> So the next time I meet in American in Britain, it's OK if I punch him on the nose? It's not OK, because I live in a civilised country. Apparently Americans don't, but that isn't news. The fact that your first example was about violence stands contrary to your overall point of being in a "civilised" country. As far as rights go, sure...punch the American in the nose. If your country lets you get away with it I'm sure it won't be a problem. Now try to blow up 3000 Americans and I bet the picture changes drastically...we're talking economies of scale.

So you just, quite literally, generalized a population of ~319 million people based off what? Assuming you're from Britain we're 5 times your population and you feel comfortable with your assessment of the American people as uncivilised; could I then just generalize all of Britain as being pompous, self righteous, judgemental assholes with a superiority complex made richer by their apparent xenophobia?

I've responded to this kind of comment previously. The fact is your rights in your country do not necessarily translate to the US. Furthermore it's of questionable legal status whether a non-us citizen on non-us soil has any of our Constitutional rights. It should be up to your country to defend those rights (socially, economically, or with your military if all else fails). If your own government would allow us to spy on you (and many countries traded information with us through our spy program) then why should I care if your own government fails to care and even endorses it?

At the end of the day a piece of paper is just a piece of paper. An idea is only as powerful as the people who believe in that idea. It's not my place to determine what is right or just for your people -- that's your job as a citizen of whatever country you're from...not mine.

We're entering legal theory at this point...suffice to say, there's not enough case law to definitively say one way or another. Furthermore while I'm aware of case law for non-us citizens on US soil, I'm not familiar with any (although that's not to say it doesn't exist) case law for non-us citizens on non-us soil. I'm not qualified enough to make a determination on whether what you say is true. This also doesn't even provide for when the rights of non-us citizens on foreign soil are "infringed" but are infringed by their own government's allowance (ie your government gave my government permission to spy on you in exchange for the information we gathered).

This is part of why I don't care/can't care about other country's citizens and their "rights". What it comes down to is whether your country is powerful enough (economically, socially, and/or militarily) to defend those rights. If your own government allows us to spy on you, why should I care whether or not it upsets you?

I never said screw anyone else. But realistically nations are only as powerful as their military makes them. Secondly many governments worked, in conjunction, with the US to share that data (along with their own data collection programs if they had them). If your own governments were allowing this all to happen, why should I care?

The thing with the UN is that it's not really all that binding for the US. We supply a lot of money and power to it and good or bad no nation with a large military truly has to listen to the UN.

SIDE was (is?) a fairly well known agency back in the 80s-90s. I cannot fathom that your government would be unable to spy on the US and unless you work for SIDE, I question as to how you'd actually know that? Does the name Ross Newland ring a bell?

That's the thing -- they're not protected by the US constitution. I'm not saying those rights are "inalienable" but, truthfully, the only rights anyone has are those that they're willing (and able) to fight for. The Native Americans, blacks, French, Irish, and many others can attest to that.

Who taught you kids? That's not the definition of treason...I grow tired of people who make up or redefine parts of our Constitution while simultaneously trying to prop up their weak points with it. Before you continue trying to tell everyone what the Constitution says, perhaps you should actually READ it. It's not hard and the people who voted you up should take a second from modding on /. and actually do a little reading themselves. What a sad, stupid group of people.

Point of note: Per the US, other nation's citizens don't have rights as recognized by the United States Constitution (diplomatic policies are not "rights") and indeed US citizens don't have rights from other countries. While I disagree with the blanket spying on American citizens, I cannot and do not care about the citizens of other countries. This may be seen as selfish, but truly other nations spy on us just as much as we spy on them. The US and its allies tends to share their collective intelligence. So while people are outraged by our spying on other nations, truth be told the other nations knew and we've known about their spying on us.

The only place that you can ever have true privacy is that place inside your head. Everywhere else, if you have something you want to remain private then use encryption that is publicly vetted or learn to live with the fact that 99% of us are totally boring, uninteresting people and no one truly gives a shit that you cheated on your wife.

>This computer is a business computer. It is designed and offered at a price range that will appeal to a customer who uses the computer to make money. No, not some bit coin mining operation, but real tangible money. These are designed for professionals who bill out to real paying customers for between $200 and $800 per hour. Yes, you heard that right. In the grown up world, highly productive and effective professionals bill their clients real money. When people grow up and begin to afford products like this, they are not wearing skinny jeans and sitting in Starbucks trying to look cool on a financed Macbook.

So they run MS Office on a Mac...how productive.

You missed the point entirely. The crime can't be treason, because the state can't be an enemy of the state. I'm not saying it's not unconstitutional or that what they're doing is legal...it just isn't treason. It's like charging someone pulled over for speeding with murder. The crime doesn't fit the definition you're giving it.

Treason, as defined by the US Constitution, is either aiding an enemy or starting a war with the US:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

I grow tired of people throwing around that term as if they're some sort of uber-patriotic person who, for all of their patriotism, hasn't read the damned Constitution.

You're free to not install the software. You literally have never done software development, have you? You certainly don't make a living off of it if you do. Those of us who do understand that the more time/work we have to put into software for "special use" cases is less profit. No one is controlling Android, I'm stating a fact that is is easier to just NOT install an application vs a granular permission system wherein you need to define HOW an application is denied access and whether that can happen any time. Also you need to add into that that those denials and what/how they return the denial need to be handled and there's a certain point where an application may simply be unable to function because you gave it absolutely no permissions.

My question is why is this such a big deal? If you're so untrusting of the developer why are you installing the software to begin with? It's literally the stupidest security mistake a person can make. Or do you want to run my AWESOMEAPP.EXE?

That's right. I can just then run an apt-get dist-upgrade and I'll have a non-booting system in mere hours! No more waiting for pesky Windows releases.

So don't use the fucking app. I don't understand your entitlement complex that you think you should have an app and to hell with the development challenges of making it fit your preconceived notions of what it should or should not do. No one is arguing the perfection of the platform here, I'm arguing that it's a fucking retarded way to try and develop software. I, as the DEVELOPER, will tell YOU the end-user what my app NEEDS...if you don't LIKE that then don't INSTALL the app.

It's so fucking simple and yet people have to get all butthurt because they can't dictate every little thing they want. If you're so butthurt about the permissions use another application...and no I don't give two shits if 100000000 of your bestest pals all have the same app and you JUST WANT TO COMMUNICATE. Quit making my life more challenging because you don't understand how my application works and you want to dictate how I write the app.