One way is that the right to privacy serves the human dignity. In German constitution, human dignity is the fundamental concept on which the constitution is based. Article 1, sentence 1: "human dignity is inviolable".
The other way is that without privacy, truly free speech is impossible, due to fear of repercussions. If they - whoever they might be - know about you, they can come after you. Read this thread, you'll see a lot of suggestions in the way of "if you don't want your information be used against you, don't post on the internet". Tell me, Mr. Anderson... what good is the freedom of speech... if you're unable to speak?
You have the freedom of speech. Nowhere stands that it is the freedom of talking explicitly about me.
Your argument about politicians is completely moot, since they are subjects of public interest so their right to privacy has got explicit limits. I am neither a politician nor other subject of public interest, so my right to privacy goes far further. In fact, personally I consider a right to privacy more important than freedom of speech because without privacy a truly free speech is not possible due to fear of repercussions.
In that case the law would grow obsolete and be replaced with another one. But in the case law, where the judges get to interpret the laws depending on their mood, you get a decision that will be applied two centuries after even if it would be completely ridiculous in more modern times.
When it gets to laws, I prefer extensive ones if they leave no room for ambiguity. For the same reason I don't like computer languages that make undefined behaviour possible.
So in order to maintain your "right to talk about me" - there is no right to talk about me mentioned somewhere - you want to infringe on my right to privacy? Well, fuck you and the horse you rode in on.
Get your facts straight. USSR has existed for 73 years and despite many people think otherwise, Stalin died in 1953 and Stalinism died with him, thanks to Khrushchev.
Sensible? I previously thought so, but she wanted the cheater, lier and enemy of freedom of speach on the internet Guttenberg as an adviser on promoting internet freedom.
ORLY? I read Lord of the Rings when I was 10, and I never thought that the books were hard to read. I loved the books. Silmarillion is hard to read, the works of Stephen Baxter are hard to read, but not Lord of the Rings.
Well, first of all, USSR was second world by the very definition of that term. Second, the Soviet Union was a country with a well developed industry, certainly not bleeding edge, but in the seventies it was only a decade behind USA or Germany. Some of the union republics weren't as developed, though, that's true.
Slashdot Mirror
Done already, replacing a good part of my meat consumption with cheese because I don't want to get gout.
Locked phones do exist here. Especially dumbphones.
Green teas differ very much. Gyokuro can give you instant jiggles while lower grade sencha or gunpowder can be at almost decaf levels.
Yes, because god used a shareware version of Genome Creator.
We can go there by two ways.
One way is that the right to privacy serves the human dignity. In German constitution, human dignity is the fundamental concept on which the constitution is based. Article 1, sentence 1: "human dignity is inviolable".
The other way is that without privacy, truly free speech is impossible, due to fear of repercussions. If they - whoever they might be - know about you, they can come after you. Read this thread, you'll see a lot of suggestions in the way of "if you don't want your information be used against you, don't post on the internet". Tell me, Mr. Anderson... what good is the freedom of speech... if you're unable to speak?
This is just another version of "when you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear". This attitude will bite you in the arse someday.
You have the freedom of speech. Nowhere stands that it is the freedom of talking explicitly about me.
Your argument about politicians is completely moot, since they are subjects of public interest so their right to privacy has got explicit limits. I am neither a politician nor other subject of public interest, so my right to privacy goes far further. In fact, personally I consider a right to privacy more important than freedom of speech because without privacy a truly free speech is not possible due to fear of repercussions.
In that case the law would grow obsolete and be replaced with another one.
But in the case law, where the judges get to interpret the laws depending on their mood, you get a decision that will be applied two centuries after even if it would be completely ridiculous in more modern times.
When it gets to laws, I prefer extensive ones if they leave no room for ambiguity. For the same reason I don't like computer languages that make undefined behaviour possible.
So in order to maintain your "right to talk about me" - there is no right to talk about me mentioned somewhere - you want to infringe on my right to privacy? Well, fuck you and the horse you rode in on.
Except that case law is the rule in only two EU member states out of 27, namely UK and Ireland.
Article 12 of the universal declaration of human rights.
Except that the right for privacy is also fundamental.
Get your facts straight. USSR has existed for 73 years and despite many people think otherwise, Stalin died in 1953 and Stalinism died with him, thanks to Khrushchev.
+1 Pink Floyd reference
They had PDAs in 1989 that could actually fit in a pocket?!
Why? Microsoft had the by far best mobile platform for a few years when the competitors were Palm and Symbian.
I was just nitpicking.
You could have one for a while now, Gigabyte HD5770 Silent Cell.
Sensible? I previously thought so, but she wanted the cheater, lier and enemy of freedom of speach on the internet Guttenberg as an adviser on promoting internet freedom.
ORLY? I read Lord of the Rings when I was 10, and I never thought that the books were hard to read. I loved the books. Silmarillion is hard to read, the works of Stephen Baxter are hard to read, but not Lord of the Rings.
And here I thought I was the only one on Slashdot who have actually liked the good old Windows Mobile.
Well, first of all, USSR was second world by the very definition of that term. Second, the Soviet Union was a country with a well developed industry, certainly not bleeding edge, but in the seventies it was only a decade behind USA or Germany. Some of the union republics weren't as developed, though, that's true.
I had a CFL in a fridge (had a few spares). It was actually working okay, the only downside is that it was not instant on, it took a second.
You say "hippie" like it is a bad thing.
Peace, dude.
He was talking about transliteration, not transcription. Novosibirsk is an accurate transliteration.