Yo dawg! I heard you liked monitoring people so we got some monitoring people to monitor your monitoring people so you can monitor your monitoring people while you monitor people!
Yo dawg! I heard you like policing your state so we got you some police to police your police so you can police your police while you police your state!
TFA Headline: "Three former NSA workers accused of aiding Snowden"
A more responsible headline: "The rest of the NSA accused of violating the Fourth Amendment rights of the entire nation, undermining the interests of the nation and its people, and destabilizing the checks and balances keeping the nation strong for over two centuries."
> Others Implicated in Making Snowden Data Leaks Possible
Since Snowden mentioned Clapper's lying to Congress got him to release the documents, I'd start by implicating Clapper.
From there it's hard not to implicate the Presidents who didn't honor their pledge to uphold the Constitution. Congress. Decision-makers within the NSA.
Without all of them, there would be nothing for Snowden to release.
Those oils sands are already being dug up and processed, and the market is not going to let anything get in the way of that.
Specifically, US regulators have no business getting in the way of that, because it's in Canada. Obama can't do anything to stop that.
He could increase funding to public transportation and decrease subsidies to oil, which would decrease demand and therefore funds. I suspect decreasing military funding and other welfare would decrease demand. He could manate increased car and building efficiency. He could increase funding to renewable energies.
Off the top of my head I can see many ways Obama can at least decrease it.
They are a kangaroo rubber-stamp court objecting to doing other than what they were appointed to do, which is to unthinkingly say yes. I can't imagine anyone with any pride in their country feeling anything other than overwhelming shame and disgust for their role in this banana-republic activity. Except self-interested cronies.
Since they could be replaced by a rubber stamp that said "Yes" with nearly no change to what the court does except to save probably tens of millions of dollars per year, they're probably concerned about losing their jobs.
Can you imagine what Jefferson or John Adams would say about this possibly unconstitutional corruption of justice? This court could scarcely be farther from their ideals. Of course they're united in opposition. They're united because their bosses gave them all the same instructions. Why would we expect any one of them to say or act independently of anyone else?
> "He also said the program, far from being unnecessary, could prevent the next 9/11."
Why stop there? If you put everyone in jail you'll prevent attacks too.
And give us all tracking collars and big bonuses for yourself and your crony pals for the contracts to fulfill all the work.
As long as we don't consider unintended consequences, history, or conflicting interests like the Constitution and public opinion, expanding surveillance makes a lot of sense.
Then again, the slightest thought to any of these things makes him sound like a total idiot, if not a traitor.
It's time to demand Clapper be hauled away in handcuffs
Blaming one scapegoat will not resolve the deep deep deep corruption in our governing system(s). Short of a complete revolution with heads rolling, it would be futile and would only serve the propagandists.
I read the comment not as scapegoating someone but as applying the law to everyone and attaching responsibility and accountability to decisions people make. If nothing else, Clapper lied to Congress. NSA programs have been found illegal. If behavior like that doesn't at least lead to a trial, why won't others follow suit? They certainly benefit from growing their bureaucracies so they have motivation to.
You don't think the smoking carcass would own all of the patents and make it impossible for a bunch of new startups to get into the industry?
Patents are assets. Assets are auctioned off in bankruptcy. The owner of a patent benefits from licensing the patent for fees, not from sitting on a patent and preventing anyone from using it.
-jcr
First, patents allow you to prevent other companies from doing what you patented, which lowers competition and the threat of new entrants, so just sitting on them, perhaps writing "Patented" on your product or marketing materials to alert potential competitors, can add value to a company.
Second, they can be assets, but they have costs too, which can be significant, so they can be liabilities too.
If we are to be honest rather than PC, whites were the reason South Africa was the most developed country in Africa (by far) and not a mess of poverty, crime, war, disease, violence and disease like every other African country.
The climate and terrain may have more to with it than you think. They probably both account for the greater potential for prosperity and why Europeans were able to recreate social structures successfully there. They tried elsewhere in Africa, but failed. Same with southern Australia. Nobody created the climate and terrain, they were already there.
