"The social contract is signed every day you're not dead from the laws protecting you. You're free to reject the contract at any time, but then you lose the implicit protections. In fact, we're so nice with our social contract in modern liberal democracies, we limit how much protection you lose based on the severity of your breach. Isn't that nice of us?"
Humanity existed long before government. "Social contract" is BS for "you owe us" for providing something life provides anyway often referred to as natural rights, survival of the fittest and/or just living. Buzz off you carpetbaggers and racketeers.
"... because there are no legal penalties whatsoever defined for violating the constitution. The oath is an empty act, with absolutely no teeth behind it."
Yes there is. It's treason and the penalty is death.
Yes they are. Real power is firepower as the US government constantly proves. If anyone tells you anything else, they're trying to sell you something. You don't shoot at a border agent, you kill him and any of his compatriots that try to defend his actions. That's how you fight a war and when the guns come out that's what it will be. Two sides that violently disagree and neither willing to give in. that's a war.
"Also, were I working for the TSA, I'd say that your soft position on the threats facing this great country makes you a help to the terrorists and a conduit of the dangers terrorism poses to the American way of life. You should repent and amend your ways."
As a member of the freedom loving public you are supposed to serve I say:
You Can't Defend The Constitution By Violating It!!
"...than an even trade for losing your 4th Amendment rights.... Riiiiiight."
You haven't lost your 4th, or any, amendment rights. The 4th and other constitutional amendments are a prohibition on the government taking your natural privacy and other rights away. It just means the government is ignoring the constitution. If any government officials try to ignore it, remind them of your natural rights by blasting their treasonous ass back to DC or be even more patriotic by just killing them for violating the public trust.
"power to the federal government and take it back to the states"
We had it that way before, it didn't work out so well then an a couple of times since. You states guys blew it more than once which is the reason we're like this now.
"Do you really want every minor infraction that would put someone away for less than a year to have to go to court?"
Yes, maybe congress will get the message and stop passing so many over-reaching and idiotic laws and maybe repeal a few of the more stupid ones. Nah, but I can dream.
"It doesn't help your argument to present allegations as facts. Without proven facts the rest of your post is manure."
I agree. In addition it was a minor local issue, one that MIT should be used to by now and the local officials didn't think anything of it. The feds should've never been involved at all.
Yes, you can. Ortiz went out of her way to create the situation and had total control over what was going on. If it was anyone else, they'd be up on charges of manslaughter or conspiracy to commit. As for being mentally ill, lots of people commit suicide, we call some of them posthumous heroes(soldiers, firefighters, cops) and not mentally ill who snapped and committed suicide and just happened to save someone else. Who knows maybe they didn't have any options at home either. Aaron weighed his options and knew what he was doing as his last comments had made that quite clear. It wasn't just one thing that made him decide as no matter what happened in prison the other penalties of not having access to a computer for life, something that seemed to be the center of his existence then being old(65+) by the time he got out, with no future anyway as an ex-con and by that time, out of sync with the world. Or if by some miracle he got off with minor charges he'd still be in deep debt, with no job prospects and no future banned from his only interest and only real income and still out of sync depending on period of incarceration. You tell me which is better. Even if he got off completely(no chance) he'd still be in deep debt, credibility ruined and all that implies, and on watch lists.
Fact is he was harassed for pointing out massive misuse of public funds to keep public information private, and he was right. As for ortiz and clan, they jumped on it even though it was a minor local issue, literally and knowingly(his condition was on file) drove him to his death in their drive to build their careers. The test is simple, would he be alive today without their unwarranted interference? Yes.
And for all you that say he's a criminal It's innocent until proven and declared guilty in this country. The media doesn't count, so he was no criminal. He was no hero, but he didn't deserve what happened either. But a martyr, maybe.
Microsoft already has on numerous occasions, one more is dust in the wind right? As for UEFI Microsoft's involvement has been going on a long time. And who said secure boot had to be default, guess, Microsoft. It could be off and set to on by users, you know the ones who should have control since they're paying for it.
"If it were an anti-piracy measure then there wouldn't be a requirement for you to be able to disable it."
Yes there is a Microsoft reason to turn it off. Backwards compatibility with older OSes and applications. That and a possible negative response from the DOJ and especially the EU. Of course, a large backlash by the tech public couldn't be ruled out either.
"It's a movie about Steve Jobs; the only way for it to be honest is if it's filled with rewritten history and selectively ommitted truths and just blatent lies. Also, unless Apple sues the producers of this movie, it's not very realistic."
