But think about that comment.
Encryption from end to end?
16bit? WOW, I hope the other phone has the decrypt.
Because that old Digital encoding thing back in 1998, seems to still work on my email.
Broken and fixed a few times.
But encoding Audio, so the other end can decode is abit hard. its NOT instant.
But whats neat, is Man in the middle, where you intercept the signal And listen to both sides, and record it, then decipher it.
Oh! I shouldnt give them a hint should I ?
yep, 200 years ago, we had OWNED property? and renters? and Lots of people in cabins int he woods.. And Horse's with drivers licenses. Oh! I know.. Business licenses. Any License's?? Any requirements to PROVE who a person was?? A credit card?
The fun part of this, is that 90% of it wasnt used by Any one.
that can be done.
GET there books, for the congress and reps,and read them and FIX THEM.
either back to original, or somehthing abit better.
But if you REALLY want to mess them up.
Add 1 more thing to the Gov.
THAT the people are the last ones to VOTE Yea/NAY on every bill.
That alone would scare them all to hell.
What the frack did you Police do, BEFORE digital?
Get a hint.
The SAME thing you can do now, EXCEPT you have to do it yourself, not ask the Phone company to setup a recording device.
Even tho there were TONS of regs to protect people using Phones, They got Jumped over many times.
AND for those using cellphones, Those LAWS never transferred. Until they do, they CAN do anything to your PHONE.
If you really want to go deeper.
Your best bet is the gov wishes it to be Localized/Smaller. They want to Dump onto the Big corps That will limit to LArger and LESS groups to be monitored. That is about the only outcome of this.
Heard everyone together so we can be watched easier.
I posted a link in the last comment about freedom of speech and the Internet.
Where Compuserve and prodigy GOT REAMED.
1 for NOT censoring
Other for Censoring
The corps dont really care about this, except to EAT up the Forms and Chats, but they dont want to Monitor and control it. Let others Waste their TIME.
Who remembers the original Bill and here 230 came from?
I REALLY wonder if an idiot thinks that the Original bill is still around.
I WOULD ASK THEM,
" how many pages and/or paragraphs are in 230?"
"How long did it take you to read ALL of 230?"
Ask These questions, THEN ask the one above if you want. Because I dont think they are on the same page.
Does this Truly express the intelligence of our representatives?
Computers DONT MAKE MISTAKES...
But, but..
COMPUTERS DONT MAKE MISTAKES.
But, but. WHO input the information? Who programmed it? Can you Prove it works?
I find it very strange, how some of this has come about.
Can we discuss, If trump is correct about a Way to cheat the election. Something that if used to often, could be discovered, or that the COST is to high to use, often.
With all the past knowledge we have and the current thoughts on how this system works.
We have seen in the past there were state elections with Mechanical machines and they could be faked. but you still needed someone to build it.
Even now we have groups that Try to/and Do prove how easy it is to hack SOME of these Computer based systems, Which is kinda strange with all the Ways we can keep it safe.
Which still has the same problem, Who to pay to do it. Unless you wish to erase them.
This would be a Very dangerous thing to do for a programmer. And I would HOPE they get the idea, quickly.
Trump only has 1 problem with this, in proving it exists. And if he does?
On to Mitch.
Considering his state, why is he still in office?
Last election about 45% of the people voted. 2 million of a 4.4 million population, and if you just consider those of Voting age, its Still a very close call. As biden won 2 counties?? and got almost 1/2 the vote. Even the Senate vote McGrath got 3 counties, and got 2/5 the vote.
But its not overhyped in other countries that have it up and running?
Using Tech that the USA Banned, from China?
That wanted to Come to the USA and install the Whole thing?
But CISCO got pissy, as all USA corps do.
And thats What CAPITALISM IS.
