Its really the old "Man bites dog" thing. If its not fantastic, its not news.
Generally when it comes to this sort of thing, the importance of the issue is indirectly proportional to the geographic scope of the story. The incidents most likely to affect you will never make it past the local paper....because heart attacks, car accidents, and slips in the tub are not interesting.
Which is why this research is so vital, because terrorists will not take it upon themselves to massively increase our perception of the likely hood of attack, so we need to do it ourselves, and this is the research we need to determine how best to manipulate ourselves into a proper state of terror, to advance political goals and keep the funding flowing.
Problem is, other people have similar sorts of systems and similar weaknesses. I used to work at a company that did IT for several hospitals (a relationship defining "its complicated" since they founded us) and well, simple auditing of usage after the fact is so..... 1990s.
By the time I left there was already some real time auditing and control in place, even to the extent of flagging attempts to access inappropriate records. In fact, if you were to access the medical record of your next door neighbor, or a relative, it would be flagged as suspicious access. The only records I knew of that you could look up frivolously were Santa Claus' and the Easter Bunny (Santa had much more hilarious prescriptions).
I am pretty sure you couldn't easily use that system to download large swaths of records before you got noticed. And that system had additional issues like, you basically need to let most people access most records because you don't want to deny access in an emergency so you HAVE to err on the side of letting the authorized user see everything and audit their usage.
Why would any other system have such a restraint? A nurse might need to emergency look up a patient she found in the hallway.... federal employee information... who has those needs on an emerhency basis? Seems they could have rate limits and cross checks against work loads.
Honestly that is about what I expected. I have no illusions about why soldiers fight, its one of the reasons I have come to be so anti-military because I realize what a pack of lies it is kids are pumped full of and then asked to fight and kill for. Honestly, I see recruiters as child abusers.
The funny thing is, this pisses off a lot of people but, when I talk to some veterans and hear what they have to say, its just, wow. The people who actually were in the shit they know the truth. There is a reason fraternizing with the enemy is a crime....because the low level soldiers on both sides almost always have more in common with each other than the people who want them to kill each other.
In fact, I dare say there is no situation in all of history where war was necessary but for the actions of a few wealthy politicians who made it so with their dealings. Setting up their petty alliances, brokering with each other over the lives of others....then duping those people into fighting for them. That is the entire history of war back to before people started writing it down.
But I am 35, I remember being 18, I woke up politically a bit early, and even I had only been paying attention for what, 2-3 years at that time. The more I have come to understand people, I think I understand why we fight and why we war and, I honestly hate it and think its stupid.
Yet I still play Battlefield 4. Aspects of war are fun, the "laser tag" aspects, the competition, the excitement. I can see why a person like myself who has never seen the real thing and doesn't connect it with deep loss can be attracted to it....thats the danger. The allure of excitement.
Its like I was talking with a friend of mine, we can pretend ISIS is a bunch of evil people who hate us for our freedoms and Al Queda attacked us with no provokation but, look who "our" allies are. Our own "best buddies" the Saudis need international pressure heaped on them to not stone women to death as punishment for being gang raped. They are mad at us because people like the Bushes have been over there wheeling and dealing for oil and making enemies for a century now. Wealthy profiteers of ours went over there, made deals with truely terrible tyrants, and then ran for the flag the moment they saw resistance; and its any wonder people over there associate their actions with us....but of course now at this point, that shit is all so entrenched its official and it is us.
And what really gets me is, I hear the other stories too. I read the posts by the soldiers who are like "fuck you, we build schools" and I get that. That's the worst part, we do wrap up a lot of good in some dishonest lies, and package them together with the same naked profiteering that created the whole mess to begin with.
Maybe if the government didn't have such a reputation for being corrupt and siphoning so much money into the military industrial complex for so long, we could have an honest debate about building a school for someone else, but there is so much distrust it can't happen, and much of that distrust is....entirely warranted.