It's a movie about Steve Jobs; the only way for it to be profitable is if it's filled with rewritten history and selectively ommitted truths and just blatent lies. Also, unless Apple sues the producers of this movie, it's not very realistic.
Does the US government actually care. Look at what's currently going on. For all intents and purposes the 2nd, 4th, 5th amendments are currently in the the trash can. The rest of the bill of rights isn't much better. And you think the US government is going to care about a little island or an organization it put in place using legal structures defined by that same document. It's amazing the government acknowledges the constitution still exists, Obama included. It's little more than a near transparent shadow of itself, let them declare a king/dictator and be done with it so the next civil war can begin.
The US never acknowledges it made a mistake until long after those that did it are gone and it's been largely forgotten. Just man up already!
"you can just build against yor own libraries in a directory and package it with your application."
The BSDs can do that too. Except commercial vendors like Valve want a standardized in operating system way to install their software with minimum of hassle(self-contained), PBI would allow that.
"That's not true. BSD licenses have "viral" things about copyright notices"
Now you're just spreading FUD. The current 2 clause BSD license doesn't interfere with code reuse. GPL3 plainly does. And before citation needed pops up. You're on the internet. Look it up yourself.
"If they wanted, they could also have made their own game specific BSD based on PC-BSD and run it."
Yes they could. And with the PBI packaging system which installs and runs all the support programs and libraries from the same directory as the main program(game) there wouldn't be any dependency,collision, or version issues with the operating system as Valve would be providing everything needed by the program. It's one package, just download, double-click to install, and start playing. It's basically a windows like install operation. And the BSD license is a plus with developers and commercial entities averse to the GPL and potential license contamination with linux code.
"While he may have had issues, it's dangerous to characterize different opinions as mentally ill."
In this case, lethal. He wasn't mentally ill. There's evidence he weighed his choices and the outcomes. The behaviors of a rational individual. A law used outside of the corner case it was written to solve is often wrong but applied regardless. This abuse is what is being used as a defense by the prosecutors. When a lawyer can't use public opinion to defend themselves they hide behind the law even when it doesn't apply. Always deflecting blame to those that wrote it or the public who elected them instead of their abuse of the system. Just because the system is open to abuse doesn't mean you should or you have to. And yes the prosecutors are to blame as its up to them how to apply the law to a situation. No law can be written for every situation. So prosecutors have some leeway in it's application. This just wasn't the proper way and some one died. Funny how in lower professions, mistakes like this that kill usually end up with high fines, disbarment, and prison time. The really funny part of this whole thing is the very people these prosecutors have pissed off control practically their whole lives. They better thank their lucky stars we are not as cold as them or they would have been wiped out in every way except the one they forced Aaron to take by now.
Remember Aaron! Make prosecutors accountable for their decisions! Reform prosecutor conduct!
"because suicide isn't commonly accepted as the act of a "well" individual."
Except in times of war or fighting crime and then we give medals and accolades for it. Especially when he or she survives the attempt. We call them heros.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
It makes all gun control law illegal, period. I know, how about repealing the 2nd amendment. You know the only legal way instead of the illegal way of marginalizing it to irrelevance. Oh right because it wouldn't happen and a civil war would spring up the next day if it did. So disarm the population any way you can so they are not a threat to government abuses. Government cannot be trusted ever, even the framers of the constitution knew this.
Here's a remedy from before the 1980's. How about treating people with physical and mental problems by treating the actual cause of the problem instead of the symptoms? Right, because that would cost time and money. Never mind it took time and the lack of money to make the problem this bad in the first place.
Now how about getting On Topic.
"don’t think that this was just two or three prosecutors that were doing something unusual."
I'm reminded of "If everyone jumped off a bridge...". The prosecutors decision making power based on the facts of the case got short circuited in the name of career building. Somehow I don't think anything good could've come of this anyway. That's besides the opposite ramifications of trying to shut someone up pointing out failures in proper government behavior in a tortuous way.(where's that quick and speedy trial)
PS I'm still reminded of "If everyone jumps off a bridge...".
Slashdot Mirror
"The social contract is signed every day you're not dead from the laws protecting you. You're free to reject the contract at any time, but then you lose the implicit protections. In fact, we're so nice with our social contract in modern liberal democracies, we limit how much protection you lose based on the severity of your breach. Isn't that nice of us?"
Humanity existed long before government. "Social contract" is BS for "you owe us" for providing something life provides anyway often referred to as natural rights, survival of the fittest and/or just living. Buzz off you carpetbaggers and racketeers.