The first case addressing Internet Service Provider (ISP) liability for third-party posted defamation statements was Cubby, Inc. v. CompuServe, Inc. in 1991. However, that case involved a known author and the service provider, CompuServe, won its case by claiming lack of editorial control, hence no liability for the particular messages. Then, in Stratton Oakmont v. Prodigy Services, Inc. (1995) the court ruled against the ISP, Prodigy. Because Prodigy placed some controls over what could be posted on its system, the court considered Prodigy a publisher and, therefore, responsible for the content of posted statements. The Stratton decision sent shock waves through the Internet industry and potentially set the stage for considerable online defamation lawsuits.
Force a monopoly.
And does anyone think this happened in the past.
regulations to restrict a market?
Or The Corps afford to Buy them out?
Which is easier?
"Section 230 protects internet sites and users by providing a legal basis for organizations of all shapes and sizes to moderate content."
There is something abit OPEN about this statement.
"MODERATE CONTENT"
Think it was Portal, went to court, because they Moderated the comments, and LOST. Only because they Didnt allow everyone to say/do anything they wanted.
The end problem is what happens IF' you let anything/everything Stand as Printed?
Its still happening, spamming. Bots roaming around finding ways into Forums and Blasting everything in 30 seconds or less.
Do you think FB moderates? MSN? Google? Any of the larger Net systems?
What about those sites that allow comments on their Food/products/goods? And there is a small line about NO BAD COMMENTS OR A $200 FINE?
(isnt that against the law, YEP)
So, if we/People/customers/Clients/all of us have the RIGHT to post anything we want, and IT CANT BE ERASED. does Copyright/RIAA/MPAA or any other Major corp have any rights to Sue us? IF' this is placed as PART of freedom of speech, they Should NOT have any ability to SUE.
That so many have forgotten WHY/for what the police forces are/were for.
Im sorry that we DONT educate them Much on anything except to shoot a gun at a person running away. We dont teach them to Think OUT of the box, Just that the Gun WILL solve the problem.
For all the money spent on Local police, its amazing we hardly see RIOT suits being used by Swat or Entry into homes. It should be some of the best protection we have, and all I see is Vests.
WE rig them up to use Camera's, to help the cities and towns from complaints, then they dont work? THAT should be against the law, but ISNT?
"It calls for states to pass legislation demanding independent investigations of misconduct and excessive force deployment in cases that result in death or injury. "
Here is the problem.
THEY ALREADY DO. but it costs money. Where do you complain?(anyone got that list of contact agencies and Which one does what?), FOIA? anyone heard about that? and how well it works with the police?
Camera? what camera? Oh! that camera! the batteries fell out.
The recording of what? by whom, on what day? time? NOPE NOT HERE.
The Cop did what? can we see the tape? No tape, ok, then the complaint has Nothing to base this on.
"A military cannot function without discipline. As long a what the soldier is being ordered to do is lawful, they are required to do it under penalty of the uniform code "
"the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)―for simply enforcing the laws they were sworn to uphold. The misdirected hostility towards ICE stemmed from the fallacy that it was the executive branch, not the United States Congress, that determined what laws to enforce."
So, Who told them to be Idiots? And they Followed the idiots suggestions/comments/changes to BASIC COMMON SENSE?? Blaming the Congress?
SOME ONE WROTE A BILL telling ICE to separate Children from their PARENTS?
I would Love to see that bill.
"They do not enact the laws that they are required to enforce, nor do they dispose of the criminals they arrest."
Great comment, but alittle lite on the Foundation. WHAT LAWS? You started with, and only mentioned, The constitution. which is very basic, and simple. and 99% of Federal laws are for ???(which is a very large conundrum). The Laws they enforce tend to be STATE, because the state is supposed to follow the constitution, but the Other Fed laws is a BIG debate. And comes with a BIG question of Why arent the cops In those Corps arresting people? Or is that the Fed Job?
On the post: No Surprises Here: Presidential Commission On Law Enforcement Repeats Calls For Anti-Encryption Legislation
Re:
But think about that comment.
Encryption from end to end?