You know this is the nuance that gets lost in so much argument. I couldn't be so mad if there wasn't something I once looked up to and loved. I tell people every day I see the flag I think of torture, because they told me we are a nation of laws and I believed in that once. But over and over I just saw we were a nation of lies. Law is for the people who can't afford a lawyer, or aren't following orders. We are only against torture when other people do it. That isn't a nation of laws at all. I can't love that.
And don't get me wrong, its like you say, you shoot because the guy next to you is. I understand people do terrible things out of rage, or in the moment. Certainly if I was in a dark room with a man who had hurt my wife you can believe terrible things might happen; or put my life in danger, see how much of a pacifist I am then; but.... the cold methodical organization of a plan? It gives me shivers just thinking about it and, we let
This. Ideally you see it with plenty of warning so that you have time to deflect it. Shit maybe you use multiple nukes over the course of a week or two to nudge it into a safer flyby, possibly even one that impacts the moon (for 10 billion bonus points), or flings it off onto a path that will not meet up with us again.
Shit should make an x-prize contest out of asteroid snooker. Prize to the company that demonstrates the capability to take an NEO, and deflect its flyby by an amount which would prove ability to deflect a real hit of appropriate size. Must use no more than N nuclear weapons (obviously the sponsoring nation would have to handle the launch and deployment phases).
Object Must not do another flyby of earth for another 200 years minimum.
Extra points for designs using existing warheads that can be easily repurposed.
Extra points for never having another flyby (solar escape, capture by another planet, non-intersecting orbit, etc all valid end states)
Make it do a grand tour of the solar system, and dump into the sun: Lead engineer gets a state renamed after him.
> So, what was the Camera? Kodak? Bolex? Did Gramps get the film developed locally, or did he save > the reels for Stateside? If there is a good collection, have you contacted the Library Of Congress? > They love that sort of stuff.
Honestly, I have considered once or twice that I should find a better home for them than the lock box in the basement where he kept them. The camera was long gone (or put away, it might still be in the house stashed somewhere, I imagine if it is we will find it after my grandmother passes and we finally have no choice but to go through everything). For some reason I want to say Kodak.
I still have the projector and well... I hate to admit this but the rheostat I gave him to slow down the motor with. It um, "worked" but, knowing what I do now, I probably wont use it like that again.
Maybe it should be dead. Honestly, without this how would we, the people, ever know the truth?
The truth has been denied to the public for far too long. Its not like using lies to manufacture the public image of your war in one way or another, either to deny you were causing it, or when it really started, or what the real reasons are.... it wasn't even remotely new when the Gulf of Tonkin happened.
The lack of ability for large forces to maintain exactly this kind of secrecy is probably the best thing to ever happen in history.
You are indeed correct, it was film. On reels, in fact, its still on reels. Hell, he didn't show any of them for years because the motor on his projector burned out and when he got a new one it was the wrong speed, and he and I had to figure out how to get it to play at the right speed.
I grew up in the 80s/90s man, its all video to me.
I don't know about that. People do change over time. I remember being a teenager and talking with my grandfather about the videos he brought back from Korea. He showed a bunch of videos of the camps and the guys hanging around.... so I asked "Did you take any footage of the fighting" "Yes I took some, I used to mount the camera on the gun sometimes" "Why don't you ever show those?"....
The look of absolute horror on his face when he asked "Why would you want to see that?" is something I have not forgotten.
The similarity is a bit striking in terms of technological overpowering, here is what he told me about the battles (never did seek out his footage), he was in a half track, relaying information from the radio.
"We would be at one side a hill. You would hear a bugle call come over the hillside and then, on the radio 'they are coming over the hill', and a few seconds later, there would be men coming over the hill right at our machine guns, and we would just mow them all down" That is really all he ever has to say about it.
People generally don't like war too much who actually have to see it. Viet Nam wasn't a shit storm domestically because it was particularly bad compared to other justifications for conflict. The Gulf of Tonkin lie is about par for the course on how wars get started. The real difference was the journalists actually showing people war directly.