From Wikipedia: "The extreme southwest has a climate remarkably similar to that of the Mediterranean with wet winters and hot, dry summers, hosting the famous Fynbos biome of shrubland and thicket. This area also produces much of the wine in South Africa... With more than 20,000 different plants, or about 10% of all the known species of plants on Earth, South Africa is particularly rich in plant diversity... The Fynbos biome, which makes up the majority of the area and plant life in the Cape floristic region, one of the six floral kingdoms, is located in a small region of the Western Cape and contains more than 9,000 of those species, making it among the richest regions on earth in terms of plant diversity..."... not sure how much credit Europeans can take for that.
Supply and demand aren't exactly on their side either, as there are a lot of people making music out there.
It's tough to fight supply and demand for pricing.
On top of that, a lot of guys in bands get groupies, which probably motivates many of them. Throw in free beer and free admission to the clubs they play in and you're going to have a hard time decreasing the supply of music.
I'm sorry but there's no difference between livestock (chicken, cows, horses, etc...) and experiment sujects (mice, chimps, dogs, etc...)
Yes, none of them is a legal person. Monsanto, however, is.
Figure that out and what it means about the values of our legal system.
Most posts so far are comparing chimpanzees to other animals, like humans and rats, ignoring that we've already given person status to entities that have no physical body, let alone a brain.
Easy solution: Ban the use of antibiotics in the meat industry.
Of course then people wouldn't get their insanely cheap meat anymore.
Boohoo - what a disaster.
Actually, given the simultaneous problem of expensive meat and people dying, Jonathan Swift had a modest proposal almost 300 years ago that would solve both problems in a single, delicious, soylent step.
Let's get real. The worst christians is Westboro Baptist Church and what do they do? Protest funerals and tell everyone how gay lovers will burn in hell. Let's try an experiment: Paint Jesus in Feces in a Christian country and see what the worst thing that will happen to you as a result? Next, pain Mohammed in feces and see what will happen to you in a Muslim country. Or even a European one (death threats anyone)?
Oh wait, you were trying to make a lame attempt at equating the two.
George W. Bush: 'God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq'
> One of the delegates, Nabil Shaath, who was Palestinian foreign minister at the time, said: "President Bush said to all of us: 'I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did."
> Mr Bush went on: "And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And, by God, I'm gonna do it."
Invading nations for religious beliefs seems serious. I don't think Bush was talking about Allah. Westboro Baptist Church isn't in his league.
Situations like these prompt people to suggest we use MLK's kids behavior to judge the content of their character.
As ironic and clever as such remarks sound, they miss the big picture. These problems happen because we have a copyright system that tries to shoehorn recordings and ideas into a legal framework designed for tangible objects. The legal morass would entangle nearly anyone into such messes.
We're seeing the result of a broken system. To blame the children misses that point.
Just one example from the article: "The estate claims in the filing that it is the owner of the worldwide rights and property interests involving King's name, image, likeness, recorded voice and memorabilia."
Just think of the challenge of corralling things like the use of a name like King or an image of someone who perpetually put himself in the public eye, in front of cameras. Now throw in that new media with new distribution properties exist today that no one could have conceived of then. Combine that with the legal framework designed for physical objects. Maybe when MLK was alive he could have managed these things since it was him, but now people can only guess at what he would want and argue over differences, not that they have to follow what he wants because the law says other people own rights to things like his "likeness."
I'd make the headline "IP laws so outdated and twisted, they sink even MLK's family into a legal swamp".
Slashdot Mirror
"and yet I have never been infected, although online for hours each day."
There is a great, big difference between "have never been infected" and "have never been infected that I know of"
It also says nothing about whether their computer has been infected.
By the principle of "Quality, price, speed, pick any two," when you ask for price and speed, just know what you're asking for.
Yo dawg! I heard you liked monitoring people so we got some monitoring people to monitor your monitoring people so you can monitor your monitoring people while you monitor people!
Yo dawg! I heard you like policing your state so we got you some police to police your police so you can police your police while you police your state!
Reviews so far sound suspiciously like
No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
But personally I'll hold out until it runs Linux. I don't need backdoors watching everything I watch.
TFA Headline: "Three former NSA workers accused of aiding Snowden"
A more responsible headline: "The rest of the NSA accused of violating the Fourth Amendment rights of the entire nation, undermining the interests of the nation and its people, and destabilizing the checks and balances keeping the nation strong for over two centuries."
