That may be so, but how does this make the US government good, or the US Government honest. This is a strawman argument.

The US Government might not be as outwardly harsh about dealing with dissent, but thats only because it has more subtle ways which are equally as effective.

I firmly believe if we didn't have hollywood, journalists, and a long tradition of marketing and advertising goons, you'd see the same sort of oppressive state apparatus as you do in China and Russia.

We also have a much higher standard of living because we exploit more from third world nations. The standard of living of the Average American is not by his hand, but by the gun he forces on others. The "Success" isn't even shared equally, and we have a large underclass that for all intents and purposes do not have any real benefit of living in a first world country.

We also have the highest incarceration rate in the world, namely to deal with the organized street militias that prowl the neighborhoods of the disenfranchised, malcontents, and those who violate moralist superstitions.

I hate this. Just because someone gives you something for free, doesn't entitle them to take your rights away.

Thats litterally how pimps control prostitutes.

it is fairly insightful. I don't think you have a point besides "any other political opinion other than do what the government says is childish because I said so".

You are the product, means that not only are these companies spying on you, they are proccessing information to sell to advertisers much in the way a spy agency would go after a mark. They find your psycological weak points to convince you that their product is awesome and then have you harrass the companies neigh sayers.

At the end of the day, you loose your freedom to decide what products you want, and your opinions are owned by advertising corporations. Their clients pay for your opinion, and they manipulate you into believing.

You are the product.

I'm used to going to punk shows with few bouncers, and oh, no cameras. You might have to be a little more cautious, but 90% of the problems you have will be started by the security. At rock shows, most of the time these are crew members and not shy of beating people for minor provocations. Usually bikers or three letter crews, but occationally some minority based "street social clubs".

Next ask, "who is manning the cameras", and expect them to be just as sketchy. Oh the cops? So you trust the police to look for actual theft? Looking for petty theivery is very much on the low list of priorities, and on the top is enforcing strict moral code of looking for an excuse to bust people performing sexual acts or consuming intoxicants. If the music is the slightest bit "counterculture", its any excuse to arrest as many of the party goers as possible, generally making up a reason.

There is never a good reason why you'd want cops at such an event. Unless you expect crews to show up for the show(motorcycle clubs, HC three letter crews, urban corner clubs, etc...), don't hire external security either. Get people who are closer to the music community to resolve disputes.

The other known theif clause sounds too damn close to outlawry, where someone is subjected to being an outlaw and denied rights as a sentance for comitting a crime. This in history has never worked out well.

Why wouldn't they co-operate? How many people are going to stay home or spend less money because of the cameras?

How much financial damage can the police do through harrassment to ensure the cameras stay up, such as imposing fines, threatening to revoke permits, taking them through court systems, having uniformed and un-uniformed officers harrass festival goers until they don't want to come back or get them to leave before they spend too much money.

Waiting for a financial incentive to get large companies to protect your rights for you is foolish. Unpopular opinion: you might as well trust the government to "protect your rights"

But giving the game a bad review, in the future is going to be considered stealing because you're causing other people to not buy it, which is exactly the fucking same as what they are doing now.

Part of tommorow's "Terms and Services" which for the last 3 years have been legally binding and a felony to breach is that you must only say and think positive things about the product.(drink your verification cans)

buying the game used the developer only makes one sale. That is exactly the same if a person buys the game and makes a copy for their friend.

hey look, I had the idea for posting on slashdot before you came along and stole my idea, I am going to need $100 per post in compensation.

To the American public and our daily lives, the impact has been slight, but its done somethings like inspire TLS 1.2 implementation, and other organizations to seriously re-check and resecure their systems.

the people who work in technology noticed and many companies are seriously not trusting the government anymore

The NSA has lost some operational capability and fired a whole bunch of sysadmins because it no longer trusts its people, this limiting its operational capabilities. Morale is low.

Less people are joining law enforcement across the board. The NSA isn't getting the recruits it wants. The crucial people who it needs to continue its technological operations know, and they care.

The leaks have degraded its long term capacity to function.

First they told us sharing was stealing. I let someone else listen to the album I have, and now I'm stealing. If that was bad enough

Now, if you buy something in a foreign country, and then bring it back to your home country its stealing, even if you legally bought it.

This is like how police charge people with "assaulting an officer" for bleeding on them after they beat the crap out of them at a traffic stop for doing 5 mph over the speed limit.

When you steal something you deprive someone else of using it. End of story.

But thats always how its been. Political conversation about economics always uses really simple terms, and ignores stuff that might be used to present a negative view of capitalism. For example, we talk about "supply and demand". It is not the only force in the market:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

If you knew something about capitalism, you'd know something about Porter's Five Forces. With the exception of union labor, and some form of labor movement doing negotiating, the power of labor to negotiate is mostly less than the power of the owners to negotiate, hence the long term decrease in wages and conditions. Every now and again there is a temporal reversal of the situation where the labor holds the bargining power, but that is almost as quickly reversed by agreements between the bosses.

and yes, its always been like this. Wages only remained high because of regulation. Regulation also can create unneccary rules and power to be abused.

you can't have capitalism that is not abusive somehow. Solving one problem introduces another until you throw the system out altogether.

But they clearly don't want these jobs. I mean, they are only taking jobs Americans won't work, right?

Wake up, this is capitalism. Americans won't have access to American jobs next generation because college will cost too much, and they will import labor from less capitalist countries to make up the diffrence. Free market my ass.

but but "muh markets".

for the people who'd rather we loose our jobs to the chineese.

This just highlights the bigger problem of SEO, big data, and such. Anyone can manipulate search engine rankings, and anyone can pay for your public opinion.

Having creationists do what advertising has done should simply highlight an existing problem.

and the topic is changed. the topic is the Trans Pacific Partnership. Obama Supports it. All of you partisan asses are just as brainwashed. you see someone attacking Obama for any reason and they might as well be talking about secret muslim athiest birth certificate shit.

There is a secret trade agreement, and Obama is supporting the secrecy. If you look at the Democrats supporting it, its going to be the most powerful ones that are running in 2016 for president and have the most sway and favor with party leadership, and detemine party dirrection.