authority? Even USA doesn't really dares to stand up to them... so all in all, we are talking of China ultimately controlling the distribution of said media/softwares, and who knows what terms they will set for the USA based companies?
I will admit that chances of above happening are remote at the moment. But what are these media folks, and their employees in the senate, smoking? Why even take the chance?
Slashdot Mirror
.
I mean, just a good old x-ray should be sufficient if you prove that you are a citizen(with help of SSN, passport, birthcerificate or whatever). And if the US government thinks that some terrorists(like that guy from pakistan) have acquired US citizenship, then maybe they should fix that process regards granting of citizenship in the first place? If you feel the need to cover fringe cases like the pakistani guy, shouldn't your surveillance and extra security measures cover at least just those first generation immigrants instead, instead of treating the entire populace as terrorist scums?
If someone questions why such a big issue is being made of 5000 people dying when hundreds of thousands die in just road accidents every year, he is slimed for being "insensitive" to the families of those 5000. Fine, but how on earth do you guys turn a blind eye when some rich politicians decide to cash in on the tragedy and suffering of those same families to sell fake expensive equipment in name of security theater and kickbacks? Is THAT not insensitive? Is that not shameful? Is that not a disgrace?
Seriously, why on earth are there no serious protests against folks who decided to start treating the US citizens themselves as suspect terrorists? How can these folks suggest such a thing and still remaining your elected leaders
And then we wonder why Americans are stereotyped as being dumb...
Dear idiot, youtube was setup by 3 ex-paypal-employees and was merely bought by google in 2006. But don't let the facts come in way of your trolling.
Hint : Almost anyone can be convinced to commit a crime, if you soften them enough by bribing them or brain-washing them. Plenty of criminals can be bribed to plant a bomb or two for a few hundred thousand dollars, if they are convinced that they can get away with it. Unless you have dreamed up some magic cure for poverty, there is no point stuffing *those* guys into jail. The ones you need to go after are the actual instigators... the actual recruiters.
If they were conducting a sting operation by posing as potential terrorist candidates instead, and entrapping the recruiters, it would be much, much more useful. But that would mean actually risking one's neck and actually doing some real work.
And if you had a conspiracy theorist inclination, the best question to ask will be, why exactly is US government so sure that terrorist threat doesn't requires only real effort anymore... I mean if they can stoop this low, what is to stop them from justifying an actual terrorist attack or two being sponsored by FBI "so that we retain the powers we need by reminding people regards the need for power on terror"...
Who is to say that this sort of slippery slope of justification has not already been used in the past?
If you have laws that pretty much strictly punish the govt. officials for benefiting in this manner, once they leave their jobs, you will find plenty of "wars" and problems out-right disappearing.
Won't somebody please think of the idiots!!!
What you fail to realize is that the market size for these pills is fixed! Only cancer patients will buy the medicine for cancer. No amount of advertising will get a person who does not have cancer, to consume a prescribed drug for cancer. Capiche?
So all you are doing is just taking the customer base of your competitor. i.e. do not buy his pills, buy mine instead. This may or may not be avoidable, but it is virtually of zero benefit to the customer. If your pill was significantly better, the doctors will prescribe it and customer will even prefer it, without requiring aggressive marketing. Results will speak for themselves, and what matters most to the doctors is having a good reputation, so they will prescribe what is known to give really good results. If it is just nearly same as what competition has got, customer does not really benefits. You have just increased the cost for both yourself and your competitor, and ultimately the customer.
Nature usually does it best! Would that more of our scientists tried harder to get their cues from it, rather than trying to fight it or destroy it.
Yup, it has more or less nothing to do with the Hindus, and everything to do with the easily-offended Muslims.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-16903765
"Mr Sibal was angered by morphed photos of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi, as well as pigs running through Islam's holy city of Mecca"
They are just trying to avoid specifically referring to the Mohammed cartoons, to not kick up a shit-storm. But yeah, this is coming from the Muslims.
Feel free to be politically correct and mod me down.
But elections being this close, and due to the victory being uncertain because of corruption scandals, the ruling congress party in India is out to appease the muslims who vote en-masse.
