The problem is, they are either a platform or a publisher.
The difference is in responsibility. If they are a platform, then they have a wide range of latitude on content on that platform. They aren't responsible. The moment they start picking an choosing, they start to become a publisher, and the content protection narrows substantially.
Censorship is a natural tendency, and we all ought to fight against it in all its forms. The idea that some ideas are just "too dangerous" is a slippery slope that we don't want to ride down.
If you create a "perfect" creation, then it wouldn't have free will. The moment you insert free will, then you'll create the thing with an imperfection, the ability to choose wrong (or right). Unless you value free will above being perfect, then choosing wrongly is something that can be included in a perfect design.
There are a number of various stories about how choosing perfection leads to less than optimal results.
My home theater is still on par with movie theaters, with the exception of the size of the screen, which doesn't dominate my living room. Surround, Balanced, dark, with real popcorn butter. Add in, I can pause the film being played to.... get more popcorn, and it is a win.
The point being, there is very little value added to spending $15 ticket to see a movie, in a crowded theater. Add in the $6 soda and $10 Bucket of Popcorn. I'd rather spend that kind of dough on a nice couple NY steaks, or even Filet and have a great meal and a movie at home, relaxed, in my PJs.
You would have thought we would have learned that criminals and terrorists...
That is all fine well and good, but it is clear that finding, capturing, and successfully prosecuting said terrorists is largely fruitless ventures. You can't even guarantee that they are in any jurisdiction that even if you knew who they were could even get your hands on them to prosecute. For all you know, they are in Russia, NK, China or Pakistan, and good luck getting those criminals to trial.
It is much easier to properly secure your shit in the first place. You can think government is here to help you, but you're wrong. Government is the last step in helping yourself, not the first.
The more likely scenario is that the story went something like this.
IT People: "Hey, we have vulnerable systems, we need $$ and $$$ to secure them properly" Mayor's People: "Sorry, I have this program here that is pure ego boosting and is quite flashy, you don't get anything for your budget. In fact, I need some of what you used to have back" IT People: "Okay, but when this shit goes south, and you try to blame me, I have this Email showing you said "no" to fixing this problem. Mayor's People: "Ummmm you gonna vote for me again, right?"
The problem is that these systems are old and crap, and can't be secured.
THIS is utter bullshit. They CAN be secured. I can secure those devices pretty damn easy a couple different ways, and all it takes is sufficient levels of funding to provide the kind of security needed.
Here are a few ways one can secure them.
1) Don't have them publicly accessible internet. (VPN, Private Network, P2P network to a secured facility) 2) Access control systems in place, with randomly changing passwords, with keys only available to a few. 3) Pen Test the systems on a regular basis, shore up weaknesses. 4) Pay for competent IT people.
All of those have varying levels of costs and one must measure the costs against the chances of being compromised.
I think male means having a XY Chromosome. It is objective. Having XX means Female. And in the rare cases of XYY, XXX, XXY, and a few others, we have to have some measure of extended viewpoint. Most, if not all Trans people are not Chromosome defected in any way.
He is for XY, She is for XX.
Your Royal Highness is reserved for Queens/Kings not just anyone claiming to be a sovereign..
What is morally contemptible is a government set up in such a way that this is the only reasonable option. There is NO guarantee that if you give info to a Federal Agent that they won't use it against you.
Trump is the guy elected after Obama. The better of two really bad choices for a large portion of the electorate. Keep in mind, the other choice sucked as much as Trump.
Bernie Sanders doesn't work for anyone but himself. He dresses it up in populist left wing idiocy, but his three houses show he is a full and complete hypocrite. He should donate two of them to people without homes. He is the 1% he hates. He hates himself, having never worked a day in his life. Definition:Parasite
Warren is a lying fake Native American, and was caught as such. She claimed native heritage and when caught with less native blood than the average American she claims she never did. Actual Documentation shows otherwise. Definition:Fauxahauntas.
