I think the real story here is that the federal government has become so corrupt and has debased our rights under the US Constitution that we're now having to use state constitutions to defend our freedoms.
(a) It is not the defendent's decision to be charged with a federal or state crime. (b) A not guilty verdict on a state charge doesn't in any way protect one from a subsequent guilty verdict on a federal charge.
So, in summary (a) there is no turning to state courts and (b) even if there was, it wouldn't protect against a federal court ruling.
So true, and the burqa ban isn't bigoted for the same reason, since I'm not allowed to wear it as well... Burqa is additionally banned in public by a *different* law.
Lol, did that red herring taste good? "same reason " != "different law." And, as far as I can tell, the law against religious parphenalia was invalided in the 90s becuse of selective enforcement which let the crucifixes pass.
Burqa is additionally banned in public by a *different* law ("Loi interdisant la dissimulation du visage dans l'espace public") as an illegal form of covering your face, which can be used to, e.g., commit crimes while hiding your identity.
Yes, because there has been such a crime-wave of burkha wearing bandits, it was absolutely necessary to get this law passed right quick.
Well then, your entire argument falls apart without that premise because no amount of hand-waving about negatives and positives swaying perception can buttress the claim that politicians must be enabled to lie in order to get re-elected.
Actually, you're not allowed to wear a burqa there *irrespective* of your race, not only if you're an Arab. There's nothing racist about the ban.
Really? Does your brain really work that way such that you can't see the utter hypocrisy in what you just wrote? Here's a clue for you - if they banned wearing a crucfix, that wouldn't be bigoted either since everyone, not just catholics, would not be allowed to wear a crucifix. Or how about the yarmulke? Banning that wouldn't be racist either since it would apply to everyone, not just jews.
Still don't get it? Then the only reasonable conclusion is that you are a bigot.
The true problem is that instead of FOIA being used by journalists or investigators for specific issues, they are used by political firms who are trying to dig up dirt on the "other side" (and most of those FOIA requests are overly broad to boot). Throw away #3 and the FOIA process isn't a zoo anymore. Let reputable journalists investigate, not anonymous trolls who get paid to encourage the other side to waste time.
Do you have any evidence of this being a systemic problem? And I don't just mean that "anonymous trolls" (whatever that is) make too many (whatever that is) FOIA requests, but that the goal of digging up dirt is ultimately bad for society.
No one can get re-elected. And the problem is not just the union. I don't know of a single congressional district where you have 50%+1 agreement on a wide range of issues.
Am I reading you right? You think that because the majority of the population aren't in full agreement on most issues that politicians need to be able to lie to the population in order to get re-elected? Really? WTF? Do you seriously think that voters are not already aware that the people they vote for don't necessarily match them on each and every issue? That voters already pick the candidate they have the most agreement with, not total agreement?
So, it seems that not only does McDonalds in Paris have some strange issues with cameras, but judging from these comments, a surprising number of French people are racist.
It isn't about having a 3D printer handy after you are cuffed. It is about challenging the idea of physical security through obscurity. Handcuffs rely on a "shared secret" of the physical key, that's why the manufacturers go to great lengths to control distribution of those keys. But 3D printers make it practical to turn that physical key into data, and at that point all of the problems of security through obscurity of information start to apply to a formerly physical security model.
In other words, all it takes is for one person to "scan" a key and upload it to the internet and now it is orders of magnitude more likely that someone will have a copy of the key on their person, perhaps disguised as jewlery or just in stuck in their pockets, that will let themselves unlock their cuffs while sitting in the back of a police car.
Do you really believe that the US is falling apart?
Yes. A fundamental part of what has made American society great has changed over the last 40 years - upward mobility. Rates of upward mobility have plummetted. Our system of meritocracy has become just another form of aristocracy where the rich are able to give their kids the skills to compete on merit but the children of the poor are left out - no SAT prep, no AP courses, no extra-curricular activities, etc.