Now all footage is carefully coreographed and any gore avoided like the plague because, the truth doesn't drum up support. However, you can't hide the truth from the people you ask to fight.
> It got to the point we put in very large bold characters in our release notes... we work on this version of Java, if > you get clever and introduce your own version of Java, we won't talk to you until you confirm the bug in the > version we support.
It gets really fun when open source folks do this, I actually had this conversation recently:
"Have you tried the latest version? That module has been updated since the version you are using" "No, but I am looking at your code on github now, line X would be where there should be logic to handle this case, but it isn't there."
I then did verify it with the latest version, but it failed as expected.:)
And others. I had a hell of a time back when my job involved compiling all third party software we used that wasn't part of the OS distribution. Several really fun PHP updates. My particular favorite was when a minor point release actually moved entire modules out of the core and into a seperate download..... talk about incompatable versions!
Seems any time we hear the FBI is investigating anything, it turns out they are partly to blame, if not fully.
How many "terrorists" have been mentally ill men setup for profit by CIs like Robert Childs ( http://fcir.org/2014/12/26/fbi... ). How many incidents have been FBI made plans, using FBI made contacts, with FBI made devices?
I would just about bet that somewhere, at the root of this, there is an FBI paid informant who helped make it happen.
> The only reason he has managed to avoid this so far is because of his involvement in Wikileaks, and the > resultant political help from Ecquador. He's using politics and the cloud of US extradition over Wikileaks to avoid > Swedish prosecution
Ok, lets assume for the sake of argument this is all reasonable and correct. Wouldn't you say an individual molester getting away because of public uproar over the perception of international bad acting, including illegal detention and torture.....is a small price to pay for the powers our leadership needs to keep us free?
So what if our country has such a terrible international reputation, its the reputation our leaders built doing what they HAD to do to KEEP US FREE! right?
Sure, maybe if they hadn't inspired so many whistleblowers, he wouldn't have so much credibility and there would already be justice for his crime but.... if you want to make omlets you have to break eggs, and justice is too fragile to keep in tact in the face of terror.
> Sweden would have to get the permission of the UK to extradite Assange. Even if it were to happen (not likely) > that isn't going to happen until Swedish justice is satisfied.
Permission? Really? So what punishment would they face if they didn't do that?
Its always easier to get forgiveness than permission. Do you really think if that happened he would be able to sue anyone? IF he did, do you think the USA would be all "Oh well rules are rules, you get to go back and we have a do-over".
No, that permission is, at best, an academic issue that can be debated, while he is sitting a CIA black site.
Depends, sometimes there is someone who can. While any given day is unmemorable, each day and some of its details may be notable to someone. There are a number of random events I have been able to work out pretty exact dates for just because they happened in relation to something else that places the event in time...like where I was going that day.
A couple of years back a girl at a local store asked my wife and I if we lived near the neighborhood we did because of where she saw us walking. Of course we do, and I instantly knew by what she said where we were going at the time, so even now, if it mattered in some way (not that I can imagine how it would) I could pin down the exact day and pretty close to the time she saw us, even without having noticed it at the time.... just because I know we were on the way to see my doctor.
For every 20 or 50 people who just walk by, there is that one guy who was stuck in traffic on his way to an event marked in his calendar.
Yes but for all we really know Sweeden is an easier place to black bag him and move him off to one of the many secret US prisons as well, where he might even be secretly tortured, afterall, its what the US does, and has not prosecuted anyone for.
Dictionary definitions are terribly boring arguments. Dictionaries seldom even attempt to include all known words much less all known definitions, and have real trouble keeping up with common usage of words. They are out of date the moment they are written.
There is no single common accepted standard for all definitions. Not only that but, the idea that you could completely sum up such a word in a few brief sentences is kind of silly. There can be no disagreement on what the definition of fascism is, was, should be today....because some guy wrote down what he thought in a book?
