Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re: and you never will find the money (Score 1) 121

I stopped reading after your first sentence

This is what I wrote:

>all the evil shit a government can pull (and they do, i'm not defending government, i'm just noting there is far worse out there) is nothing compared to the evil that exists without a government backed currency and government oversight, accountability, and regulations of finance and banking. i'm not in love with government, i just recognize it as the *least worse* evil when it comes to currency mechanisms

Did you try reading what I wrote before launching into the useless insults?

Comment: Re: and you never will find the money (Score 4, Insightful) 121

You didn't even read what I wrote

Here, I've excerpted for you. Educate yourself, try again:

>the world is not a choice between unicorns and rainbows versus shit and broken bones

>the world is often a choice between various shades of bad situations

>wisdom is picking the least bad situation, and comparing it versus the other bad options. rather than ignorantly comparing the least worse bad situation against uneducated perfection fantasy. so government regulations, with all of the corruption and rent seeking and regulatory capture, etc., is better than no government, or weak government

You don't want to be oppressed? Ever try living in a place with no government or weak government?

FIX it, don't destroy it.

Comment: Re:and you never will find the money (Score 2) 121

look at the article we are commenting under. there is your answer

without protections, you get fucked

it's kind of like antivaxxers: they have no fucking clue how horrible a world of constant deadly diseases was. so in this bubble of ignorance, created by progress, they only see the tiny "evil" in what we have to do to maintain the advance: get injections. they react to that as the evil that needs to be defeated. as if that's the only evil possible. and when enough of them allow enough attack vectors for a deadly disease to proliferate, people die. so here we have the real evil at work: ignorance

the world is not a choice between unicorns and rainbows versus shit and broken bones

the world is often a choice between various shades of bad situations

wisdom is picking the least bad situation, and comparing it versus the other bad options. rather than ignorantly comparing the least worse bad situation against uneducated perfection fantasy. so government regulations, with all of the corruption and rent seeking and regulatory capture, etc., is better than no government, or weaker government

people need to fight corruption, not government itself. in fact, those who corrupt government are often the ones loudly proclaiming government to be the enemy, rather than the corruption they create. and uneducated fools fall for their lies

another example: the FDC

like antivaxxers, certain paranoid economically illterate wackjobs see great evil in the FDC. and in their abject economic and historical ignorance, they have no clue of the historical suffering that led to the FDC. no, in their mind these controls exist because of vast conspiracies and assorted nutbag fantasy rantings about efforts to control us all, because reality is apparently an episode of scooby doo

why does the FDC actually fucking exist in the first place? study your economics and your history. don't trust the low iq herp derp hysterics of alex jones types to "educate" you

the reasons are mundane and sensible for the FDC. not dark and creepy. a world without them, the world before the FDC, is far, far worse:

every dozen years, there would be a banking panic, and people would lose their life savings

simple history. simple economic fact

that's the real reason why we have the FDC (cue paranoid historically and economically illiterate whining about "freedom")

and here we have bitcoin enthusiasts losing their deposits by entrusting them to random assholes without any government oversight, and guess what?

"oh well"

that's what life is like without "evil" government regulations in finance

Comment: Re:God Republicans are Stupid (Score 2, Insightful) 83

by ScentCone (#49181545) Attached to: The Mexican Drug Cartels' Involuntary IT Guy

Well, she didn't break the law.

Actually, she did. The law requires all official communication to be archived by the government. She deliberate set up mechanism to avoid that. That legal requirement was in place long before it was further enhanced by a later bill that spoke directly to the issue of personal email accounts and the timeliness of forwarding personal mail to offical mailboxes. She HAD NO OFFICIAL MAILBOX, because she didn't want that record keeping to even happen in the first place. She set up a personal platform so that she, and only she, could decide what content, if any, might eventually be passed along to a platform subject to FOIA requests, etc.

She was both nefarious AND wrong, and in every way that matters here, acting deliberately outside the law for her own purposes. And she paid cash to someone operating under a false name to set it up, just to make sure we'd all eventually realize just how sleazy she was really being about it.

Comment: Re:God Republicans are Stupid (Score 0) 83

by ScentCone (#49181459) Attached to: The Mexican Drug Cartels' Involuntary IT Guy
Nonsense, Mr/s Clinton apologist. Well before that law was passed, there was already a requirement to retain all official communications, including emails. She set this up specifically to get around such scrutiny, and did it the moment that she was named as the nominee for the job. Her use of a false name on the registration and cash payment to the consultant just contributes to the atmosphere (and reality) of deliberate avoidance of the legal requirements.

A law the speaks directly to the matter of forwarding along private messages from private mailboxes that get occasionally used in connection with official duties doesn't mean that the already existing laws about retaining all official communication didn't already exist. They did. She chose not to establish an official mailbox at State. Her personal mail account on her phony-name-registered domain WAS BY DEFAULT her official email channel. And she did not in any way comply with the existing laws that required ongoing official storage of her communications within government systems and available for things like FOIA requests. Countless FOIA requests for her correspondence were in fact completely ignored because of this deliberate loophole that she established (look! no official records of my communication exist because there are no records!).

And because it's her own private email sandbox, SHE gets to decide which messages she should or shouldn't pass along for official archiving per the law. We as her employers have no recourse to see if her judgement on the matter is or was sound, or even legally correct. This was a deliberate act on her part to avoid legally mandated scrutiny of her communications as a government official. Combine that with her panhandling for donations from foreign governments (WHILE she was Secretary of State!) to fund the foundations from which her family drew income and which did things like fly them around the world in luxury accommodations, and you can see why she might indeed want to dodge the law and hide her communications.