And muslims have long since been against freedom of speech and expression of non-muslims. If Google complies, it gives them a tool to get those mohammed cartoons removed from internet permanently. "Gods worshiped in India" indeed. Save for some lunatic fringe groups, hindus in general, tend to usually ignore such stuff. Or at least, barring some peaceful protest, they are at least not out to kill the heretics.
Nice read. Just one issue.
You and Hollywood have been taking the word piracy a tad too literally. "Pirates" were guys who boarded your transport vehicle and made away with your goods.
The word what is actually applicable here is "theft" or "smuggling". Now tell me again, how theft/smuggling has ever been marginalized in the world "after some time", at any point in history.
If you try to regulate/restrict something that can be "stolen" easily, then no matter how many laws you pass, it will not stop that specific crime in any way. For most people, temptation is difficult to resist, and they will continuously find a way to commit the "crime" without being detected. And when inevitably such a way is found, they *will* commit the said "crime".
I give up... what is the difference?
1. Anonymous should simply change their demand then. "We will continue to DDOS the websites unless the all the ministers in present government continue to occupy their position and stay in politics".
2. The Polish government will then announce that they refuse to give in to cyber terrorists and shall immediately resign en masse,and quit politics...
3. Profit!
He was put under arrest in a cubicle and was prevented from leaving, when he wanted to.
Right... because US sentaors are well-known for wanting to blow up planes, they are flying in.
Are you seriously this daft?
You seem to be logic impaired... or are not much familiar with USA. In USA it is completely legal to possess guns/weapons, unlike some of the other countries. In fact, it is a constitutional right. It is perfectly fine, for the government/TSA to however, not allow you to bring weapons in areas like airports or the white-house. But they cannot arrest you for merely carrying a legal registered weapon in USA. Much like smoking is legal, but you are not allowed to smoke in a plane from safety point of view. But you seem to be suggesting that TSA should supersede the constitution itself and arrest you for merely carrying weapons(registered or otherwise). (If not, then on what basis are you asking for TSA to detain people?).
Declaring cyber-war? Are you an illiterate or a total idiot? Did you even read the article you posted?
They said they are gearing up to defend themselves against the undeclared cyber-war that is being waged against them. Namely Pakistani/Chinese hacker groups.
Defending yourself against attacks is declaring cyber-war now? Wow! You are an idiot, regardless of whatever "connections" you see.
It is interesting that you think that India is an enemy for you. Last I checked, the only few countries which actually consider India an enemy were Pakistan and China. And that might explain your entire garbage post I guess.
The only bombshell here is that you fail to realize that Indian military wouldn't trust foreign companies like Norton, Symantec etc. without having access to source code, to ensure there is no key-logger style functionality etc. transmitting sensitive stuff to USA spy agencies.
And why do you think it is unreliable or will stop working? Slow is not an issue for most of the educational apps. There is also a difference in expectation of speed when reading a book, and when playing angry birds.
What you are unable to grasp is that these tablets are intended for kids/folks who have NOT used a tablet/PC ever in their life. They do not have any per-conceived expectations regards speed/responsiveness. The computers that were around in the 80s and 90s, in no way compare to the laptops you may own now. You will throw those old ones in trash, if someone gave you one for free. But back in that time period, they were just fine.
I really cannot understand the "let them eat cake" mentality. There ARE kids in rural areas of India, who want to study but usually don't get the opportunity due to school being many miles away(with no roads) and inability to even buy books. And you have no idea about the sheer population v/s size of India either. The government just doesn't have the kinds of resources to make it happen. But put in a solar panel in a village(already done in many places), and even one such tablet can help those kids, if government can make it cheap enough for mass distribution...
Here is one example of what I am talking about :
http://blogs.worldbank.org/files/edutech/hiwel_050.jpg
See the kids gathered around the screens? Those are actual really really low end PCs embedded in the walls. They work just fine for the purpose intended. They do not stop working and are pretty usable, for the definition of use intended.
I am not venting off at you in particular. It is the simply non-comprehending, patronizing "let them eat cake" attitude of folks like you, who for some reason make assumptions that if it is not the latest Samsung galaxy tab or the IPhone 4gs, it just won't work, and the people in Indian government are just dumb folks, who are investing in tablets that stop working after 2 weeks. (Hint : they are just very very slow, and you need patience to work with them. But they are reliable).