Where are the credentials of the person who wrote that particular entry? Where are his sources cited?
Dictionaries are useful when you don't have any context for understanding a word, they are NOT by any stretch of the imagination, the final authority on definitions....and of all of them....only one that I know of, in the English Language, even ATTEMPTS to be that, and that is OED.
> but finding someone guilty of a standing law is different than being in support of the law itse
I disagree entirely. Why would you even bother with a jury of peers rather than experts if the whole point wasn't for individuals to test the law itself against general sensibilities?
One should not be convicted of a crime solely because some dusty law book says so or because its been tradition. When the law is wrong it deserves opposition and it deserves to be broken, law makers and prosecutors deserve to see men walk free from courts.
I dunno I get pretty inpolite about a lot of these issues even in person. we are talking about people who enforce laws that are far more repugnant than anything said here. There is no justification at all for drug laws or suffering the tyranny lovers who make and enforce them.
They deserve to be insulted, and put in their place amongst the worst criminals in human history.
Though, I have just about kicked a guy out of my house for admitting he was a on a jury that found someone guilty of drug laws, so much for anonymity.
I don't see an issue here, not a single threat, and frankly, when you look at the laws these judges enforce, case in point here, really....I see nothing repugnant. I dislike these shitbags this much too. I wish people like this judge would do us all a favor and jump feet first into a wood chipper. Would make the world a much better place.
and I don't need to be anonymous. No threat here....I wish she would do the world a favor...for us.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe the proper phrase would be CAN use slew. Its actually a command line option on startup of ntp.
I only know this because a particular piece of software I have had to install requires it and will refuse to install if its not set.
Its really the old "Man bites dog" thing. If its not fantastic, its not news.
Generally when it comes to this sort of thing, the importance of the issue is indirectly proportional to the geographic scope of the story. The incidents most likely to affect you will never make it past the local paper....because heart attacks, car accidents, and slips in the tub are not interesting.
Which is why this research is so vital, because terrorists will not take it upon themselves to massively increase our perception of the likely hood of attack, so we need to do it ourselves, and this is the research we need to determine how best to manipulate ourselves into a proper state of terror, to advance political goals and keep the funding flowing.
Problem is, other people have similar sorts of systems and similar weaknesses. I used to work at a company that did IT for several hospitals (a relationship defining "its complicated" since they founded us) and well, simple auditing of usage after the fact is so..... 1990s.
By the time I left there was already some real time auditing and control in place, even to the extent of flagging attempts to access inappropriate records. In fact, if you were to access the medical record of your next door neighbor, or a relative, it would be flagged as suspicious access. The only records I knew of that you could look up frivolously were Santa Claus' and the Easter Bunny (Santa had much more hilarious prescriptions).
I am pretty sure you couldn't easily use that system to download large swaths of records before you got noticed. And that system had additional issues like, you basically need to let most people access most records because you don't want to deny access in an emergency so you HAVE to err on the side of letting the authorized user see everything and audit their usage.
Why would any other system have such a restraint? A nurse might need to emergency look up a patient she found in the hallway.... federal employee information... who has those needs on an emerhency basis? Seems they could have rate limits and cross checks against work loads.
Honestly that is about what I expected. I have no illusions about why soldiers fight, its one of the reasons I have come to be so anti-military because I realize what a pack of lies it is kids are pumped full of and then asked to fight and kill for. Honestly, I see recruiters as child abusers.
The funny thing is, this pisses off a lot of people but, when I talk to some veterans and hear what they have to say, its just, wow. The people who actually were in the shit they know the truth. There is a reason fraternizing with the enemy is a crime....because the low level soldiers on both sides almost always have more in common with each other than the people who want them to kill each other.
In fact, I dare say there is no situation in all of history where war was necessary but for the actions of a few wealthy politicians who made it so with their dealings. Setting up their petty alliances, brokering with each other over the lives of others....then duping those people into fighting for them. That is the entire history of war back to before people started writing it down.
