they are even below that, to the level of the westboro baptist church.

If by win, you mean "please everyone on planet earth", then no.

But if you read the rest of the comments, you'll see the rest of us think PETA is flaming mad, and need to shut the fuck up.

Add one more to your list:

More people would seriously be pissed at google for kow-towing to PETA that people would ever be pissed at google for using the camels.

I think we need to revamp all articles about PETA to "PETA threatens technology XYZ with their batshit insane ramblings"

please don't lump PETA in with greenpeace.

I mean greenpeace might do some dumb shit, but they aren't this level of dumb.

If you need someone to lump PETA in with, make it the Westboro Baptist Church.

I don't think anyone actually supports PETA. I think the vast majority of the nerd population is fine with camels, or at least from reading this thread.

PETA concerns itself with nothing more than self-promotion than anything else, and they are they are obviously the "westboro baptist church" of protest organizations.

I think I speak for everyone when we consider anyone following the advice of PETA an extremely bad thing, and any organization that actually listens to PETA would be strikes against them.

I would be really disapointed in google if they listened to a word PETA says.

>implying greenpeace and PETA are a terrorist organizations.

exactly what we meant when the word "terrorist" has become an overused buzzword for everyone we don't like, in order to bypass any and all laws regarding their rights and saftey.

PETA might be an absurd organization, thats laughable, but terrorists they are not.

Greenpeace might be a little harsh, but they are also not terrorists.

There is absolute zero outrage when someone of the working class has their unauthorized nudes posted, and revenge porn sites exist with impunity. This is not going to change this. I don't give a fuck about celebrities. Zero fucks given.

The real question is, why is this only brought up when its a bunch of celebrities. Why do "feminist" groups seem to use their resources to defend celebrities and leave working class gals in the dark. Take this, along with your pink fracking drill bits and shove it up your ass. Feminism has turned into a privledge for an elite of women who are able to afford it.

thats somewhat bullshit, because rubber hose cryptography is almost as much fantasy as what they critize. What is depicted is likely mabey %1 of all scenarios where encryption would help you.

Beating the password out of someone is more an act of romantic fiction, than standard practice, just about anywhere in the world. While XKCD recognizes that most nerds obviously aren't James Bonds, what they miss is most digital adversaries aren't James Bond Villans either.

1. Most of the time, the person is simply going to either steal, or subversively copy your encrypted disk, so you don't even know they are looking for it. Read: what the NSA or any other wiretap is doing. They count on suprise that you don't know your being monitored. Hence they can't hit you, and expect that you remain unaware they are after your data. If they can't break the cipher, they can't break it. More likely, its not going to be a three letter agency, and just a common theif, who, will not have the resources or ability to try beat you for the password, and certainly does not want to confront you, just get your information without you finding out and changing your passwords.

2. Another situation is where they do confront you, but they simply don't either have the political will to beat you for your password. More common than you'd think, because, well, simply put, beating people doesn't make a regime popular with its constituents. Your going to have to be accused of something fairly bad before it becomes acceptable. If you have a hidden encryption scheme like TC does, and they don't know if its there for sure, they could beat you all day long and they'd never know if you were telling the truth or not. Torture is not effective. This has been known for centuries. Despite what the defeatists will tell you. Torture in war is done more to break the spirit, will and emotions of the enemy than it is for information. Or just for the kicks or emotional benefit of really pissed off angry people.

you can look up US case law on this.

3. If your adversary is in the government, your adversary might not be the entire government or entire system. Encryption that police cannot recover on their own, might help you, if the cops are crooked as shit, but the DA, Judge, or someone else in the system cares. Encryption that can last long enough to make it into the court room, can save your otherwise wild and henious accusations against police misbehavior. Don't give the cops the opperuntity to tamper with the evidence, or force them to hand you a subopena or warrant, or hold out on giving up your keys until talking with a lawyer will give you many more options.

they could be, because google has localized search engines for just about every country it does business in. They can, and do filter content based on local laws of various countries.