"... because there are no legal penalties whatsoever defined for violating the constitution. The oath is an empty act, with absolutely no teeth behind it."
Yes there is. It's treason and the penalty is death.
"Guns are not a solution to everything."
Yes they are. Real power is firepower as the US government constantly proves. If anyone tells you anything else, they're trying to sell you something. You don't shoot at a border agent, you kill him and any of his compatriots that try to defend his actions. That's how you fight a war and when the guns come out that's what it will be. Two sides that violently disagree and neither willing to give in. that's a war.
"Also, were I working for the TSA, I'd say that your soft position on the threats facing this great country makes you a help to the terrorists and a conduit of the dangers terrorism poses to the American way of life. You should repent and amend your ways."
As a member of the freedom loving public you are supposed to serve I say:
You Can't Defend The Constitution By Violating It!!
"...than an even trade for losing your 4th Amendment rights.... Riiiiiight."
You haven't lost your 4th, or any, amendment rights. The 4th and other constitutional amendments are a prohibition on the government taking your natural privacy and other rights away. It just means the government is ignoring the constitution. If any government officials try to ignore it, remind them of your natural rights by blasting their treasonous ass back to DC or be even more patriotic by just killing them for violating the public trust.
"power to the federal government and take it back to the states"
We had it that way before, it didn't work out so well then an a couple of times since. You states guys blew it more than once which is the reason we're like this now.
"Do you really want every minor infraction that would put someone away for less than a year to have to go to court?"
Yes, maybe congress will get the message and stop passing so many over-reaching and idiotic laws and maybe repeal a few of the more stupid ones. Nah, but I can dream.
"It is no longer a quest for justice but a crap shoot."
Look around, it already is!
"Swartz faced a maximum of a few years in prison, the same as he would have in most of Europe for the same crime."
That's not all and you know it.
"It doesn't help your argument to present allegations as facts. Without proven facts the rest of your post is manure."
I agree. In addition it was a minor local issue, one that MIT should be used to by now and the local officials didn't think anything of it. The feds should've never been involved at all.
"I said you can't pin it on them."
Yes, you can. Ortiz went out of her way to create the situation and had total control over what was going on. If it was anyone else, they'd be up on charges of manslaughter or conspiracy to commit. As for being mentally ill, lots of people commit suicide, we call some of them posthumous heroes(soldiers, firefighters, cops) and not mentally ill who snapped and committed suicide and just happened to save someone else. Who knows maybe they didn't have any options at home either. Aaron weighed his options and knew what he was doing as his last comments had made that quite clear. It wasn't just one thing that made him decide as no matter what happened in prison the other penalties of not having access to a computer for life, something that seemed to be the center of his existence then being old(65+) by the time he got out, with no future anyway as an ex-con and by that time, out of sync with the world. Or if by some miracle he got off with minor charges he'd still be in deep debt, with no job prospects and no future banned from his only interest and only real income and still out of sync depending on period of incarceration. You tell me which is better. Even if he got off completely(no chance) he'd still be in deep debt, credibility ruined and all that implies, and on watch lists.
Fact is he was harassed for pointing out massive misuse of public funds to keep public information private, and he was right. As for ortiz and clan, they jumped on it even though it was a minor local issue, literally and knowingly(his condition was on file) drove him to his death in their drive to build their careers. The test is simple, would he be alive today without their unwarranted interference? Yes.
And for all you that say he's a criminal It's innocent until proven and declared guilty in this country. The media doesn't count, so he was no criminal. He was no hero, but he didn't deserve what happened either. But a martyr, maybe.
"That is why we vote for representatives who work on our behalf."
Now if they just did that.
"Whatever application you had open is still open in the exact same state, and that's practical."
Funny X11 used to have this thing called session management, I wonder where that went?
"Set everything to autosave and get a distro that boots up quickly."
And use SSD drives in your machine. If you still have a problem, switch to decaf.
"vendors who don't/won't produce "label-compliant" products are less likely to receive "marketing assistance" payments from Microsoft."
Just call it bribes and be done with it. Or maybe even kickbacks, etc.
"Microsoft actually does something evil."
Microsoft already has on numerous occasions, one more is dust in the wind right? As for UEFI Microsoft's involvement has been going on a long time. And who said secure boot had to be default, guess, Microsoft. It could be off and set to on by users, you know the ones who should have control since they're paying for it.
"If it were an anti-piracy measure then there wouldn't be a requirement for you to be able to disable it."
