Are you kidding? Wikileaks wouldn't be anywhere near as effective without Assange being in the public's eye so much. Assange's ego is what has almost single-handedly brought all this needed media attention to the government's war crimes.
I guess I actually don't really disagree with you all that much. I think there is definitely a partnership going on here. Large companies can't afford to alienate the government or it could make things difficult for them. But they are usually happy to go along and help write our regulations too.
ok, maybe they wouldn't shut em down. but I don't doubt for a second there are people in the government who would shut down wikileaks. and for anyone who continued to support wikileaks, life would become very difficult. My main point still stands. Government pressured Amazon, and the government could make up any reason they wanted to put even more weight on them. up to and including shutting them down. maybe it didn't come to that yet but by god it very well could if they continued.
I'd say the real issue here is someone's addiction to a rosy-eyed view of corporations who can do no wrong blinds him to what's plainly right in front of him.
I didn't say corporations can do no wrong. I said the issue HERE is government power. IN THIS CASE.
Yes, that is an interesting pattern. Government power is the fundamental issue here. How much more will we let them have until people finally decide enough is enough?
If the government threatened to shut down your business because you were supporting Wikileaks, you would probably cave too. The real issue here, as always, is government pressure and the power of the state.
You really think a large government will ever tell corporations to go take a hike? Laughable. Most of the worst corporations I know of are totally protected by the government in some shape or form. You even said it yourself... our government is the one that gives the power to the corporations. The larger the government, the more corporate power we have. The two are inseparably connected.
Are you kidding? Government regulation is the reason we can't legally download any TV show we want at any time without commercials. The free market solved this problem a LONG time ago. But our Benevolent Overlords (not) decided to not allow it. You can take your regulation and shove it where the sun don't shine...
I tend to believe that the risk of hurting innocent people is overblown. We haven't had that happen yet from their previous release of documents. If there was, I'm sure the detractors would have kicked up a huge stink. It seems like the opponents of wikileaks are merely using this as a way to try and get enough public opinion on their side so they can shut it down. Almost like it's just an excuse because the government and supporters are upset about being exposed.
If General McCrystal was burning a Koran and laughing about it, that should be public too. His position of power is far too important to ignore something like that. The public needs to know what kind of people their rulers really are.
I think this type of criticism is entirely unfounded. In order to get this leaked information out into the world, you need press coverage. Julian Assange has done America and the world a HUGE favor by exposing the crooks and liars in our government. This government is hurting America and the world. We can't even begin to start turning things around unless their secret dealings are made public in the widest possible manner.
It's no surprise that most businesses will cave to the crooks in our government, who has the power to shut them down for whatever reason they want. The more shameful thing is that we allow our governments to get away with these lies and fraud for so long. Personally, I think it is the very nature of any government to be corrupt and fraudulent. WikiLeaks is only the latest proof in that pudding. Democracy is not immune.
Even though I love WikiLeaks, I will still continue to shop at Amazon as long as they offer me the right goods at the right prices. Amazon is not in the business of political advocacy, and I wouldn't expect them to have any desire to participate in something that may shut down their business.
I hate talking on the phone. The only reason I have voice service is because I'm on a family share plan. You're almost always interrupting someone. I would much rather send them a message that just gets to the point.
I have a 10v running Snow Leopard that works great. It didn't take all that long to do, either. I didn't want to spend the money on a mac mini just to dabble in some iPhone development. And my other laptop is too old to virtualize os x.
No, it's exactly the opposite. How on earth will this guy will benefit from large companies writing a hundred patents surrounding his discovery? Patents will always be detrimental to the little guy, and innovation in general. You can't improve anything that's patented, even if your application is 100% better.
The mere fact that they wanted to sell subscriptions to people who would pay voluntarily doesn't mean they are "acting like a business". There could be a million other ways they weren't acting like a business. You can't reasonably expect an industry that has been monopolized by government for 100 years to turn around on a dime and all of a sudden be successful in business.
This is why governments who try to act like a business almost always fail. It takes a LONG time to unravel the mess that government has caused. Not only that, but we don't even know what kind of regulations and restrictions are in place in that county that would apply to potential competitors.
They undoubtedly still have a government mentality in their fire department. That clearly shows in this case. Letting a customer's house burn when they were willing to pay a large amount more than the subscription is not only bad business but the kind of pure douchebaggery we have come to expect from politicians and their bureaucratic lackeys.
They clearly weren't running it like a business. If they were, they would have accepted a higher fee to put out the fire, which still would have made them a profit. As usual, people are straining to blame libertarianism when the opposite is true. This is clearly a failure of government.
This has nothing to do with libertarianism. It wasn't some free market fire department. It was government operated. This is such a basic concept I don't even know why it has caused such an uproar. In reality it's another failure of government. Suck it, progressives. And suck the conservatives who are defending these government firemen standing by and not doing anything.
Slashdot Mirror
or did she use passwords she already had to get into the system? I wouldn't be surprised if this was yet more abuse of the word "hacking".
Are you kidding? Wikileaks wouldn't be anywhere near as effective without Assange being in the public's eye so much. Assange's ego is what has almost single-handedly brought all this needed media attention to the government's war crimes.
