More doom & gloom from the 'no perspective' crowd. It's all words, it's what doom & gloom wishes were true.

If it were actually this bad, people would be mass emigrating to other countries. This is what happens in other countries that are actual cesspools instead of imaginary cesspools. Where do they come? America, yup. If they can get it. Funny enough, it's a pain in the ass to do it legally.

But they won't let you keep old citizenship if you decide to become a citizen of the USA.

That's absolutely not true. At one time ('80's I think), on becoming a natualized US citizen, you had to hand over your foreign passport. Not now.

Here is what the State Department has to say on the matter

You're kidding. Have you actually experienced them? The tax issues are mindboggling in their complexity because the US law is written for US institutions and concepts.

The complexity issue can be solved at a cost of <$1000/year.

Get an accountant to prepare your taxes. I am resident in the USA and have rental properties in the UK, so my taxes are fairly complex. If I had more income from the UK, the tax filings would be more complex, but really, it's not that hard as long as you are prepared to pay a professional.

Jizzbug is correct, you always have to file

umm, No (unless there are special rules that apply to non-resident citizens)

No. My equivalences are exactly the same. I am not applying state laws to an international framework, I am applying long standing international legal principles to a an international framework. when a country does something stupid, like you describe, you have two choices - International treaties and the penalties spelled out in them, or WAR.

Perhaps you have heard of it.

Which is exactly what is happening right now with ISIL. When countries get out of hand, we have two choices - diplomatic punishment or military punishment. You on the other hand, seem to think we can call their mommy and have them punish them.

Yes, the US works with Interpol to stop cybercrime. Bit you demonstrate total ignorance of how that works. You've been watching way too many movies and think that's how it works. If you were aware of how Interpol actually you would realize it proves me correct, as they take a lot of effort to avoid extra-territorial jurisdiction.

I am not outside of my depth, I work in the legal field, and my stepfather is a defense lawyer for international criminals. I have had long discussions about what is and is not legal - and which countries obey those laws and which countries ignore them.

So to educate someone that clearly knows very little about how international law works, particularly Interpol, here is a short education

1. Interpol is not some kind of magic international police. Countries - and not all of them - willing sign treaties, agreeing with a set of rules govern how it works. The participating countries then change their own laws to do what the treaty says. Note treaties, not national laws control Interpol. The treaties in question (like all such treaties) specify what happens if the country signs the treaty but does not change their own laws in a timely fashion.

2. Interpol does NOT HAVE ANY POLICE. There are no Interpol cops. No SWAT, not even traffic cops. They provide training and communication between national police. That's it. So when a crime takes place in say Sweden, committed by a band of criminals that reside in Finland, Sweden does not send cops to Finland. Finland does not send cops to Sweden. Sweden investigates, gets an extradition order, and sends information to their Interpol office. That office sends it to all their other offices, and notifies Finland. In Finlnd, the standard, regular Finish police go and arrest the criminals. Once the Finish cops arrest them, the criminals go through the Finish legal system, where they are either extradited to Sweden or a Finish judge say no.

You live in a movie based fantasy world that does not exist. There are NO EXTRA TERRITORIAL INTERPOL COPS.

While it's true that "The various US federal government agencies are all filled with *people*, all different kinds of people." this doesn't mean that they are trustworthy. The FCC, in particular, has done some rather vile things to support "its constituents" (i.e., the money making groups it is supposed to regulate). And the current chairman is not particularly trustworthy, being closely associated with the MPAA.

OTOH, the FCC has less direct reason to abuse the general citizenry than do the large monopoly ISPs. So while I hardly trust them, I still trust them more than, say Verizon, or AT&T.

IIUC, German law is different on this, and anyone is allowed to file suit to enforce anyone's copyright claim. I usually think this is a bad idea, but in this case I'm unsure.

I never said it was. In fact I will outright agere that it is not illegal for a company to use a VPN. Nor is it illegal to use a glove when firing a weapon, nor is it illegal to burn that glove.

But it IS illegal to destroy evidence. The second you do that, it becomes a crime. So if your burn a glove that was connected to a crime, that action becomes illegal. Totally legal actions, when taken in furtherance of a crime become illegal. And the use of a VPN you describe would be a crime.

No offense, but you are making assumptions about the legal system that indicate you don't know jack shit about how it works.

Knowledge of tcp/ip etc is irrelevant to the legal code.

I did not oversimplify, nor did I make a technical misunderstanding.

I simply applied long standing, generally accepted legal principles in use for hundreds of years to current issues.

I repeat - the fact that technology now allows people to hide the fact that they are breaking the law does not invalidate the law.

Here, let me explain is to you in a simple manner. 1) Online poker is illegal in certain countries (The DOJ says the US is one of them).

2) But it is legal in England.

3) If you personally set up a VPN to make it seem like people are playing London, when in fact they are playing online poker from Utah, then YOU HAVE COMMITTED A CRIME. Even if you yourself never play online poker, only renting out your VPN to your neighbors.

This is a very simple legal concept. Not that hard to understand. Legal actions become criminal when used in furtherance of a crime. Perhaps you have heard of the words "accessory to a crime"? That is what you are describing.

It's not that difficult to do, but:
1) you need to set it up ahead of time.
2) you make yourself vulnerable to a hacker activating it by accident.

P.S.: This is based on Linux, not Android, but it probably works the same. A logon activates a script at logon time. Write a shell script that actually runs an emulation of "rm -rf /*". (You can't actually use that, because it's been intentionally disabled as too dangerous to allow.)

If you were a Korean you wouldn't feel that way.

Militarism wasn't central to Mussolini's beliefs, it was derived...though I admit that the Roman model he used was strongly focused on militarism. The essentials was the binding together of the various interests of the state, as symbolized by the Roman fasces. Militarism was one tool to achieve this, and to allow that combined force to project its power. (Symbolized by the axe within the rods that were bound together.)

That part about syndicates sounds right though. I've got to admit that I don't understand the difference between syndicates and trade unions...unless they are intended to be company specific unions, which have a *very* bad history, and did even then, so I can't believe that he was pushing THAT.

About Mussolini's "moderate racism"... Just about everyone was racist to that extent at that time (with some major exceptions). Read some of the stuff that was being pushed on the public in the US. Hell, read Heinlein's "Fifth Column" or John W. Campbell's "Mightiest Machine". Or look into the history of IQ tests. And at that time there wasn't much hard evidence that race actually was unimportant. (There is now...but it's not totally solid, just essentially solid.)

OTOH, I guess I, also, tend to oversimplify Fascism, and think of it as the corporate state. I doubt that it would have been any better than the corporate state, but it sounds more like a traditional monarchy...without the "divine right of kings", or at least with that strongly backgrounded. Mussolini was a charismatic leader, but it's not clear what the follow on would have been, had that happened. (I wonder what Mao Tse Tung would think of modern China.)

Hmm...that sounds quite plausible, but labor wasn't stressed in the sources I read.

Sales is like magnetism, it's a natural force of the universe. Wrap some wire around a magnet, spin, and you've got electricity. Same thing with sales: take any product no matter how absurd, add professionals and boom, you've got a company with millions in revenue per year.

Someone is still using a Blackberry phone?

How else would you suggest that society could make sure that people driving vehicles on public roadways have at least some basic knowledge of how to safely operate a motor vehicle? The honor system?