What has followed is a false equivalence that success on the narrow scales of our meritocracy (such as standardized testing, high GPAs and ultimately the accumulation of wealth) makes people good decision makers in more broader, complicated areas -- that the expertise which has served a person well enough to make millions on wall-street is also going to make their opionions on things like social policy wise and considered.
2) When they redirect a residential customer to the security problem page, it's not going to just redirect the infected machine, it will redirect all of your machines.
No it won't. Only the infected machines are using the bogus nameservers.
Yep, that's what a lot people think and it sure fits the stereotypical corporate mentality. But, it really isn't that hard to mitigate. Set the servers up to redirect to a warning page for only 1% of the ISP's address range per day or something in that ballpark. That reduces the flood of support calls down to something manageable.
Don't all of those ISPs play that dirty trick of redirecting failed DNS lookups to advertising? Why don't they just set their DNSchanger servers to redirect all lookups to some page telling the user that their system is infected and how to download a tool to fix it?
Sure it will break everything but http(s) but if they are happy to do it for money why aren't they happy to do it for the common good?
[quote]The prime example of an industry that really does need such protection is pharmaceuticals. The reasons are threefold....
Second, and related, the patent term begins to run when the invention is made and patented, yet the drug testing, which must be completed before the drug can be sold, often takes 10 or more years. This shortens the effective patent term,...[/quote]
Huhwhat? Big pharma needs patents because they can't exploit the current patent system enough? An article that starts off which such a blatant example of circular reasoning isn't something we should give much credence to, even if the rest of it validates our opinions.
That is a far cry from federal law. From the link you provided they don't even have any technical standards yet, but much less actual law. I don't see this one getting anywhere near passing for the simple reason that immediate detection and repair of emissions problems is not particularly useful. It is no really no big deal if some small fraction of cars have emissions problems, the point of emissions testing is to prevent widescale pollution not one-offs.
There is already a law on the books requiring a GPS device in every car
Oh please. If that were actually the case, there would have been a major hue and cry about it. Of course if you can actually cite such a law - GPS in every car - I will change my sig to say "grantspassalan is the smartest guy on slashdot." Since the actual law doesn't even require the logging of direction of travel, I'm pretty confident your name won't be appearing in my sig.
The average person will gladly lie, cheat, and steal (or worse), and is only stopped by immediate negative consequences for those actions. The average person should not be trusted - they'd take everything you had if they reasonably believed they could get away with it forever.
That is an argument that leads to fascism via technocracy. If it really were true we would never have developed as a civilization because the one thing necessary for civilization to work is trust. Not trust based on some version of hellfire and brimstone but the trust that while men are imperfect, we are fundamentally good-natured.
So, why aren't you just giving a fictitious name when you're having something shipped to your home? The USPS, et al, is fairly plug and play when it comes to adding "new" people to a domicile.
Because all it takes is one shipment with your name on it and the jig is up. You may not even have control over it, a relative could decide to send you a birthday present.
How do you know the Walmart isn't using ANPR and facial recognition on their ubiquitous CCTV cameras?
ANPR does not connect you to the purchase, just with everybody else in the parking lot, it is even less useful if you use a unique name for each order. Facial recognition is unreliable and requires a database of face to name matches which are few and expensive. But mailing address databases are everywhere since any commercial transaction is likely to get logged into one.
Sure it is diminishing returns, but your examples are a lot further down the line of risk/return trade-offs.
As best I can tell there have been no reported deaths. That doesn't completely rule out poisoning, but along with there being no actual threats or anyone claiming responsibility, it does lend credence to the idea of it just being hysteria.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the real story here is that the federal government has become so corrupt and has debased our rights under the US Constitution that we're now having to use state constitutions to defend our freedoms.
(a) It is not the defendent's decision to be charged with a federal or state crime.
(b) A not guilty verdict on a state charge doesn't in any way protect one from a subsequent guilty verdict on a federal charge.
So, in summary (a) there is no turning to state courts and (b) even if there was, it wouldn't protect against a federal court ruling.