But I am 35, I remember being 18, I woke up politically a bit early, and even I had only been paying attention for what, 2-3 years at that time. The more I have come to understand people, I think I understand why we fight and why we war and, I honestly hate it and think its stupid.
Yet I still play Battlefield 4. Aspects of war are fun, the "laser tag" aspects, the competition, the excitement. I can see why a person like myself who has never seen the real thing and doesn't connect it with deep loss can be attracted to it....thats the danger. The allure of excitement.
Its like I was talking with a friend of mine, we can pretend ISIS is a bunch of evil people who hate us for our freedoms and Al Queda attacked us with no provokation but, look who "our" allies are. Our own "best buddies" the Saudis need international pressure heaped on them to not stone women to death as punishment for being gang raped. They are mad at us because people like the Bushes have been over there wheeling and dealing for oil and making enemies for a century now. Wealthy profiteers of ours went over there, made deals with truely terrible tyrants, and then ran for the flag the moment they saw resistance; and its any wonder people over there associate their actions with us....but of course now at this point, that shit is all so entrenched its official and it is us.
And what really gets me is, I hear the other stories too. I read the posts by the soldiers who are like "fuck you, we build schools" and I get that. That's the worst part, we do wrap up a lot of good in some dishonest lies, and package them together with the same naked profiteering that created the whole mess to begin with.
Maybe if the government didn't have such a reputation for being corrupt and siphoning so much money into the military industrial complex for so long, we could have an honest debate about building a school for someone else, but there is so much distrust it can't happen, and much of that distrust is....entirely warranted.
You know this is the nuance that gets lost in so much argument. I couldn't be so mad if there wasn't something I once looked up to and loved. I tell people every day I see the flag I think of torture, because they told me we are a nation of laws and I believed in that once. But over and over I just saw we were a nation of lies. Law is for the people who can't afford a lawyer, or aren't following orders. We are only against torture when other people do it. That isn't a nation of laws at all. I can't love that.
And don't get me wrong, its like you say, you shoot because the guy next to you is. I understand people do terrible things out of rage, or in the moment. Certainly if I was in a dark room with a man who had hurt my wife you can believe terrible things might happen; or put my life in danger, see how much of a pacifist I am then; but.... the cold methodical organization of a plan? It gives me shivers just thinking about it and, we let
This. Ideally you see it with plenty of warning so that you have time to deflect it. Shit maybe you use multiple nukes over the course of a week or two to nudge it into a safer flyby, possibly even one that impacts the moon (for 10 billion bonus points), or flings it off onto a path that will not meet up with us again.
Shit should make an x-prize contest out of asteroid snooker. Prize to the company that demonstrates the capability to take an NEO, and deflect its flyby by an amount which would prove ability to deflect a real hit of appropriate size. Must use no more than N nuclear weapons (obviously the sponsoring nation would have to handle the launch and deployment phases).
Object Must not do another flyby of earth for another 200 years minimum.
Extra points for designs using existing warheads that can be easily repurposed.
Extra points for never having another flyby (solar escape, capture by another planet, non-intersecting orbit, etc all valid end states)
Make it do a grand tour of the solar system, and dump into the sun: Lead engineer gets a state renamed after him.
> So, what was the Camera? Kodak? Bolex? Did Gramps get the film developed locally, or did he save
> the reels for Stateside? If there is a good collection, have you contacted the Library Of Congress?
> They love that sort of stuff.
Honestly, I have considered once or twice that I should find a better home for them than the lock box in the basement where he kept them. The camera was long gone (or put away, it might still be in the house stashed somewhere, I imagine if it is we will find it after my grandmother passes and we finally have no choice but to go through everything). For some reason I want to say Kodak.
I still have the projector and well... I hate to admit this but the rheostat I gave him to slow down the motor with. It um, "worked" but, knowing what I do now, I probably wont use it like that again.