They've made no bones about blocking various content in various countries due to laws like the DMCA.

not quite how that works. Thats like saying we don't need laws against murder because most Americans don't murder people.

This is about google complying with european law, and it selectively enforcing european's rights based on its own perogatives, basicly its rather American view on criminal justice which revolves around the witch hunt, and very harsh black and white theories, that people are either good or bad, and its really a waste of time trying to reform criminals.

Again, they don't challenge American laws like the DMCA, and NSA/FBI security letters under freedom of speech or right to privacy.

If they complied with all laws in countries they operated in, and stated such, they'd be forgiven as working within the system

If they complied with none of them, and held universal principles like Free speech, it'd be awesome, and unbiased.

If google refused to recognize the authority of any country of which it did no business in, again, fair for not letting a country excede its own jurisdiction, and enforce laws outside its boundries.

But what google is telling the world, is that they are an American company, and follow American laws, unquestionablly, while disregarding laws everywhere else, even in their overseas operations. The issue is that American law, byzantine American laws are being made to apply world wide, to everyone else, with little or no recourse.

my sides, my fucking sides.

That is so fucking bullshit its not even funny. The definition of "plenty" is debatable, as America doesn't spent nearly 1/10th what it needs to feed its poor. Let along medical care, the big one.

The military budget, however, rarely if ever gets questioned, and we have by far the largest military spending in the world. Mabey 1/3 could probably end both homelessness and hunger, and pay for universal health care.

not quite. In europe, former criminals have a right to move on with their lives after being reformed, and have their past crimes forgotten about so they can start new lives without interference, and you know, mabey not go back to jail.

Google also complies with 98% of requests from the US government, without really weighing moral implications of US law.

the hangup on adiction is that it takes a person's right to consent away.

air, water, food, and human contact are not addictions, they are human neccesities.

a web browser used to be something you paid $29.95 for at a computer store, long before you could get computer parts at staples.

Back in those days, the only people that paid, where people not on the internet, piracy was ubitquitos to internet usage.

warez, hackz, crakz, serialz, phreakz, and mp3z, you'd all find right on one poorly written site, fserv on irc, or bbs.

some you'd simply trade what you had for credits to download what you needed.

that was the 1990s.

speaking of "mp3z", they existed for about a decade, before any so called "legitimate" store existed to sell them. Warez before app stores, as pirates were the pioneers of digital distribution. Along with them, software programs to listen to mp3s as well as hardware mp3 players all came before the first online music store, by a very wide margin.

>Lots of things are highly addictive, the various drugs starting with oxy are good examples as they're perhaps more addictive then heroin and frequently prescribed.

I know, and they need to be more tightly regulated. I've been screaming about it for years. Many of them even have the nicknames "synthetic heroin", and despite being label, they do cause adiction, and many of the soul crushing effects of heroin. Prescription painkillers *are* an issue, and they are *not* ok.

>If someone is in chronic pain, whether physical or mental and a drug as cheap to manufacture and as safe as heroin is cheaply available, does it matter if they become addicted?

something about the cure being as bad as the disease.

Nothing is going to change because in our us vs them election cycle issues like this are:

1. not brought up by either major party.
2. Major party partisanism is strong, they don't vote on the issues, they vote on attacking the other guy, and fear. Few people inside the party are willing to listen to any message that doesn't come dirrectly from party HQ, in fear that it might be sabeteurs working for the other party, or they might be labeled as such by over zealous partisans, and their friends might stab them in the back.
3. No minor party really stands a chance for election.
4. If they did, they'd be attacked by both parties with information campaigns denouncing the third party as fringe, lunatics, and terrorists, by affiliated news media.(its pretty damn obvious that both major parties have affiliated news-media as propaganda)
5. Allegations which will be substainalized by the FBI doing an "investigation".(read set-up operation)

The only way to bring up an issue is to go through the Media companies in the face of PR, paying millions to have celebrities, and someone in either party consider your platform, and the 10 o'clock news won't denounce you as a terrorist with no one to back you.