Comment Re:How much money goes to Debian.org? (Score 1) 319
Please mod parent up!
Maybe Mark thinks the saying goes "you scratch my back and i'll keep standing with my back to you"?
Please mod parent up!
Maybe Mark thinks the saying goes "you scratch my back and i'll keep standing with my back to you"?
Of course, you understand this has nothing to do with privacy right? The app was pulled because it didn't conform to our freedom respecting terms & conditions.
That is, our freedom to collect all your data.
People who want to infect computers for whatever reason, do it because they benefit. adding secure boot does not thwart their desire to benefit, thus, they simply change tac. So "Secure Boot" will do absolutely nothing to make Windows computers safer, as it does not change the cause of the problem.
But Microsoft people already knew this. I mean lets face it, they don't get to make the decisions for a massive corporation unless they have at least a few braincells.
So now, anyone who wants to distribute their own linux, which historically is what drives innovation amongst the free software world, must pay $99 to a CA through Microsoft. A company who always has been, is now, and always will be, looking for a way to undermine competition.
ITS FUCKING GENIUS!
>>>>>coreboot gets my vote!
Yes it is impossible to enforce. But please don't think for a second that the people writing these "laws" are just stupid, that would be dangerous.
The intention behind this move is simply to create a legal framework which allows those in control to censor ANY comment which is contrary to propagandised opinion.
If you or I make a valid yet controversial comment on a website based in NY, the appropriate people will be alerted, the comment will be taken down, and a statement will be issued in its place:
"This commenters identification could not be verified."
the size of a Windows map?
In fact, I don't think there's a super computer capable of mapping it.
Your right they have. But if you take a look at what always happens after they implement that surveillance, you might understand why many, many people do not want it.
every single government in history has turned on the people it governs. Your casual attitude implies that you and your government are the exception. I hope your not that nieve.
Well, if the occasional letter can give away as much information about my habits as all of my internet dealings from my past preasant and future... I'll eat my house.
"Telco's everywhere are secretly supporting internet surveillance".
All countries are interconnected. All western countries are looking to pass legislation to mandate surveillance. As such all people, everywhere, are being surveilled.
This isn't acceptable any more.
please tell me your joking?
I can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to associate freedom with censorship?
Orwell strikes again!
"I'm not criticising American ideals or the American people, but this kind of behaviour is made possible by unregulated free-market capitalism."
No my friend its not. I seriously doubt *anyone* wishes to be told what they can or can't say or do. And considering a true free market is regulated by peoples wishes, and their wishes are to not be censored, you'd be *very* hard pushed to suggest this is a result of a free market.
What we have now is nothing but heavily regulated, deeply dysfunctional *corporatism*.
I'll give it a go,
"Caution; answering "no" to any of the following questions may reveal that it's you who has been brainwashed into denying what is right in front of you... "
Really, so you are expecting everyone to assume the only alternative to what the state has set up are the options you provide? sorry, but thinking people will not do that.
"Do you really think a public sewerage system is worse than emptying your bedpan on the street? "
No, but why are you suggesting we would not have a public sewage system if it was not provided by the state. What generally happens when a problem arises that people want to solve is that they create what is necessary to solve it. Thats to say, if a city of people do not want to be knee deep in ass dirt, they would say "hey, I have an idea, why don't we create an infrastructure that takes ass dirt from here to somewhere else.
Are you suggesting both you and everyone else are incapable of cooperation and organisation?
"Do you really think chlorinated water is worse than cholera and dysentery? "
No, but why are you suggesting that nasty diseases are the only alternative to chlorinated water? Surely you have heard of Ozone disinfection, which has been shown time and again to be more effective than Chlorination without the side effect of dangerous chemicals. Its also widely used in Europe (EUSSR).
"Do you really think crossing a public bridge is worse than travelling 200miles out of your way to ford a river?"
No, but again, why are you suggesting the only alternative to State built bridges is to walk 200 miles? If there werenâ(TM)t so many legal encumbrances stopping people, perhaps there would be many more bridges then the State toll ones provided currently.
"Disclaimer: I have been homeless but I've never been so mindless as to take government mandated 'luxuries' for granted."
Did the state force you out of your house for a private bank because you could not pay the extortionate interest?
Your middle of the road interpretation of historical events is - not middle of the road at all.
Things have been getting worse for quite a while now. possibly since the inception of the federal reserve and all that came with it. However, things have gotten to a point now where they are noticeably bad in a global sense.
Thats to say, the world economy (on the dollar reserve) has grown weaker exponentially against physical goods. Its now at a point where people will really start to struggle to buy food. I believe 20% of Americans are now completely reliant on food stamps, right?
Or how about the inescapable realisation that America is now partaking in multiple "wars" (they should be referred to as invasions). And are now killing millions of people either directly or indirectly with military engagement or economic sanctions. As opposed to only one at a time before the 2000's.
Or, the fact that prohibitive laws are shot through congress at an ever increasing rate. So fast it seems, they no longer have the time to read them (a very well know trick of the once mighty USSR, and one that has also been adopted by the EU or, as I like to refer to it, the EUSSR).
But more important then any of the above realisations is this:
Just because the political class is doing it, IT DOES NOT MEAN ITS GOOD, CORRECT, MORALLY SOUND, FINE OR DANDY. It just means its happening.
And make no mistake, IT IS SHIT! so we need to stop it, right?
who thought that the slippery slope argument had no merit,
Pricks!
What is left out of law is MUCH MORE important then what is put in.
The words "affect existing law" does not in anyway shape or form stop them ADDING to current supposed "laws", as ADDING to something does NOT have to affect the something you are adding to. And this is exactly what they have done here -ADDED TO EXISTING "LAWS".
with
"(d) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force."
what they suggest with this construct is neutral. However, notice again that it also does nothing to prohibit the use of millitary force. Thats to say, what was left out is MUCH MORE IMPORTANT then what was put in.
I wish people would first think before they post about such important infromation.
Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.