Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:hmmm (Score 4, Insightful) 52

If I remember, didn't Obama run on a platform that included implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission? The same 9/11 Commission that concluded the attacks happened because the FBI and the various intelligence agencies weren't talking to each other and sharing information?

Watch and learn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

And there's nothing inherently bad about that.

Yes there is. Go read the constitution. It's spelled out very plainly there. There is no ambiguity.

The problem isn't that the agencies are sharing information, it's that they're sharing information that's outside their lane. And that occurs not because they're sharing information, but because they're outside their lanes to begin with. I'd much rather have agencies that are focused on not sifting through every American's data, than ones that do that but don't share it with each other.

You've no idea how this works do you? They are collecting everything so that should a crime happen, they can retroactively comb though everything you've ever done to find evidence against you. It's like the local police placed cameras in your home and then said it wasn't a search because they wont look at the tapes unless there's a crime. But in reality, they really are looking at the tapes, but that's beyond the scope of this conversation.

But know this: This really is the nightmare scenario of 1984. There is direct and solid documented proof that they are doing exactly what all the conspiracy nuts were terrified of. It's not myth, its real. The only difference is, our government has not yet used this insane power to subvert the publics interest that we know of. But remember, at no time in human history has a government ever refused to exercise dictitorial power. It's only a matter of time until we elect the next Nixon or Stalin... and that person will use the NSA powers to make you wish this was just some sort of joke. But it's not. You should be horrified that your government feels it's Legal to do this.

Comment Re:WTF (Score 4, Insightful) 319

Free speech hasn't been taken away. There already are limitations on what constitutes free speech in the UK (and the US, and other countries, for that matter). Speech that is abusive or incites hatred is one of the things things that is limited. Political protest isn't limited. The press is free to insult the government. Go look up what constitutes "freedom of speech". It doesn't mean "I say whatever I like [without consequence]"

In the US? The only legal limits we have on free speech here are:
1. Speech that directly and immediately puts human lives in danger (The old, yelling fire in a crowded theater, thing.)
2. Slander... and this isn't unprotected, it's just that you can be sued for liable for making things up. And slander in the US has a much different definition here than it does in the UK.
3. Those limits imposed by society. i.e. I'm not allowed to make wiener jokes around my wife's friends. But this isn't a legal limitation, it's a "I don't want to get hit with pots and pans" limitation.

I see a lot of nonsense and talking heads on TV that talk about how the US is different and we just don't understand that the rest of the world has a different view on free speech. We do know that, we've fought wars over it. We know exactly what Europe's limits on free speech lead to, and it appears to be happening again! Seriously, pull your heads out of your asses. You've got a few douche-bags running around blowing people up. That sucks, but really the number of people getting killed is very very low. Remember WW2? Because that was a real war, and that's what restrictions on speech and the press lead to.

Man alive I'm glad that I'm too old to get drafted.

Submission + - Study: Men that post "Selfies" show traits of psychopathy (medicalnewstoday.com)

Charliemopps writes: A new study conducted by Jesse Fox, assistant professor of Communication at The Ohio State University, with Margaret Rooney a graduate student at Ohio State, shows that men in the study who posted more photos of themselves online than the rest of the group, scored higher on measures of narcissism and psychopathy.

Comment Re:So they are doing what? (Score 2) 509

I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Fine, agree 100%, but denying the holocaust is strictly verboten in France. Another equivalent expression would be to goose-step down the Champs-Élysées singing Deutschland uber alles. All examples tasteless and repugnant, but Mohammed in homo-scenes seems to be quite acceptable.

This #'jesuischarlie thing is not very well thought-out, I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt to my French friends on the basis they are in shock, and emotions are running high. But defending unsavory freedom of speech when directed towards Arabs, but taking offence when directed against Jews, or French nationalism is far from the sophisticated, elegant and enlightened image many Europeans like to hold of themselves.

Except the Mohammed stuff is made up and a joke. The holocaust really did happen, and makes most other events in human history pale in comparison. And those that would deny that it happened are doing so for the very purpose of repeating the event. The purpose of the Mohammed cartoons was to try and get Muslims to lighten up (A good thing) The purpose of denying the holocost is to recreate it (a bad thing.)

I do not support those laws, but they're like the child molester laws of free speech. It's really hard to argue they're bad no matter how hardcore you are into free speech.

Comment Re:Meaningless drivel (Score 3, Insightful) 100

Later law automagically overrides, so a law cannot make anything permanent.

All it'll take is a new law allowing/mandating internet access taxes to make this "permanent" ban vanish.

So they have a temporary law, and they want to make it into a permanent law, and you're saying that's meaningless because they could make another law overriding it? Other events that could render this law meaningless: Civil war, Alien invasion, Meteor strike, Solar flare that destroys all electronics overnight.

eegads, this entire endeavor is meaningless.

Comment Re:I'm shocked, SHOCKED! (Score 2) 190

Or you mean an industry wanting a new entrant in to that industry to be subject to the same regulations the rest of the industry is forced to follow, right?

Um... no.

This is a perfect example of what's wrong with government regulation. Usually regulation is introduced for a very real and justifiable reason. The problem is however that once "The law" governs how money is made, those who like money (everyone) get very interested in politics. They cajole and manipulate the regulation until it does nothing more than prevent new competition from entering the market.

I'd be willing to bet that if you reviewed the regulations in question you'd be rather surprised at how stupid they are. One example from my state is that they can't be open on Sunday. Wow, big consumer protection there... The same goes for a dozen other heavily regulated markets... Cabs, Airlines, liquor distributors (especially liquor distributors) and on and on.

Comment Re:Nope (Score 2) 331

Are storage spaces (such as Megaupload) responsible for their users files?

The problem is, that hasn't been decided as of yet. It would make sense to any normal person that they wouldn't be. But law enforcement isn't sure how to deal with such services so they are doing their best to kill the industry with raids, but then drop the cases before they hit court so no ruling can hurt their efforts.

Comment Re:So they are doing what? (Score 4, Insightful) 509

Came here to say exactly this. It seems that people need to be reminded of what François Marie Arouet (it's often attributed to Voltair) said:

I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Whilst the violent reaction of fundamental muslims is disgraceful, I fully support their ability to sprout their views. If I didn't, then I couldn't support Charlie Hebdo et al to mock islam (along with judaism and christianity and everyone else). Take a positive look at it - by allowing them to air their views, we're making sure the world sees how pathetic they are, and allows us [with clear conscience] to say "they are utter disgraces as human beings".

Uhm... I do no think you understand "Anonymous"
They're like a super geeky version of your drunken Redneck cousin Rufus. Any semi-passable pretext to start a fight is leap upon. Then you're forced to listen to several minutes of chest puffing and threats that are usually followed by his ADD kicking in, him losing interest and you feeling embarrassed that hes related to you.

Comment Re:It's a lie! (Score 1) 72

Right, but you're talking about physical rackspace and not "the cloud" so you're entirely off topic. Why would they ever guarantee the security of a rack slot?

We're talking about "The cloud" here, which is entirely different. You don't even know where the data is stored. Is it in New York? Chicago? India? All 3 places at once? To the laws of the country its stored in make the data available to local authorities without a warent? Is the vendor hiring temp workers from a country that has poor privacy laws and allowing them to remotely access your data? Just because they signed a contract stating that they wouldn't 4years ago, does that mean they still abide by that condition? Or even know that it was ever agreed to in the first place?

Crappy vendor? They're all crappy vendors.

Slashdot Top Deals

"It's the best thing since professional golfers on 'ludes." -- Rick Obidiah

Working...