Yes there is a Microsoft reason to turn it off. Backwards compatibility with older OSes and applications. That and a possible negative response from the DOJ and especially the EU. Of course, a large backlash by the tech public couldn't be ruled out either.
"It's a movie about Steve Jobs; the only way for it to be honest is if it's filled with rewritten history and selectively ommitted truths and just blatent lies.
Also, unless Apple sues the producers of this movie, it's not very realistic."
It's a movie about Steve Jobs; the only way for it to be profitable is if it's filled with rewritten history and selectively ommitted truths and just blatent lies. Also, unless Apple sues the producers of this movie, it's not very realistic.
Fixed that for you.
"We are in violation."
Does the US government actually care. Look at what's currently going on. For all intents and purposes the 2nd, 4th, 5th amendments are currently in the the trash can. The rest of the bill of rights isn't much better. And you think the US government is going to care about a little island or an organization it put in place using legal structures defined by that same document. It's amazing the government acknowledges the constitution still exists, Obama included. It's little more than a near transparent shadow of itself, let them declare a king/dictator and be done with it so the next civil war can begin.
The US never acknowledges it made a mistake until long after those that did it are gone and it's been largely forgotten. Just man up already!
"you can just build against yor own libraries in a directory and package it with your application."
The BSDs can do that too. Except commercial vendors like Valve want a standardized in operating system way to install their software with minimum of hassle(self-contained), PBI would allow that.
"That's not true. BSD licenses have "viral" things about copyright notices"
Now you're just spreading FUD. The current 2 clause BSD license doesn't interfere with code reuse. GPL3 plainly does. And before citation needed pops up. You're on the internet. Look it up yourself.
"If they wanted, they could also have made their own game specific BSD based on PC-BSD and run it."
Yes they could. And with the PBI packaging system which installs and runs all the support programs and libraries from the same directory as the main program(game) there wouldn't be any dependency,collision, or version issues with the operating system as Valve would be providing everything needed by the program. It's one package, just download, double-click to install, and start playing. It's basically a windows like install operation. And the BSD license is a plus with developers and commercial entities averse to the GPL and potential license contamination with linux code.
"While he may have had issues, it's dangerous to characterize different opinions as mentally ill."
In this case, lethal. He wasn't mentally ill. There's evidence he weighed his choices and the outcomes. The behaviors of a rational individual. A law used outside of the corner case it was written to solve is often wrong but applied regardless. This abuse is what is being used as a defense by the prosecutors. When a lawyer can't use public opinion to defend themselves they hide behind the law even when it doesn't apply. Always deflecting blame to those that wrote it or the public who elected them instead of their abuse of the system. Just because the system is open to abuse doesn't mean you should or you have to. And yes the prosecutors are to blame as its up to them how to apply the law to a situation.
No law can be written for every situation. So prosecutors have some leeway in it's application. This just wasn't the proper way and some one died. Funny how in lower professions, mistakes like this that kill usually end up with high fines, disbarment, and prison time. The really funny part of this whole thing is the very people these prosecutors have pissed off control practically their whole lives. They better thank their lucky stars we are not as cold as them or they would have been wiped out in every way except the one they forced Aaron to take by now.
Remember Aaron!
Make prosecutors accountable for their decisions!
Reform prosecutor conduct!
"because suicide isn't commonly accepted as the act of a "well" individual."
Except in times of war or fighting crime and then we give medals and accolades for it. Especially when he or she survives the attempt. We call them heros.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
It makes all gun control law illegal, period. I know, how about repealing the 2nd amendment. You know the only legal way instead of the illegal way of marginalizing it to irrelevance. Oh right because it wouldn't happen and a civil war would spring up the next day if it did. So disarm the population any way you can so they are not a threat to government abuses. Government cannot be trusted ever, even the framers of the constitution knew this.
Here's a remedy from before the 1980's. How about treating people with physical and mental problems by treating the actual cause of the problem instead of the symptoms? Right, because that would cost time and money. Never mind it took time and the lack of money to make the problem this bad in the first place.
Now how about getting On Topic.
"don’t think that this was just two or three prosecutors that were doing something unusual."
I'm reminded of "If everyone jumped off a bridge...". The prosecutors decision making power based on the facts of the case got short circuited in the name of career building. Somehow I don't think anything good could've come of this anyway. That's besides the opposite ramifications of trying to shut someone up pointing out failures in proper government behavior in a tortuous way.(where's that quick and speedy trial)
PS I'm still reminded of "If everyone jumps off a bridge...".