So true, and the burqa ban isn't bigoted for the same reason, since I'm not allowed to wear it as well ... Burqa is additionally banned in public by a *different* law.
Lol, did that red herring taste good? "same reason " != "different law." And, as far as I can tell, the law against religious parphenalia was invalided in the 90s becuse of selective enforcement which let the crucifixes pass.
Burqa is additionally banned in public by a *different* law ("Loi interdisant la dissimulation du visage dans l'espace public") as an illegal form of covering your face, which can be used to, e.g., commit crimes while hiding your identity.
Yes, because there has been such a crime-wave of burkha wearing bandits, it was absolutely necessary to get this law passed right quick.
Ooh pedant for the fail. Substitute bigot for racist and go drink your milkshake.
No they don't do that.
Well then, your entire argument falls apart without that premise because no amount of hand-waving about negatives and positives swaying perception can buttress the claim that politicians must be enabled to lie in order to get re-elected.
Actually, you're not allowed to wear a burqa there *irrespective* of your race, not only if you're an Arab. There's nothing racist about the ban.
Really? Does your brain really work that way such that you can't see the utter hypocrisy in what you just wrote? Here's a clue for you - if they banned wearing a crucfix, that wouldn't be bigoted either since everyone, not just catholics, would not be allowed to wear a crucifix. Or how about the yarmulke? Banning that wouldn't be racist either since it would apply to everyone, not just jews.
Still don't get it? Then the only reasonable conclusion is that you are a bigot.
They also used to be banned in Turkey. I guess that makes them racist too.
Do you really need to have someone point out there is a forest in front of you when all you can see are trees?
The true problem is that instead of FOIA being used by journalists or investigators for specific issues, they are used by political firms who are trying to dig up dirt on the "other side" (and most of those FOIA requests are overly broad to boot). Throw away #3 and the FOIA process isn't a zoo anymore. Let reputable journalists investigate, not anonymous trolls who get paid to encourage the other side to waste time.
Do you have any evidence of this being a systemic problem? And I don't just mean that "anonymous trolls" (whatever that is) make too many (whatever that is) FOIA requests, but that the goal of digging up dirt is ultimately bad for society.
No one can get re-elected. And the problem is not just the union. I don't know of a single congressional district where you have 50%+1 agreement on a wide range of issues.
Am I reading you right? You think that because the majority of the population aren't in full agreement on most issues that politicians need to be able to lie to the population in order to get re-elected? Really? WTF? Do you seriously think that voters are not already aware that the people they vote for don't necessarily match them on each and every issue? That voters already pick the candidate they have the most agreement with, not total agreement?
So, it seems that not only does McDonalds in Paris have some strange issues with cameras, but judging from these comments, a surprising number of French people are racist.
Burkha ban. Look it up.
It isn't about having a 3D printer handy after you are cuffed. It is about challenging the idea of physical security through obscurity. Handcuffs rely on a "shared secret" of the physical key, that's why the manufacturers go to great lengths to control distribution of those keys. But 3D printers make it practical to turn that physical key into data, and at that point all of the problems of security through obscurity of information start to apply to a formerly physical security model.
In other words, all it takes is for one person to "scan" a key and upload it to the internet and now it is orders of magnitude more likely that someone will have a copy of the key on their person, perhaps disguised as jewlery or just in stuck in their pockets, that will let themselves unlock their cuffs while sitting in the back of a police car.
Read busy's other posts, he's a smart ass. It was even a little bit funny. I wouldn't have modded him down for it.
Do you really believe that the US is falling apart?
Yes. A fundamental part of what has made American society great has changed over the last 40 years - upward mobility. Rates of upward mobility have plummetted. Our system of meritocracy has become just another form of aristocracy where the rich are able to give their kids the skills to compete on merit but the children of the poor are left out - no SAT prep, no AP courses, no extra-curricular activities, etc.
What has followed is a false equivalence that success on the narrow scales of our meritocracy (such as standardized testing, high GPAs and ultimately the accumulation of wealth) makes people good decision makers in more broader, complicated areas -- that the expertise which has served a person well enough to make millions on wall-street is also going to make their opionions on things like social policy wise and considered.
