Candidate B is running against candidate A. Since either A is currently in office, he will secretly issue a wiretap to get any kind of dirt on B that it possible.
Think it's rediculious? This is what Richard Nixon essentialy did, albeit in a far more crude manner.
There is also the situation when people are engaging in a legal activity, although one that the government frowns upon, such as a major political rally, like the Million Man March. Perfectly legal (preedom os association is prodected under the First Amendment), but the government really did not like it happening. Imagine if the government had been able to get specific details from a convenient wiretap, or was able to pull it out of private e-mail, and was then able to set up police in such a way as to effectively block the march. I think that issues like this is what this is all about. -- Matt Singerman
Re:What makes you think...
on
CALEA update
·
· Score: 1
BUT the last time I talked to Bell Atlantic, I was told that my privacy was important to them! No, seriously, I am fairly sure that phone companies will not record conversation without your express prior consent, and I know of at least one state (Maryland) where it is ILLEGAL to record a phone conversation without the permission of both people, unless there is a court order to record it. -- Matt Singerman
About "tapping" the Internet...
on
CALEA update
·
· Score: 5
Even if the FBI could intercept any data that is out there, it would be completely useless to them if it is encrypted data. So long as the FBI is not granted a magic key by either consensus among crypto companies or by government regulation, privacy over the internet can and will exist.
As far as tapping digital lines... It should be allowed, but only with a court order. Just like it is with analog lines. Sometimes, there is a justifiable reason for a line to be tapped. Think suspected drug dealer here. The problem is not with the FBI tapping lines, it is with thee frequencey of which lines are tapped. Court orders for line tapping are given out too frequently and with too broad of a spectrum of reasons. Call your representatives in Congress and express your concern with this issue, they will listen (on occassion). -- Matt Singerman
you are the most evil person I have ever seen in my life. the hell with 25% of kids! they're better off than John D. Rockafeller was! Do you know how STUPID that sounds? And as for spending for a better future, I am all about that; I simply consider that to be investing in education and children, not fueling some pathetic sci-fi fantasy. You don't actually care about people, you are more interested in seeing a science flourish, no matter how many miserable lives there are. Excuse me for caring about other human beings - assholes like YOU really annoy me. -- Matt Singerman
So if this bustling economy is such a great solution, then why do 25% of children live at or below poverty, and 20% of all Americans overall? Oh wait, because instead of having better schools and job training and drug treatment centers, we launch bits of metal into space so we can see what happens when a monkey shits in zero gravity.
Oh, by the way, don't confuse "poor" and "poverty"... "poor" is having trouble making ends meet; "poverty" is legally defined as a family of four surviving on less than $16,000 per year. So while you sit in your nice suburban living room, or your trendy urban loft apartment, arguing why we need to hand that much more money over to the aeospace industry, please try not to think too much about the chronically undernourished children in the US. Did you chronic undernourishment kills almost twice as many children worldwide than famine does? Oh, I forgot, we're so much better off here. -- Matt Singerman
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a situation...
Candidate B is running against candidate A. Since either A is currently in office, he will secretly issue a wiretap to get any kind of dirt on B that it possible.
Think it's rediculious? This is what Richard Nixon essentialy did, albeit in a far more crude manner.
There is also the situation when people are engaging in a legal activity, although one that the government frowns upon, such as a major political rally, like the Million Man March. Perfectly legal (preedom os association is prodected under the First Amendment), but the government really did not like it happening. Imagine if the government had been able to get specific details from a convenient wiretap, or was able to pull it out of private e-mail, and was then able to set up police in such a way as to effectively block the march. I think that issues like this is what this is all about.
--
Matt Singerman
BUT the last time I talked to Bell Atlantic, I was told that my privacy was important to them! No, seriously, I am fairly sure that phone companies will not record conversation without your express prior consent, and I know of at least one state (Maryland) where it is ILLEGAL to record a phone conversation without the permission of both people, unless there is a court order to record it.
--
Matt Singerman
Even if the FBI could intercept any data that is out there, it would be completely useless to them if it is encrypted data. So long as the FBI is not granted a magic key by either consensus among crypto companies or by government regulation, privacy over the internet can and will exist.
As far as tapping digital lines... It should be allowed, but only with a court order. Just like it is with analog lines. Sometimes, there is a justifiable reason for a line to be tapped. Think suspected drug dealer here. The problem is not with the FBI tapping lines, it is with thee frequencey of which lines are tapped. Court orders for line tapping are given out too frequently and with too broad of a spectrum of reasons. Call your representatives in Congress and express your concern with this issue, they will listen (on occassion).
--
Matt Singerman
you are the most evil person I have ever seen in my life. the hell with 25% of kids! they're better off than John D. Rockafeller was! Do you know how STUPID that sounds? And as for spending for a better future, I am all about that; I simply consider that to be investing in education and children, not fueling some pathetic sci-fi fantasy. You don't actually care about people, you are more interested in seeing a science flourish, no matter how many miserable lives there are. Excuse me for caring about other human beings - assholes like YOU really annoy me.
--
Matt Singerman
So if this bustling economy is such a great solution, then why do 25% of children live at or below poverty, and 20% of all Americans overall? Oh wait, because instead of having better schools and job training and drug treatment centers, we launch bits of metal into space so we can see what happens when a monkey shits in zero gravity.
Oh, by the way, don't confuse "poor" and "poverty"... "poor" is having trouble making ends meet; "poverty" is legally defined as a family of four surviving on less than $16,000 per year. So while you sit in your nice suburban living room, or your trendy urban loft apartment, arguing why we need to hand that much more money over to the aeospace industry, please try not to think too much about the chronically undernourished children in the US. Did you chronic undernourishment kills almost twice as many children worldwide than famine does? Oh, I forgot, we're so much better off here.
--
Matt Singerman
If I was Dad Goldin, I'd use the $50 billion to feed, clothe, shelter, and educate the 25% of US children that live in poverty.
God bless America; the richest country in the world, and it can't even feed all its own children.
--
Matt Singerman
TOO COOL.
mental note: build space station; take pictures of eclipses from said space station.
--
Matt Singerman
Come on... Am I the only one who remembers that biotech was supposed to be the Next Big Thing in the early 90s?
--
Matt Singerman