Maybe it should be dead. Honestly, without this how would we, the people, ever know the truth?
The truth has been denied to the public for far too long. Its not like using lies to manufacture the public image of your war in one way or another, either to deny you were causing it, or when it really started, or what the real reasons are.... it wasn't even remotely new when the Gulf of Tonkin happened.
The lack of ability for large forces to maintain exactly this kind of secrecy is probably the best thing to ever happen in history.
You are indeed correct, it was film. On reels, in fact, its still on reels. Hell, he didn't show any of them for years because the motor on his projector burned out and when he got a new one it was the wrong speed, and he and I had to figure out how to get it to play at the right speed.
I grew up in the 80s/90s man, its all video to me.
I don't know about that. People do change over time. I remember being a teenager and talking with my grandfather about the videos he brought back from Korea. He showed a bunch of videos of the camps and the guys hanging around.... so I asked "Did you take any footage of the fighting" "Yes I took some, I used to mount the camera on the gun sometimes" "Why don't you ever show those?"....
The look of absolute horror on his face when he asked "Why would you want to see that?" is something I have not forgotten.
The similarity is a bit striking in terms of technological overpowering, here is what he told me about the battles (never did seek out his footage), he was in a half track, relaying information from the radio.
"We would be at one side a hill. You would hear a bugle call come over the hillside and then, on the radio 'they are coming over the hill', and a few seconds later, there would be men coming over the hill right at our machine guns, and we would just mow them all down" That is really all he ever has to say about it.
People generally don't like war too much who actually have to see it. Viet Nam wasn't a shit storm domestically because it was particularly bad compared to other justifications for conflict. The Gulf of Tonkin lie is about par for the course on how wars get started. The real difference was the journalists actually showing people war directly.
Now all footage is carefully coreographed and any gore avoided like the plague because, the truth doesn't drum up support. However, you can't hide the truth from the people you ask to fight.
Who ever said the jury is the BEST place. It is most certainly NOT the best place.
However, when all other places have failed, and failed over and over, then it is the LAST place.
> It got to the point we put in very large bold characters in our release notes ... we work on this version of Java, if
> you get clever and introduce your own version of Java, we won't talk to you until you confirm the bug in the
> version we support.
It gets really fun when open source folks do this, I actually had this conversation recently:
"Have you tried the latest version? That module has been updated since the version you are using"
"No, but I am looking at your code on github now, line X would be where there should be logic to handle this case, but it isn't there."
I then did verify it with the latest version, but it failed as expected. :)
And others. I had a hell of a time back when my job involved compiling all third party software we used that wasn't part of the OS distribution. Several really fun PHP updates. My particular favorite was when a minor point release actually moved entire modules out of the core and into a seperate download..... talk about incompatable versions!
Seems any time we hear the FBI is investigating anything, it turns out they are partly to blame, if not fully.
How many "terrorists" have been mentally ill men setup for profit by CIs like Robert Childs ( http://fcir.org/2014/12/26/fbi... ). How many incidents have been FBI made plans, using FBI made contacts, with FBI made devices?
I would just about bet that somewhere, at the root of this, there is an FBI paid informant who helped make it happen.
> The only reason he has managed to avoid this so far is because of his involvement in Wikileaks, and the
> resultant political help from Ecquador. He's using politics and the cloud of US extradition over Wikileaks to avoid
> Swedish prosecution
Ok, lets assume for the sake of argument this is all reasonable and correct. Wouldn't you say an individual molester getting away because of public uproar over the perception of international bad acting, including illegal detention and torture.....is a small price to pay for the powers our leadership needs to keep us free?
So what if our country has such a terrible international reputation, its the reputation our leaders built doing what they HAD to do to KEEP US FREE! right?
Sure, maybe if they hadn't inspired so many whistleblowers, he wouldn't have so much credibility and there would already be justice for his crime but.... if you want to make omlets you have to break eggs, and justice is too fragile to keep in tact in the face of terror.