16bit? WOW, I hope the other phone has the decrypt.
Because that old Digital encoding thing back in 1998, seems to still work on my email.
Broken and fixed a few times.
But encoding Audio, so the other end can decode is abit hard. its NOT instant.
But whats neat, is Man in the middle, where you intercept the signal And listen to both sides, and record it, then decipher it.
Oh! I shouldnt give them a hint should I ?
yep, 200 years ago, we had OWNED property? and renters? and Lots of people in cabins int he woods.. And Horse's with drivers licenses. Oh! I know.. Business licenses. Any License's?? Any requirements to PROVE who a person was?? A credit card?
The fun part of this, is that 90% of it wasnt used by Any one.
On the post: Mitch McConnell Using Section 230 Repeal As A Poison Pill To Avoid $2k Stimulus Checks
There are a few things.
that can be done.
GET there books, for the congress and reps,and read them and FIX THEM.
either back to original, or somehthing abit better.
But if you REALLY want to mess them up.
Add 1 more thing to the Gov.
THAT the people are the last ones to VOTE Yea/NAY on every bill.
That alone would scare them all to hell.
On the post: No Surprises Here: Presidential Commission On Law Enforcement Repeats Calls For Anti-Encryption Legislation
AND
What the frack did you Police do, BEFORE digital?
Get a hint.
The SAME thing you can do now, EXCEPT you have to do it yourself, not ask the Phone company to setup a recording device.
Even tho there were TONS of regs to protect people using Phones, They got Jumped over many times.
AND for those using cellphones, Those LAWS never transferred. Until they do, they CAN do anything to your PHONE.
On the post: Section 230 Isn't A Subsidy; It's A Rule Of Civil Procedure
Re: Re: CONTROL means "platforms" are PUBLISHERS.
If you really want to go deeper.
Your best bet is the gov wishes it to be Localized/Smaller. They want to Dump onto the Big corps That will limit to LArger and LESS groups to be monitored. That is about the only outcome of this.
Heard everyone together so we can be watched easier.
On the post: Section 230 Isn't A Subsidy; It's A Rule Of Civil Procedure
Re: CONTROL means "platforms" are PUBLISHERS.
if it.?
I posted a link in the last comment about freedom of speech and the Internet.
Where Compuserve and prodigy GOT REAMED.
1 for NOT censoring
Other for Censoring
The corps dont really care about this, except to EAT up the Forms and Chats, but they dont want to Monitor and control it. Let others Waste their TIME.
On the post: Section 230 Isn't A Subsidy; It's A Rule Of Civil Procedure
REALLY hope this isnt true.
Who remembers the original Bill and here 230 came from?
I REALLY wonder if an idiot thinks that the Original bill is still around.
I WOULD ASK THEM,
" how many pages and/or paragraphs are in 230?"
"How long did it take you to read ALL of 230?"
Ask These questions, THEN ask the one above if you want. Because I dont think they are on the same page.
Does this Truly express the intelligence of our representatives?
On the post: Facial Recognition Helps New Jersey Cops Jail The Wrong Man For Ten Days [Update]
Re:
Computers DONT MAKE MISTAKES...
But, but..
COMPUTERS DONT MAKE MISTAKES.
But, but. WHO input the information? Who programmed it? Can you Prove it works?
On the post: Mitch McConnell Using Section 230 Repeal As A Poison Pill To Avoid $2k Stimulus Checks
read his wiki.
I find it very strange, how some of this has come about.
Can we discuss, If trump is correct about a Way to cheat the election. Something that if used to often, could be discovered, or that the COST is to high to use, often.
With all the past knowledge we have and the current thoughts on how this system works.
We have seen in the past there were state elections with Mechanical machines and they could be faked. but you still needed someone to build it.
Even now we have groups that Try to/and Do prove how easy it is to hack SOME of these Computer based systems, Which is kinda strange with all the Ways we can keep it safe.