>>They already know how to run their lives, thank you very much. They don't need me to tell them anything.
But you seem pretty content to tell us what we should or should not buy, and what we should be allowed to have, eh?
Here is a clue. One of the many uses for this tablet is to get them on internet, and have educational apps/websites to help teach poor illiterate kids in villages, where there is serious lack of educational material, and even teachers. It is about giving them an opportunity.
Having a cheap affordable tablet can help the government to distribute one in practically every village, and provide current information to those who would not have it otherwise.
It is incredible, how an arrogant know-it-all like you, who has no idea whatsoever about the ground realities in India, feels compelled to spout off his patronizing opinions in any case, without understanding the least bit what use these tablets are meant for. (hint : it is not for playing angry birds!).
Because if US companies are the ones writing USA laws, in total disregard for jurisdictions or possibility of abuse, etc. then it is entirely feasible that they can eventually move this up a notch and get a kill-switch enabled in say microsoft windows, MS Office. Oracle databases, whathaveyou and simply put the Competitor's entire network/infra-structure out of commission. "Pay up or we disable that oracle database, the moment it connects to internet for updates, license be damned".
Internet, like say managing international flights, is too much of a global thing to be controlled by any one country. World was playing along on the premise that USA was not abusing its control of internet, so far, and thus was trusted to follow a fair approach. The moment you start abusing that power, you lose everyone's trust and force them to look for alternative solutions, thus causing the internet to splinter. Worse, it says that "we don't at all respect your own laws or even international trade laws/norms etc!"
And when USA abuses in such a blatant manner, the trust in one thing, why should it at all be trusted in others? Is it supposed to be "Oh we screwed you with the internet thing, but please become entrenched with our proprietary software, till you just can't function without them, and do continue hoping we won't screw you there as well"?
It is all about trust.
I assume that answers your query well enough.
>>There will always be a doomsday scenario about why Russia is better than the US or will nuke the US, Japan is better, South America, China, whoever. It's always the same crap.
Are you old enough to have been around the Cuban missile crisis? Just wondering...
If your law makers are already this insane and so blatantly for sale, who is to say that they may not pass a law enabling a built-in kill-switch for say whatever proprietary OS or telecommunications solution is being used heavily in some other country, just so that they can enforce their latest extortion scheme?
Any country with slightest amount of sense will dump US based proprietary software products immediately, and move to open-source to escape this.
Let me see... I have a site that does not violate any of the laws of *my* country... but a company in USA can just cook up a case and get it shut down regardless, in an instant.
And all this because, the internet is controlled by USA. So does this law passes out of any US national security concerns? Does it take into account of juridictions etc? Nope. This is done at behest of some corporate suits, who want to buy yet another island somewhere.
Direct implication : USA based companies are writing the US laws, and if I use US based products, my competitor can simply disrupt my business, if someday, they manage to pass yet another law that gives such a power to them. Inference. Do NOT use USA based products, since US laws can now be simply purchased by your competitors, and can be completely in violation of international norms or even fairness.
One of the major arguments for SOPA have been the trillions of dollars of theoretical losses of sales by the Media companies. As has been pointed out repeatedly ad nauseum, these losses are only theoretical.
But has someone on the senate actually done some estimation of possible loss of revenue, if the internet actually becomes splintered and USA loses its control? Or of even more foreign governments just turning to open source solutions, instead of to, say Microsoft? China, for example, is a big competitor already for the control of internet. They control a sizable part of it already. Let us say that they actually get it in their head to actually set up an alternate mechanism and act as the controlling authority? Even USA doesn't really dares to stand up to them... so all in all, we are talking of China ultimately controlling the distribution of said media/softwares, and who knows what terms they will set for the USA based companies?
I will admit that chances of above happening are remote at the moment. But what are these media folks, and their employees in the senate, smoking? Why even take the chance?
>>In the meanwhile, I'm more worried about the survivors of those dead worlds, who are on their way here.
That is perfectly okay. They will land a job in a newspaper somewhere...and wear their underwear outside their pants!