If libertarians didn't exist, the IQ level of the internet would rise to almost 100.
Leave it to an authoritarian to tell us that authoritarians know best. Fortunately, you're not in charge of determining who's allowed to exist or use the Internet.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it[.]
For example, exercising the right to vote for a libertarian/non-authoritarian candidate is "voting wrong?"
I suppose I could come to agree with your wisdom, once your junta puts a gun to my head and tells me that I "agree."
Probably the worst part of it all is that the taxpayer will have to cough up to support his tenure in some "correctional" institution, whereas some form of useful slave labour in community service might at least do somebody enough good to justify this adolescent's pathetic little life.
Yeah right, that's the worst part. Nobody ever thinks about the things North Korea gets right. Scandinavian countries could do this are get a handle on their out-of-control crime and recidivism rates.
That might be because you were arguing for a bill that would limit our rights in the story about a bill that is going to limit our rights.
If you want universal background checks to pass and CISPA, not to pass, you are being logically inconsistent with respect to citizen's constitutional rights.
You're right, and I believe CISPA represents an effective means for compiling the dossiers against which these background checks are performed. No, thank you.
I find myself at an impasse. I can vote for the party that makes the right promises then doesn't keep them, or the party that makes all the wrong promises and does keep them. This leaves me vacillating between futile hope and grotesque masochism.
That's a false dilemma. Voting for Democrat/Republican is not your only choice. Keep voting for liars, thieves and sociopaths, and that's what you'll always wind up with.
Where are the guys that make the RIGHT promises and keep them? Where are they hiding those guys?
In the third parties. They might not win, but you'll maintain whatever integrity you have, and you'll send an important message.
Oh! Right. I forgot. You can't buy the right guys. Therefore you can't sell them to the public.
If they're on the ballot, you can vote for them — spread the word.
I think that's exactly what the OP (Industrial Complex) was pointing out. We have a "left" and a "right" but they all committed to big government and authoritarianism.
Yes, but the AC I responded to claimed the US was left-of-median, which isn't true. Anyone can claim anything; my intent was to provide objective data illustrating that the left/right, authoritarian/libertarian spectrum in the US exists within the confines of right-wing authoritarianism (at least as far as elected officials are concerned).
I have a pretty good memory of Slashdot-regulars' general political stances, and it's heartening to see the broad bipartisan support here in opposing many authoritarian policies: increasing domestic surveillance, subversion of due process, drug prohibition, and oppressive security theater, to name a few examples.
Unfortunately, this coming-together to defend civil liberties is not as widespread throughout the US populace as it is here. I think that the populace's support for policy based on the proposer — rather than the proposal — is a good demonstration of why this isn't occurring. That a person would abandon their own principles, though, in favor of petty partisanship boggles my mind.
Leftist governments are traditionally the governments that are large and up in everyone's business. That's what we got today.
This graph of US state senatorial positions shows the opposite of your above quoted statements. Right-leaning states' senators hold more authoritarian positions, while left-leaning states' senators hold more libertarian positions — though all of those positions are on the right and authoritarian sides of the median axes.
The other [explanation] is that a guy who made profits out of massive piracy of other peoples work doesn't have any moral qualms about stealing things from other peoples computers.
I find your explanation analogous to claiming that a librarian would likely have no moral qualms about burglarizing a bookstore — it does not follow. TPB's revenue comes from donations, advertising, and merchandizing; no mechanism is provided for exchanging money for unlicensed, copyrighted works. Commercial copyright infringement outfits tend to have lifespans that are small fractions of TPB's nine years of operation, due to governments' aggressive pursuits against them.
The NY Post also ran the (now thoroughly falsified) "news" that a Saudi suspect had been taken into custody early after the blast. That served as a great filter for identifying racist right-wing nutters, who were eager to pass along the NY Post's predictable uncorroborated tabloid Islamophobia as if it were an actual news source.