> Others Implicated in Making Snowden Data Leaks Possible
Since Snowden mentioned Clapper's lying to Congress got him to release the documents, I'd start by implicating Clapper.
From there it's hard not to implicate the Presidents who didn't honor their pledge to uphold the Constitution. Congress. Decision-makers within the NSA.
Without all of them, there would be nothing for Snowden to release.
Those oils sands are already being dug up and processed, and the market is not going to let anything get in the way of that.
Specifically, US regulators have no business getting in the way of that, because it's in Canada. Obama can't do anything to stop that.
He could increase funding to public transportation and decrease subsidies to oil, which would decrease demand and therefore funds. I suspect decreasing military funding and other welfare would decrease demand. He could manate increased car and building efficiency. He could increase funding to renewable energies.
Off the top of my head I can see many ways Obama can at least decrease it.
I was going to suggest it would soon be easier to list what online communications they don't collect, but I think we passed that point a while ago.
Is there any online privacy they show signs of respecting?
Do they see any reason not to do what they're doing? I mean, the Fourth Amendment didn't seem like much of a road block.
They are a kangaroo rubber-stamp court objecting to doing other than what they were appointed to do, which is to unthinkingly say yes. I can't imagine anyone with any pride in their country feeling anything other than overwhelming shame and disgust for their role in this banana-republic activity. Except self-interested cronies.
Since they could be replaced by a rubber stamp that said "Yes" with nearly no change to what the court does except to save probably tens of millions of dollars per year, they're probably concerned about losing their jobs.
Can you imagine what Jefferson or John Adams would say about this possibly unconstitutional corruption of justice? This court could scarcely be farther from their ideals. Of course they're united in opposition. They're united because their bosses gave them all the same instructions. Why would we expect any one of them to say or act independently of anyone else?
> Stormy Alien Atmospheres May Spark Seeds of Life
Life started at least once here, why not elsewhere?
With any luck we'll achieve intelligent life before them too, but I'm not holding my breath.
> "he used to describe leaker Edward Snowden as a "defector""
He is a defector. Away from the rogue near-nation of the NSA and toward the United States' Constitution.
... still think the world was made by an omnipotent being in 7 days ...
6 days.
On the seventh day he ate pasta, probably noodly.
> "He also said the program, far from being unnecessary, could prevent the next 9/11."
Why stop there? If you put everyone in jail you'll prevent attacks too.
And give us all tracking collars and big bonuses for yourself and your crony pals for the contracts to fulfill all the work.
As long as we don't consider unintended consequences, history, or conflicting interests like the Constitution and public opinion, expanding surveillance makes a lot of sense.
Then again, the slightest thought to any of these things makes him sound like a total idiot, if not a traitor.
I think this is a case where Poe's Law applies.
I think this is a case where whoosh! applies.
About 40 people I was going to hire to start this business won't see the light of day.
Where do you keep these candidates and why not let them have some sunlight even if you don't hire them?
It's time to demand Clapper be hauled away in handcuffs
Blaming one scapegoat will not resolve the deep deep deep corruption in our governing system(s). Short of a complete revolution with heads rolling, it would be futile and would only serve the propagandists.
I read the comment not as scapegoating someone but as applying the law to everyone and attaching responsibility and accountability to decisions people make. If nothing else, Clapper lied to Congress. NSA programs have been found illegal. If behavior like that doesn't at least lead to a trial, why won't others follow suit? They certainly benefit from growing their bureaucracies so they have motivation to.
You don't think the smoking carcass would own all of the patents and make it impossible for a bunch of new startups to get into the industry?
Patents are assets. Assets are auctioned off in bankruptcy. The owner of a patent benefits from licensing the patent for fees, not from sitting on a patent and preventing anyone from using it.
-jcr
First, patents allow you to prevent other companies from doing what you patented, which lowers competition and the threat of new entrants, so just sitting on them, perhaps writing "Patented" on your product or marketing materials to alert potential competitors, can add value to a company.
Second, they can be assets, but they have costs too, which can be significant, so they can be liabilities too.
the NSA sent Grassley a letter with details of the 12 LOVEINT incidents it has uncovered since 2003.