AOC is an illiterate mess and a huge blight. When the founder of Greenpeace calls her on the carpet for "Green New Deal", you know she is bat shit looney. Yes, please keep shilling to AOC and her killing 25,000 well paid jobs that she doesn't feel are appropriate for New Yorkers. That is the definition of elitist snob. She obviously knows better being a fucking bartender what kind of jobs people actually want.
Aint nobody heard of Ro Khanna. How about you point to the other fresh face of the Democrat Party, Omar, the biggot Jew hater Muslim, who the Democrats can't actually call on the carpet because that would make them.... "Islamophobes" and part of the "Zionist conspiracy". Fucking racist assholes, the lot of them.
nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself
Lots of sub-clauses here, but this is the one that is key.
"I refuse to testify on the grounds that it might incriminate me"
This does not indicate that you have or haven't committed a crime, as there is no reasonable person who knows all the crimes they may or may not have committed. There are just too damn many, and the government can use ALL of them against you should you testify. And should you accidentally admit that you committed a crime (that you weren't aware of) they could AND HAVE used such as a witness against people, which is all the warning you need.
Under no circumstances should a person ever speak and answer questions of/from a federal agent.
And as for everyone here, it is important to understand the US Government has become the enemy of the people, and under no circumstances should you ever say anything to a government agent. Ever.
"I'm taking the fifth. I refuse to answer any questions. Under no circumstances can you infer guilt by my remaining silent and refusing to answer any and all questions, per my Constitutional Rights. Am I free to go or am I being detained?"
Not a She. His XY Chromosomes says he's a male. That is how science classifies him.
Better? Or are you "just saying" that "just saying" something doesn't make it so. He can call himself a girl all s/he wants I don't give a shit about whatever gender they think they are, but saying something ("just sayin") doesn't make it so, even according to your own logic. S/He could call themselves the Queen of England for all I care, it doesn't make it so.
You're not entitled to your own facts. Objective Reality Hurts
Ok, so how do you feel about a coward who lied 5 times
I dunno. I know how I feel about you though based on that one statement, that you represented for yourself.
You're a douchebag idiot who can't help himself/herself/catself from inserting something completely irrelevant in an effort to try to score brownie points.
Drumpf the traitor
yeah, and that confirms my suspicions. You think you're so clever when all you are is a parrot spewing whatever someone else says that fits your world view.
Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow, Creeps in this petty pace from day to day, To the last syllable of recorded time; And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle! Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player, That struts and frets his hour upon the stage, And then is heard no more. It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.
You don't understand American Politics. Trump didn't have a chance last time either. Almost all the Media Pundits were wrong last time, and they are wrong for all the same reasons this time.
And Democrats have gone Batshit Crazy and Nancy Pelosi is looking like the most grownup in the crowd.
The fact that Warren is still viable after her "I'm an Indian. No I never claimed to be Indian. Hey look, I have less Indian than most Americans that proves I'm Indian, but I am not claiming to be Indian" stunt is proof how bat shit crazy they are.
The rampant Anti-Semitism in the party is fracturing the Jewish part of their coalition.
Blacks are starting to figure out that after 60 years of "civil rights" that the Democrats aren't really supportive. Now with "Hey look, Illegal Aliens are the preferred minority" bit, more and more are realizing that the Democrats were the real racists all along, only courting the Black vote every other and four years, while ignoring them during off election years.
Hell, even Californians and New Yorkers are starting to bail on their Liberal states, the only problem is they haven't figured out that Taxing People to death (and beyond) isn't productive and are taking their stupid ideas with them.
America is having boom years, record Employment, Jobs, wage Growth.... If Trump ran SIMPLY on that, he'll win in a landslide.