> Sweden would have to get the permission of the UK to extradite Assange. Even if it were to happen (not likely)
> that isn't going to happen until Swedish justice is satisfied.
Permission? Really? So what punishment would they face if they didn't do that?
Its always easier to get forgiveness than permission. Do you really think if that happened he would be able to sue anyone? IF he did, do you think the USA would be all "Oh well rules are rules, you get to go back and we have a do-over".
No, that permission is, at best, an academic issue that can be debated, while he is sitting a CIA black site.
Depends, sometimes there is someone who can. While any given day is unmemorable, each day and some of its details may be notable to someone. There are a number of random events I have been able to work out pretty exact dates for just because they happened in relation to something else that places the event in time...like where I was going that day.
A couple of years back a girl at a local store asked my wife and I if we lived near the neighborhood we did because of where she saw us walking. Of course we do, and I instantly knew by what she said where we were going at the time, so even now, if it mattered in some way (not that I can imagine how it would) I could pin down the exact day and pretty close to the time she saw us, even without having noticed it at the time.... just because I know we were on the way to see my doctor.
For every 20 or 50 people who just walk by, there is that one guy who was stuck in traffic on his way to an event marked in his calendar.
Yes but for all we really know Sweeden is an easier place to black bag him and move him off to one of the many secret US prisons as well, where he might even be secretly tortured, afterall, its what the US does, and has not prosecuted anyone for.
Completely redundant...... let me fix that "...Any Child.... is pretty much assured to wind up really fucked up" from somebodies point of view.
However, when you realize how fucked up that persons point of view is, it all averages out to normal, whatever that is.
Dictionary definitions are terribly boring arguments. Dictionaries seldom even attempt to include all known words much less all known definitions, and have real trouble keeping up with common usage of words. They are out of date the moment they are written.
There is no single common accepted standard for all definitions. Not only that but, the idea that you could completely sum up such a word in a few brief sentences is kind of silly. There can be no disagreement on what the definition of fascism is, was, should be today....because some guy wrote down what he thought in a book?
Where are the credentials of the person who wrote that particular entry? Where are his sources cited?
Dictionaries are useful when you don't have any context for understanding a word, they are NOT by any stretch of the imagination, the final authority on definitions....and of all of them....only one that I know of, in the English Language, even ATTEMPTS to be that, and that is OED.
I dunno, I consider the entire concept of an Oath vile, no person with good and just intentions would ever ask a person to utter one.
> but finding someone guilty of a standing law is different than being in support of the law itse
I disagree entirely. Why would you even bother with a jury of peers rather than experts if the whole point wasn't for individuals to test the law itself against general sensibilities?
One should not be convicted of a crime solely because some dusty law book says so or because its been tradition. When the law is wrong it deserves opposition and it deserves to be broken, law makers and prosecutors deserve to see men walk free from courts.
The #1 job of the law is to BE RESPECTABLE.
I dunno I get pretty inpolite about a lot of these issues even in person. we are talking about people who enforce laws that are far more repugnant than anything said here. There is no justification at all for drug laws or suffering the tyranny lovers who make and enforce them.
They deserve to be insulted, and put in their place amongst the worst criminals in human history.
Though, I have just about kicked a guy out of my house for admitting he was a on a jury that found someone guilty of drug laws, so much for anonymity.
I don't see an issue here, not a single threat, and frankly, when you look at the laws these judges enforce, case in point here, really....I see nothing repugnant. I dislike these shitbags this much too. I wish people like this judge would do us all a favor and jump feet first into a wood chipper. Would make the world a much better place.
and I don't need to be anonymous. No threat here....I wish she would do the world a favor...for us.
So it is ok to let them die because some script kiddie owned the box, because in that case you are not liable.
Makes perfect business sense.
Yes, testing patches is part of the fucking process, maybe they should have figured that into the business plan up front.