Comment Re:Dont' quit, but don't agree either. (Score 1) 554
not really, they'd be extracting gold hard cash form zynga, and rightly so.
not really, they'd be extracting gold hard cash form zynga, and rightly so.
Yet another trollmouthed coward not prepared to use their own name, with no sensible arguments supporting their 'position'
an oilrig isnt efficient, unless it's magically fabricating the oil it's pumping out rather than extracting it from the earth?
They're everywhere today, and on both sides of this debate!
Which holds zero water, as you're too much a of coward to post non AC
or is 12 years old
No, not really, this was not a government agency or indeed any corporation that outed him. This was his daughter publishing the video. I'm unsure what your argument saying that there are actually are any. Who's privacy are you saying was violated in this case? (hint: who's bedroom was it, and who was in a state of undress?) This is not a case of governmental snooping.
You think that privacy implications trump the disclosure of obvious criminal child abuse
Who ever said that? Who ever said anything remotely like that?
Most people won't be able to see how this situation is (generally) privacy related, they'll be focused too narrowly. That's okay. But don't make wrong assumptions about what my stance is on the very specific issue of this man's right to privacy versus that girl's right to justice.
People were bound to read into what I said, even though I said nothing about that particular matter. Expectations and narrow focus make people troll themselves.
For those with the ability, I am prompting discussion of the more general implications of how democratized data capture affects everyone's privacy. And I can't stress strongly enough how this generalized trend is something we should be keeping our eyes on. Taken to the extreme, it means eventually that no one, whether acting evilly or good, will have any privacy at all. Discuss.
I completely disagree with your premise here. Privacy concerns have no place in situations of child abuse. There is indeed a line regarding privacy of events and actions in private situations, however in this case that line is about 3 timeszones back that way. The only 'implication' inferrable from this regarding privacy is that if you break the law and someone records it then any expectations of privacy are delusional.
To take this as an indicator of the extreme end of this being zero expectactions of privacy in any scenario is just a strawman argument. To wit, this case and privacy 'implications' have zero to do with each other.
Look at it this way, this is physical abuse, and imo sexual molestation of a young woman. THis was not about retribution for her actions, what is clear from the video is that this was about control and domination. He violated his own daughter, in his own way, for his own ends. Its not a liberal viewpoint to regard that as wrong.
But check (that's how you use that particular group of letters!) the disambiguation
You think that privacy implications trump the disclosure of obvious criminal child abuse (and frankly from the video i'd also call it sexual abuse of a minor)?
What have you been smoking?
Careful, 'they' don't have a fully formed sense of homo(u)r and may not get the irony
Nationwide sucks in sooooo many ways. They're supposed to be a mutual, but act like the worst kind of shareholder greasing moneygrabbing outfit there is. insane.
it's 'merkin for cheque
Anonymous coward is just lol! No really, hilarious!
In less than a century, computers will be making substantial progress on ... the overriding problem of war and peace. -- James Slagle