Those people probably won't be using ChromeOS in the first place...
I guess I actually don't really disagree with you all that much. I think there is definitely a partnership going on here. Large companies can't afford to alienate the government or it could make things difficult for them. But they are usually happy to go along and help write our regulations too.
ok, maybe they wouldn't shut em down. but I don't doubt for a second there are people in the government who would shut down wikileaks. and for anyone who continued to support wikileaks, life would become very difficult. My main point still stands. Government pressured Amazon, and the government could make up any reason they wanted to put even more weight on them. up to and including shutting them down. maybe it didn't come to that yet but by god it very well could if they continued.
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/01/lieberman/index.html
I didn't say corporations can do no wrong. I said the issue HERE is government power. IN THIS CASE.
GENIUS.
Yes, that is an interesting pattern. Government power is the fundamental issue here. How much more will we let them have until people finally decide enough is enough?
If the government threatened to shut down your business because you were supporting Wikileaks, you would probably cave too. The real issue here, as always, is government pressure and the power of the state.
You really think a large government will ever tell corporations to go take a hike? Laughable. Most of the worst corporations I know of are totally protected by the government in some shape or form. You even said it yourself... our government is the one that gives the power to the corporations. The larger the government, the more corporate power we have. The two are inseparably connected.
I love Glenn Greenwald's blog. As a libertarian, I don't think there is another progressive writer I agree with more.
Hmm, what other means? Could you please elaborate?
If we didn't allow such government power to exist in the first place, there would have been no reason for Hollywood to lobby them.
Are you kidding? Government regulation is the reason we can't legally download any TV show we want at any time without commercials. The free market solved this problem a LONG time ago. But our Benevolent Overlords (not) decided to not allow it. You can take your regulation and shove it where the sun don't shine...
By the way, Glenn Greenwald absolutely nailed it here.
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/01/wikileaks/index.html
I tend to believe that the risk of hurting innocent people is overblown. We haven't had that happen yet from their previous release of documents. If there was, I'm sure the detractors would have kicked up a huge stink. It seems like the opponents of wikileaks are merely using this as a way to try and get enough public opinion on their side so they can shut it down. Almost like it's just an excuse because the government and supporters are upset about being exposed.
If General McCrystal was burning a Koran and laughing about it, that should be public too. His position of power is far too important to ignore something like that. The public needs to know what kind of people their rulers really are.
I think this type of criticism is entirely unfounded. In order to get this leaked information out into the world, you need press coverage. Julian Assange has done America and the world a HUGE favor by exposing the crooks and liars in our government. This government is hurting America and the world. We can't even begin to start turning things around unless their secret dealings are made public in the widest possible manner.
It's no surprise that most businesses will cave to the crooks in our government, who has the power to shut them down for whatever reason they want. The more shameful thing is that we allow our governments to get away with these lies and fraud for so long. Personally, I think it is the very nature of any government to be corrupt and fraudulent. WikiLeaks is only the latest proof in that pudding. Democracy is not immune.
Even though I love WikiLeaks, I will still continue to shop at Amazon as long as they offer me the right goods at the right prices. Amazon is not in the business of political advocacy, and I wouldn't expect them to have any desire to participate in something that may shut down their business.
If we ran out of corpses we could send our politicians. There would be more than enough hot air to go around.
Seems to me like that didn't work so well.
I hate talking on the phone. The only reason I have voice service is because I'm on a family share plan. You're almost always interrupting someone. I would much rather send them a message that just gets to the point.
I have a 10v running Snow Leopard that works great. It didn't take all that long to do, either. I didn't want to spend the money on a mac mini just to dabble in some iPhone development. And my other laptop is too old to virtualize os x.
No, it's exactly the opposite. How on earth will this guy will benefit from large companies writing a hundred patents surrounding his discovery? Patents will always be detrimental to the little guy, and innovation in general. You can't improve anything that's patented, even if your application is 100% better.
The mere fact that they wanted to sell subscriptions to people who would pay voluntarily doesn't mean they are "acting like a business". There could be a million other ways they weren't acting like a business. You can't reasonably expect an industry that has been monopolized by government for 100 years to turn around on a dime and all of a sudden be successful in business.
This is why governments who try to act like a business almost always fail. It takes a LONG time to unravel the mess that government has caused. Not only that, but we don't even know what kind of regulations and restrictions are in place in that county that would apply to potential competitors.
They undoubtedly still have a government mentality in their fire department. That clearly shows in this case. Letting a customer's house burn when they were willing to pay a large amount more than the subscription is not only bad business but the kind of pure douchebaggery we have come to expect from politicians and their bureaucratic lackeys.
They clearly weren't running it like a business. If they were, they would have accepted a higher fee to put out the fire, which still would have made them a profit. As usual, people are straining to blame libertarianism when the opposite is true. This is clearly a failure of government.
This has nothing to do with libertarianism. It wasn't some free market fire department. It was government operated. This is such a basic concept I don't even know why it has caused such an uproar. In reality it's another failure of government. Suck it, progressives. And suck the conservatives who are defending these government firemen standing by and not doing anything.