And the tired "America and Trump Supporters are Racist" tag line by liberals is all but gone after Covington Catholic boys and Jussie Smollett proves that is the best the media can find in "racism" category are FAKE and fraudulent. THAT is the best they can actually find. Meanwhile the actual violence by Antifa Types and deranged left-wing loons are largely panned as "Not that common" (but happen way more often than racist violence)
Which of the confirmed candidates do you think has a chance?
consensus can be limiting because it naturally opposes new radical ideas. However, most radical new ideas are complete shit
This is the problem, in a nutshell. E=MC**2 was "radical" idea. Simplistic, yet radical. Quantum Mechanics was a "Radical" idea. It still is goofy weird... but... for now... it appears more or less correct. But I have no doubt as we further discover new and improved methods, this too will be replaced with something better.
Of course you're right, but it sounds "ominous" doesn't it. Conveying a sense of dread and imperiling our Democracy (er... republic). Which was the goal, all along.
The problem with the MSM is that it repeatedly sides with "narratives" (story telling) and not with just telling us what happened. It is the story telling (fibbing) that gets them into trouble.
All one has to do is look at the two recent cases(Covington Catholic, Smollett), where the "narrative" that was being told didn't actually happen, and certainly not the way it was being reported initially in the MSM. In both cases the "narrative" was the story, not the actual events.
People want to understand why "Fake News" is a thing need only look to these two events to see that it does, indeed happen. Both these "stories" were "fake".
The MSM doesn't even try to be fair anymore. And because of that, a large portion of the population doesn't believe them any more. They are, themselves, to blame here. The difference between a Hannity and a Don Lemon is that Hannity has a clear agenda, and doesn't hide it behind "objective' narrative, that isn't true. That actually makes Hannity (or even Maddow) more reliable. Not because he isn't wrong, but rather because when he is wrong, because it can be blamed on his narrative. Don Lemon has a narrative he tries to hide (that he is objective) and that makes him less reliable largely because the narrative is false.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, they are either a platform or a publisher.
The difference is in responsibility. If they are a platform, then they have a wide range of latitude on content on that platform. They aren't responsible. The moment they start picking an choosing, they start to become a publisher, and the content protection narrows substantially.
Censorship is a natural tendency, and we all ought to fight against it in all its forms. The idea that some ideas are just "too dangerous" is a slippery slope that we don't want to ride down.
BleachBit to the rescue again!
If you create a "perfect" creation, then it wouldn't have free will. The moment you insert free will, then you'll create the thing with an imperfection, the ability to choose wrong (or right). Unless you value free will above being perfect, then choosing wrongly is something that can be included in a perfect design.
There are a number of various stories about how choosing perfection leads to less than optimal results.
Only one of the suggestions (first one, admittedly) has to do with networking.
But yeah, I didn't read anything. ;)
My home theater is still on par with movie theaters, with the exception of the size of the screen, which doesn't dominate my living room. Surround, Balanced, dark, with real popcorn butter. Add in, I can pause the film being played to .... get more popcorn, and it is a win.
The point being, there is very little value added to spending $15 ticket to see a movie, in a crowded theater. Add in the $6 soda and $10 Bucket of Popcorn. I'd rather spend that kind of dough on a nice couple NY steaks, or even Filet and have a great meal and a movie at home, relaxed, in my PJs.
Tell me again why I should go to the theater?
You would have thought we would have learned that criminals and terrorists ...
That is all fine well and good, but it is clear that finding, capturing, and successfully prosecuting said terrorists is largely fruitless ventures. You can't even guarantee that they are in any jurisdiction that even if you knew who they were could even get your hands on them to prosecute. For all you know, they are in Russia, NK, China or Pakistan, and good luck getting those criminals to trial.
It is much easier to properly secure your shit in the first place. You can think government is here to help you, but you're wrong. Government is the last step in helping yourself, not the first.
The more likely scenario is that the story went something like this.
IT People: "Hey, we have vulnerable systems, we need $$ and $$$ to secure them properly"
Mayor's People: "Sorry, I have this program here that is pure ego boosting and is quite flashy, you don't get anything for your budget. In fact, I need some of what you used to have back"
IT People: "Okay, but when this shit goes south, and you try to blame me, I have this Email showing you said "no" to fixing this problem.