The NSA self-reporting 12 incidents is like finding 12 cockroaches in your pantry. You know there are uncountably more scurrying around.
Except for one thing. The cockroaches aren't nearly as disgusting.
If we are to be honest rather than PC, whites were the reason South Africa was the most developed country in Africa (by far) and not a mess of poverty, crime, war, disease, violence and disease like every other African country.
The climate and terrain may have more to with it than you think. They probably both account for the greater potential for prosperity and why Europeans were able to recreate social structures successfully there. They tried elsewhere in Africa, but failed. Same with southern Australia. Nobody created the climate and terrain, they were already there.
From Wikipedia: "The extreme southwest has a climate remarkably similar to that of the Mediterranean with wet winters and hot, dry summers, hosting the famous Fynbos biome of shrubland and thicket. This area also produces much of the wine in South Africa... With more than 20,000 different plants, or about 10% of all the known species of plants on Earth, South Africa is particularly rich in plant diversity... The Fynbos biome, which makes up the majority of the area and plant life in the Cape floristic region, one of the six floral kingdoms, is located in a small region of the Western Cape and contains more than 9,000 of those species, making it among the richest regions on earth in terms of plant diversity..." ... not sure how much credit Europeans can take for that.
Supply and demand aren't exactly on their side either, as there are a lot of people making music out there.
It's tough to fight supply and demand for pricing.
On top of that, a lot of guys in bands get groupies, which probably motivates many of them. Throw in free beer and free admission to the clubs they play in and you're going to have a hard time decreasing the supply of music.
I'm sorry but there's no difference between livestock (chicken, cows, horses, etc...) and experiment sujects (mice, chimps, dogs, etc...)
Yes, none of them is a legal person. Monsanto, however, is.
Figure that out and what it means about the values of our legal system.
Most posts so far are comparing chimpanzees to other animals, like humans and rats, ignoring that we've already given person status to entities that have no physical body, let alone a brain.
Easy solution: Ban the use of antibiotics in the meat industry.
Of course then people wouldn't get their insanely cheap meat anymore.
Boohoo - what a disaster.
Actually, given the simultaneous problem of expensive meat and people dying, Jonathan Swift had a modest proposal almost 300 years ago that would solve both problems in a single, delicious, soylent step.
Let's get real. The worst christians is Westboro Baptist Church and what do they do? Protest funerals and tell everyone how gay lovers will burn in hell. Let's try an experiment: Paint Jesus in Feces in a Christian country and see what the worst thing that will happen to you as a result? Next, pain Mohammed in feces and see what will happen to you in a Muslim country. Or even a European one (death threats anyone)?
Oh wait, you were trying to make a lame attempt at equating the two.
George W. Bush: 'God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq'
From http://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa:
> One of the delegates, Nabil Shaath, who was Palestinian foreign minister at the time, said: "President Bush said to all of us: 'I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did."
> Mr Bush went on: "And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And, by God, I'm gonna do it."
Invading nations for religious beliefs seems serious. I don't think Bush was talking about Allah. Westboro Baptist Church isn't in his league.
"You're going to need a bigger shark."
Situations like these prompt people to suggest we use MLK's kids behavior to judge the content of their character.
As ironic and clever as such remarks sound, they miss the big picture. These problems happen because we have a copyright system that tries to shoehorn recordings and ideas into a legal framework designed for tangible objects. The legal morass would entangle nearly anyone into such messes.
We're seeing the result of a broken system. To blame the children misses that point.
Just one example from the article: "The estate claims in the filing that it is the owner of the worldwide rights and property interests involving King's name, image, likeness, recorded voice and memorabilia."
Just think of the challenge of corralling things like the use of a name like King or an image of someone who perpetually put himself in the public eye, in front of cameras. Now throw in that new media with new distribution properties exist today that no one could have conceived of then. Combine that with the legal framework designed for physical objects. Maybe when MLK was alive he could have managed these things since it was him, but now people can only guess at what he would want and argue over differences, not that they have to follow what he wants because the law says other people own rights to things like his "likeness."
I'd make the headline "IP laws so outdated and twisted, they sink even MLK's family into a legal swamp".