I'm sorry, I can't recall... I'm in NYS, and I get TV shows via BitTorrent. Thank you for the tip though; I'll keep an eye out for BBC Three's watermark if I happen to be eating.;o)
I watched a BBC documentary this past year, the host of which sought to find out what "long-pig" tastes like. He went to a doctor and had his leg biopsied, then cooked the biopsy. However, he said he couldn't eat it due to UK law, so he took it to a lab, which placed the sample in a GCMS and told him what it would it taste like: a combination of mostly pork, plus poultry and lamb, if I remember correctly. I have little doubt he was willing to eat it, though, as this bloke drank his own piss during the same series.
It's rare to see a low wage employee put themselves in a position of potential danger at work - like telling an urban thug to put down his phone, especially if he has friends with him.
Heh, an "urban thug?" Are rural thugs comparatively docile, or uncoordinated in their flouting of authority?
Slashdot Mirror
There are only two jobs where having been in prison for a crime can look good on your CV, gangster rapper and information security consultant.
Three — confidential informant.
If libertarians didn't exist, the IQ level of the internet would rise to almost 100.
Leave it to an authoritarian to tell us that authoritarians know best. Fortunately, you're not in charge of determining who's allowed to exist or use the Internet.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it[.]
For example, exercising the right to vote for a libertarian/non-authoritarian candidate is "voting wrong?"
I suppose I could come to agree with your wisdom, once your junta puts a gun to my head and tells me that I "agree."
Probably the worst part of it all is that the taxpayer will have to cough up to support his tenure in some "correctional" institution, whereas some form of useful slave labour in community service might at least do somebody enough good to justify this adolescent's pathetic little life.
Yeah right, that's the worst part. Nobody ever thinks about the things North Korea gets right. Scandinavian countries could do this are get a handle on their out-of-control crime and recidivism rates.
Apple samples voices, anonymizes it, uses it it improve voice recognition over a period of two years; reaction: EVIL! APPLE MUST DIE!
Please explain how, precisely, Apple manages to "anonymize" a particular vocal pattern, without destroying the audio quality?
It just works. Still not convinced? Think different.
StartPage
(Also known as Ixquick) is good, as is DuckDuckGo, for those who value privacy.
I think Eric Schmidt just doesn't get anonymity or privacy as applied to individuals (except when it applies to himself — then he's an expert lobbyist).
Seriously, nobody can know all the acronyms from every field.
I've found http://www.acronymfinder.com/ to be helpful. Results are are categorized by field.
That might be because you were arguing for a bill that would limit our rights in the story about a bill that is going to limit our rights.
If you want universal background checks to pass and CISPA, not to pass, you are being logically inconsistent with respect to citizen's constitutional rights.
You're right, and I believe CISPA represents an effective means for compiling the dossiers against which these background checks are performed. No, thank you.
I find myself at an impasse. I can vote for the party that makes the right promises then doesn't keep them, or the party that makes all the wrong promises and does keep them. This leaves me vacillating between futile hope and grotesque masochism.
That's a false dilemma. Voting for Democrat/Republican is not your only choice. Keep voting for liars, thieves and sociopaths, and that's what you'll always wind up with.
Where are the guys that make the RIGHT promises and keep them? Where are they hiding those guys?
In the third parties. They might not win, but you'll maintain whatever integrity you have, and you'll send an important message.
Oh! Right. I forgot. You can't buy the right guys. Therefore you can't sell them to the public.
If they're on the ballot, you can vote for them — spread the word.
I think that's exactly what the OP (Industrial Complex) was pointing out. We have a "left" and a "right" but they all committed to big government and authoritarianism.
Yes, but the AC I responded to claimed the US was left-of-median, which isn't true. Anyone can claim anything; my intent was to provide objective data illustrating that the left/right, authoritarian/libertarian spectrum in the US exists within the confines of right-wing authoritarianism (at least as far as elected officials are concerned).
I have a pretty good memory of Slashdot-regulars' general political stances, and it's heartening to see the broad bipartisan support here in opposing many authoritarian policies: increasing domestic surveillance, subversion of due process, drug prohibition, and oppressive security theater, to name a few examples.