Comment: Re:Same guy? (Score 3, Insightful) 83

by ScentCone (#49181379) Attached to: The Mexican Drug Cartels' Involuntary IT Guy

Wow, you were really straining to make that unrelated political rant seem on topic.

Not at all. I think it's humorous (or would be, if it didn't contribute to a large body of evidence about the Clinton way of doing things) to think that one of Obama's would-be (at the time) cabinet secretaries, the moment she was named for the job, ran out and paid cash to have a personal mail server set up under a false registrant's name, specifically so that nobody could ever know which or her emails was, or wasn't part of her official legacy in that job - despite the law requiring her to make all such communication part of her ongoing records at State. That she did this under the table, and never even set up an official mailbox at State, and was magically able, for years, to avoid FOIA requests for her official communications, is just fantastically corrupt. The parallels with some IT guy in Mexico being asked to set up a shadow communications platform for a corrupt cartel there aren't imaginary, they're actually interesting.

It's topical because new of Clinton's furtive behavior along these lines is breaking right now, and it's a related topic. The main point of interest for this audience is the notion of being asked (or forced, in the example of TFA) to set up systems under dubious conditions (legality-wise), and keeping mum to avoid the sort of heat that can come down on them from the people who want the work done.

Comment: and you never will find the money (Score 5, Insightful) 121

people who seek to get a currency away from "evil" government control get exactly what they want: worse. no government, no accountability. no accountability, you get screwed, and the only answer you will ever get is "oh well"

you can't run from government regulation in hatred of it as a great evil, and then expect government to come to rescue you when you inevitably get fucked. you got fucked, because there's no regulations... which you *asked for* and were enthusiastic about, moron

all this episode boils down to is some economically clueless fanboys needed to learn the hard way what the rest of us already know: that a currency backed by a government is obviously better than "free" alternatives

all the evil shit a government can pull (and they do, i'm not defending government, i'm just noting there is far worse out there) is nothing compared to the evil that exists without a government backed currency and government oversight, accountability, and regulations of finance and banking. i'm not in love with government, i just recognize it as the *least worse* evil when it comes to currency mechanisms

you can petition and redress your grievances to government, and get a hearing, and maybe justice (if you actually understand right and wrong and you aren't some deranged crackpot out for "justice")

you can't do that against random assholes whom you trusted with your deposits for some ignorant reason that just basically boils down to uneducated enthusiasm

it's like the people who rant and complain about how evil the police are. and then their car gets broken into... and... drum roll please... they call the police. you want to reform the police, fix the police, fight corruption. not fight their existence. you need the police. without the police, civilization quickly falls. of course there are crooked cops and bad cops. so fight that, the bad apples in the system, rather than fight the entire system. which you need, and want, despite the fact you aren't educated enough to see or understand that far worse problems exist without them. the same with government regulation of finance and banking. it is warped and corrupt and crooked. so fight the corruption. don't fight the whole system. because without the system, far worse shit will befall you

people need to be educated enough on economics and history to know what kind of abuses exist out there without government oversight of banking

Comment: Re:Jerri (Score 1) 520

republicans were drooling over gutting glass-steagall since reagan and finally some republican congrescritters got the bill done, and clinton signed it, therefore all democrats fault

some democrats went along for the republican cooked up lying premise for war in iraq. therefore all democrats fault

do i understand your mentality accurately?

Comment: Same guy? (Score -1, Flamebait) 83

by ScentCone (#49180741) Attached to: The Mexican Drug Cartels' Involuntary IT Guy
I wonder if that's the same guy who worked under a fictitious name, for cash, to set up the private e-mail server and domain that Hillary Clinton used for HER back-channel communications, in lieu of an official mailbox, throughout her entire tenure as Secretary of State. It has to be odd to be an IT consultant with a high profile customer like that and be unable to mention the gig on your CV. We've all worked under NDAs, but I guess working for a well-funded person or group that insists you actually use a fake name with the registrars and take cash (if you're lucky!) for the job would certainly take on a different flavor.

Comment: Re:The thing about witch hunts... (Score 1) 382

A threat against someone (like those against Curt's daughters) are at a level where the police should be involved.

hell no!

and the police won't do shit, they'll roll their eyes at you. because it's just ugly trashtalking. so schilling responds by exposing the douchebags. low grade crime. low grade response

and you act like there's a mob with pitchforks ready to hang people!

hysterical much?

you seem to have a prepackaged, thoughtless reaction to this specific case as if you only consider crimes that rise to the level of boko haram. this is low grade crap. so tone down your overheated melodrama

the overall problem is that there is not a legal, legitimate way for society to respond currently, so it is either do nothing or do this.

exactly! what's the problem? you want a nuclear strike here?

you want the police called every time someone steals a parking spot? every time someone doesn't hold the door open for someone else? every time a kid calls another a bad name?

not every act of justice has to be at the hands of police with guns

in fact, your calls for official involvement for low level shit is the actual source of the problem of an overblown reaction. there's no mob with a hangman's noose here. YOU are the one who wants people with guns to show up. you're the one taking this way, way too far and taking the chance for a reaction way out of proportion to the low grade crime

this is every day, low grade justice by regular people. and well done. good job schilling

Comment: Re:B0ll0cks... (Score 1) 509

The allegation against Clinton is that she used a third party email account, not that she didn't retain records.

I find it improbable to say the least that Clinton's email wasn't backed up by her own staff on a regular basis. It gets kinda important when the President of Hostilatia tells you that she's going to invade Allyastan because of a slight she perceived in an email you sent three years ago.

Ya'll hear about the geometer who went to the beach to catch some rays and became a tangent ?

Working...