Mayor's People: "Ummmm you gonna vote for me again, right?"
The problem is that these systems are old and crap, and can't be secured.
THIS is utter bullshit. They CAN be secured. I can secure those devices pretty damn easy a couple different ways, and all it takes is sufficient levels of funding to provide the kind of security needed.
Here are a few ways one can secure them.
1) Don't have them publicly accessible internet. (VPN, Private Network, P2P network to a secured facility)
2) Access control systems in place, with randomly changing passwords, with keys only available to a few.
3) Pen Test the systems on a regular basis, shore up weaknesses.
4) Pay for competent IT people.
All of those have varying levels of costs and one must measure the costs against the chances of being compromised.
I think male means having a XY Chromosome. It is objective. Having XX means Female. And in the rare cases of XYY, XXX, XXY, and a few others, we have to have some measure of extended viewpoint. Most, if not all Trans people are not Chromosome defected in any way.
He is for XY, She is for XX.
Your Royal Highness is reserved for Queens/Kings not just anyone claiming to be a sovereign..
What is morally contemptible is a government set up in such a way that this is the only reasonable option. There is NO guarantee that if you give info to a Federal Agent that they won't use it against you.
You told me! Oooooh.
Affirmative Action for Obama's kids because they are not privileged enough?
Trump is the guy elected after Obama. The better of two really bad choices for a large portion of the electorate. Keep in mind, the other choice sucked as much as Trump.
Bernie Sanders doesn't work for anyone but himself. He dresses it up in populist left wing idiocy, but his three houses show he is a full and complete hypocrite. He should donate two of them to people without homes. He is the 1% he hates. He hates himself, having never worked a day in his life. Definition:Parasite
Warren is a lying fake Native American, and was caught as such. She claimed native heritage and when caught with less native blood than the average American she claims she never did. Actual Documentation shows otherwise. Definition:Fauxahauntas.
AOC is an illiterate mess and a huge blight. When the founder of Greenpeace calls her on the carpet for "Green New Deal", you know she is bat shit looney. Yes, please keep shilling to AOC and her killing 25,000 well paid jobs that she doesn't feel are appropriate for New Yorkers. That is the definition of elitist snob. She obviously knows better being a fucking bartender what kind of jobs people actually want.
Aint nobody heard of Ro Khanna. How about you point to the other fresh face of the Democrat Party, Omar, the biggot Jew hater Muslim, who the Democrats can't actually call on the carpet because that would make them .... "Islamophobes" and part of the "Zionist conspiracy". Fucking racist assholes, the lot of them.
nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself
Lots of sub-clauses here, but this is the one that is key.
"I refuse to testify on the grounds that it might incriminate me"
This does not indicate that you have or haven't committed a crime, as there is no reasonable person who knows all the crimes they may or may not have committed. There are just too damn many, and the government can use ALL of them against you should you testify. And should you accidentally admit that you committed a crime (that you weren't aware of) they could AND HAVE used such as a witness against people, which is all the warning you need.
Under no circumstances should a person ever speak and answer questions of/from a federal agent.
Bingo.
And as for everyone here, it is important to understand the US Government has become the enemy of the people, and under no circumstances should you ever say anything to a government agent. Ever.
"I'm taking the fifth. I refuse to answer any questions. Under no circumstances can you infer guilt by my remaining silent and refusing to answer any and all questions, per my Constitutional Rights. Am I free to go or am I being detained?"
Not a She. His XY Chromosomes says he's a male. That is how science classifies him.
Better? Or are you "just saying" that "just saying" something doesn't make it so. He can call himself a girl all s/he wants I don't give a shit about whatever gender they think they are, but saying something ("just sayin") doesn't make it so, even according to your own logic. S/He could call themselves the Queen of England for all I care, it doesn't make it so.