Unfortunately, this coming-together to defend civil liberties is not as widespread throughout the US populace as it is here. I think that the populace's support for policy based on the proposer — rather than the proposal — is a good demonstration of why this isn't occurring. That a person would abandon their own principles, though, in favor of petty partisanship boggles my mind.
Only a teabagger would be dumb enough to think that such an act would be effective.
Effective at what? A response is underway — if effecting that response was the intent, the act was effective.
People that claim "false flag" are nutballs.
Improbable claims in the absence of evidence are foolish, but it's not as though false-flag operations don't occur.
I imagine he gets these every single day. It goes with the job.
Oh, wait, we have to take advantage of the bombings! We're still at war with Eastasia, remember!
This whole every-aspect-of-our-lives-must-be-in-the-context-of-1984 conspiracy stuff has really gotten out of hand ...
Has it? I think the actual government-using-1984-as-an-instruction-manual stuff has gotten far more out of hand than your particular gripe.
Your median is slapped over on the hard left.
FTFY.
Leftist governments are traditionally the governments that are large and up in everyone's business. That's what we got today.
This graph of US state senatorial positions shows the opposite of your above quoted statements. Right-leaning states' senators hold more authoritarian positions, while left-leaning states' senators hold more libertarian positions — though all of those positions are on the right and authoritarian sides of the median axes.
Windows 8 sucks so much, it can lift matter back past the event horizon of a black hole.
Best Windows 8 summary ever.
One of my favorites (someone's signature around here, I believe), is to the effect of: "Windows 8 was built on an old Indian burial ground."
The other [explanation] is that a guy who made profits out of massive piracy of other peoples work doesn't have any moral qualms about stealing things from other peoples computers.
I find your explanation analogous to claiming that a librarian would likely have no moral qualms about burglarizing a bookstore — it does not follow. TPB's revenue comes from donations, advertising, and merchandizing; no mechanism is provided for exchanging money for unlicensed, copyrighted works. Commercial copyright infringement outfits tend to have lifespans that are small fractions of TPB's nine years of operation, due to governments' aggressive pursuits against them.
The NY Post also ran the (now thoroughly falsified) "news" that a Saudi suspect had been taken into custody early after the blast. That served as a great filter for identifying racist right-wing nutters, who were eager to pass along the NY Post's predictable uncorroborated tabloid Islamophobia as if it were an actual news source.
That "news item" was previously included in the Wikipedia article on this event, with Daily Mail serving as the cited source.
I watched a BBC documentary this past year
Let me guess - BBC Three?
I'm sorry, I can't recall... I'm in NYS, and I get TV shows via BitTorrent. Thank you for the tip though; I'll keep an eye out for BBC Three's watermark if I happen to be eating. ;o)
The Studios That Provide Content for Netflix Want To Go HTML5, But Not Without DRM
FTFY
Do you have a source which shows Netflix stating it doesn't want to use DRM?
Just in time: U.S. Offshore Wind Farm Receives $2 Billion From Japanese Banks.
The Japanese have stepped in to provide relief from your crippling economic sanctions.
I watched a BBC documentary this past year, the host of which sought to find out what "long-pig" tastes like. He went to a doctor and had his leg biopsied, then cooked the biopsy. However, he said he couldn't eat it due to UK law, so he took it to a lab, which placed the sample in a GCMS and told him what it would it taste like: a combination of mostly pork, plus poultry and lamb, if I remember correctly. I have little doubt he was willing to eat it, though, as this bloke drank his own piss during the same series.
Quite a few industrial buildings constructed with steal walls already do this inadvertently, and there is nothing illegal about it.
I'm pretty sure wall theft is illegal. :o)
You don't get to decide when its acceptable or not. [...] I have the absolute right to talk to whomever I want, just as you do.
You're disagreeing with an authoritarian mob with mod points — clearly, your opinion is wrong.
It's rare to see a low wage employee put themselves in a position of potential danger at work - like telling an urban thug to put down his phone, especially if he has friends with him.
Heh, an "urban thug?" Are rural thugs comparatively docile, or uncoordinated in their flouting of authority?
You can take my Buckballs when you dig them out of my cold, rotting intestines. ;o)