2) When they redirect a residential customer to the security problem page, it's not going to just redirect the infected machine, it will redirect all of your machines.
No it won't. Only the infected machines are using the bogus nameservers.
Yep, that's what a lot people think and it sure fits the stereotypical corporate mentality. But, it really isn't that hard to mitigate. Set the servers up to redirect to a warning page for only 1% of the ISP's address range per day or something in that ballpark. That reduces the flood of support calls down to something manageable.
Don't all of those ISPs play that dirty trick of redirecting failed DNS lookups to advertising? Why don't they just set their DNSchanger servers to redirect all lookups to some page telling the user that their system is infected and how to download a tool to fix it?
Sure it will break everything but http(s) but if they are happy to do it for money why aren't they happy to do it for the common good?
[quote]The prime example of an industry that really does need such protection is pharmaceuticals. The reasons are threefold. ...
Second, and related, the patent term begins to run when the invention is made and patented, yet the drug testing, which must be completed before the drug can be sold, often takes 10 or more years. This shortens the effective patent term, ...[/quote]
Huhwhat? Big pharma needs patents because they can't exploit the current patent system enough? An article that starts off which such a blatant example of circular reasoning isn't something we should give much credence to, even if the rest of it validates our opinions.
That is a far cry from federal law. From the link you provided they don't even have any technical standards yet, but much less actual law. I don't see this one getting anywhere near passing for the simple reason that immediate detection and repair of emissions problems is not particularly useful. It is no really no big deal if some small fraction of cars have emissions problems, the point of emissions testing is to prevent widescale pollution not one-offs.
As for your own house, have you considered removing your mailbox / stopping USPS service?
Tried it, doesn't go over well with the local postal carrier.
home ownership is a matter of public record, so unless your home is owned by a trust or a corporate entity
Done that.
None of this may be relevant to you (perhaps you rent),
Renting from a private landlord (versus a property manager) with all utilities included works well.
There is already a law on the books requiring a GPS device in every car
Oh please. If that were actually the case, there would have been a major hue and cry about it. Of course if you can actually cite such a law - GPS in every car - I will change my sig to say "grantspassalan is the smartest guy on slashdot." Since the actual law doesn't even require the logging of direction of travel, I'm pretty confident your name won't be appearing in my sig.
The average person will gladly lie, cheat, and steal (or worse), and is only stopped by immediate negative consequences for those actions. The average person should not be trusted - they'd take everything you had if they reasonably believed they could get away with it forever.
That is an argument that leads to fascism via technocracy. If it really were true we would never have developed as a civilization because the one thing necessary for civilization to work is trust. Not trust based on some version of hellfire and brimstone but the trust that while men are imperfect, we are fundamentally good-natured.
So, why aren't you just giving a fictitious name when you're having something shipped to your home? The USPS, et al, is fairly plug and play when it comes to adding "new" people to a domicile.
Because all it takes is one shipment with your name on it and the jig is up. You may not even have control over it, a relative could decide to send you a birthday present.
How do you know the Walmart isn't using ANPR and facial recognition on their ubiquitous CCTV cameras?
ANPR does not connect you to the purchase, just with everybody else in the parking lot, it is even less useful if you use a unique name for each order. Facial recognition is unreliable and requires a database of face to name matches which are few and expensive. But mailing address databases are everywhere since any commercial transaction is likely to get logged into one.
Sure it is diminishing returns, but your examples are a lot further down the line of risk/return trade-offs.
So what about shipping to home then? Ie. pay cash in person, have it shipped home.
Sure, but you link all purchases to the same address which is only a hop and a skip away from linking it to your name.
As best I can tell there have been no reported deaths. That doesn't completely rule out poisoning, but along with there being no actual threats or anyone claiming responsibility, it does lend credence to the idea of it just being hysteria.
His sig is particularly ironic in this case.