You're not entitled to your own facts. Objective Reality Hurts
Ok, so how do you feel about a coward who lied 5 times
I dunno. I know how I feel about you though based on that one statement, that you represented for yourself.
You're a douchebag idiot who can't help himself/herself/catself from inserting something completely irrelevant in an effort to try to score brownie points.
Drumpf the traitor
yeah, and that confirms my suspicions. You think you're so clever when all you are is a parrot spewing whatever someone else says that fits your world view.
She didn't claim Native American Status? https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
I don't think Trump has a chance
You don't understand American Politics. Trump didn't have a chance last time either. Almost all the Media Pundits were wrong last time, and they are wrong for all the same reasons this time.
And Democrats have gone Batshit Crazy and Nancy Pelosi is looking like the most grownup in the crowd.
The fact that Warren is still viable after her "I'm an Indian. No I never claimed to be Indian. Hey look, I have less Indian than most Americans that proves I'm Indian, but I am not claiming to be Indian" stunt is proof how bat shit crazy they are.
The rampant Anti-Semitism in the party is fracturing the Jewish part of their coalition.
Blacks are starting to figure out that after 60 years of "civil rights" that the Democrats aren't really supportive. Now with "Hey look, Illegal Aliens are the preferred minority" bit, more and more are realizing that the Democrats were the real racists all along, only courting the Black vote every other and four years, while ignoring them during off election years.
Hell, even Californians and New Yorkers are starting to bail on their Liberal states, the only problem is they haven't figured out that Taxing People to death (and beyond) isn't productive and are taking their stupid ideas with them.
America is having boom years, record Employment, Jobs, wage Growth .... If Trump ran SIMPLY on that, he'll win in a landslide.
And the tired "America and Trump Supporters are Racist" tag line by liberals is all but gone after Covington Catholic boys and Jussie Smollett proves that is the best the media can find in "racism" category are FAKE and fraudulent. THAT is the best they can actually find. Meanwhile the actual violence by Antifa Types and deranged left-wing loons are largely panned as "Not that common" (but happen way more often than racist violence)
Which of the confirmed candidates do you think has a chance?
It isn't just another group, it is a certain perspective which needs silencing.
Person A makes outlandish and fully racist antisemitic comments, repeatedly, and they are not rebuked in any way.
Person B wears a Red Hat and they need to have calls for their face to be bashed in, DOXed, and more.
Silencing seems to be only one way.
consensus can be limiting because it naturally opposes new radical ideas. However, most radical new ideas are complete shit
This is the problem, in a nutshell. E=MC**2 was "radical" idea. Simplistic, yet radical. Quantum Mechanics was a "Radical" idea. It still is goofy weird ... but ... for now ... it appears more or less correct. But I have no doubt as we further discover new and improved methods, this too will be replaced with something better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Of course my bias is actual reality. So there is that.
Of course you're right, but it sounds "ominous" doesn't it. Conveying a sense of dread and imperiling our Democracy (er ... republic). Which was the goal, all along.
The problem with the MSM is that it repeatedly sides with "narratives" (story telling) and not with just telling us what happened. It is the story telling (fibbing) that gets them into trouble.
All one has to do is look at the two recent cases(Covington Catholic, Smollett), where the "narrative" that was being told didn't actually happen, and certainly not the way it was being reported initially in the MSM. In both cases the "narrative" was the story, not the actual events.
People want to understand why "Fake News" is a thing need only look to these two events to see that it does, indeed happen. Both these "stories" were "fake".
The MSM doesn't even try to be fair anymore. And because of that, a large portion of the population doesn't believe them any more. They are, themselves, to blame here. The difference between a Hannity and a Don Lemon is that Hannity has a clear agenda, and doesn't hide it behind "objective' narrative, that isn't true. That actually makes Hannity (or even Maddow) more reliable. Not because he isn't wrong, but rather because when he is wrong, because it can be blamed on his narrative. Don Lemon has a narrative he tries to hide (that he is objective) and that makes him less reliable largely because the narrative is false.