Which still has the same problem, Who to pay to do it. Unless you wish to erase them.
This would be a Very dangerous thing to do for a programmer. And I would HOPE they get the idea, quickly.
Trump only has 1 problem with this, in proving it exists. And if he does?
On to Mitch.
Considering his state, why is he still in office?
Last election about 45% of the people voted. 2 million of a 4.4 million population, and if you just consider those of Voting age, its Still a very close call. As biden won 2 counties?? and got almost 1/2 the vote. Even the Senate vote McGrath got 3 counties, and got 2/5 the vote.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/kentucky-2020/
Anyone get the idea that they DONT want Mitch to come home so they sent him to Congress?
On the post: Presidential Commission On Law Enforcement Says Pretty Much Everyone But Cops Are To Blame For The Shitty State Of American Policing
Re: Why we have a police department
Oh!
A new way to describe Slavery??
On the post: Verizon's Latest 5G Innovation: A 5G 'DSS' Network That's Slower Than 4G
Re: Re: Just a thought.
But its not overhyped in other countries that have it up and running?
Using Tech that the USA Banned, from China?
That wanted to Come to the USA and install the Whole thing?
But CISCO got pissy, as all USA corps do.
And thats What CAPITALISM IS.
On the post: Coalition Of Internet Companies Who Are Decidedly Not 'Big Tech' Raise Their Voices About The Importance Of Section 230
Re: Interesting way to
https://law.jrank.org/pages/23335/Zeran-v-America-Online-Inc-Significance.html#:~:text=(1995)%20the% 20court%20ruled%20against%20the%20ISP%2C%20Prodigy.&text=Section%20230%20of%20the%20act,solely%2 0on%20the%20original%20authors.
The first case addressing Internet Service Provider (ISP) liability for third-party posted defamation statements was Cubby, Inc. v. CompuServe, Inc. in 1991. However, that case involved a known author and the service provider, CompuServe, won its case by claiming lack of editorial control, hence no liability for the particular messages. Then, in Stratton Oakmont v. Prodigy Services, Inc. (1995) the court ruled against the ISP, Prodigy. Because Prodigy placed some controls over what could be posted on its system, the court considered Prodigy a publisher and, therefore, responsible for the content of posted statements. The Stratton decision sent shock waves through the Internet industry and potentially set the stage for considerable online defamation lawsuits.
On the post: First Circuit Appeals Court Reaffirms Its 2011 Decision: The First Amendment Protects The Recording Of Cops
Time=
For everyone to post a Sign that suggests that all activity on YOUR property is recorded for later use.
And if you dont like that.
If you feel wrong about what you are doing, while being recorded?
You should think for a better way.
On the post: Verizon's Latest 5G Innovation: A 5G 'DSS' Network That's Slower Than 4G
Just a thought.
Why/How can 5G be worse?
Bandwidth is higher, speed is higher.
Are we using the WRONG tech/hardware?
USA made only? restricted? Abit of Extra hardware or ability inside?
I dont do paranoid, but.
Wasnt there an idea to to add extra hardware inside the phones? Or at least to the New tech Radio signal?
On the post: Coalition Of Internet Companies Who Are Decidedly Not 'Big Tech' Raise Their Voices About The Importance Of Section 230
Interesting way to
Force a monopoly.
And does anyone think this happened in the past.
regulations to restrict a market?
Or The Corps afford to Buy them out?
Which is easier?
"Section 230 protects internet sites and users by providing a legal basis for organizations of all shapes and sizes to moderate content."
There is something abit OPEN about this statement.
"MODERATE CONTENT"
Think it was Portal, went to court, because they Moderated the comments, and LOST. Only because they Didnt allow everyone to say/do anything they wanted.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/09/isps-dont-have-1st-amendment-right-to-edit-inter net-fcc-tells-court/
ISPs don’t have 1st Amendment right to edit Internet, FCC tells court
The end problem is what happens IF' you let anything/everything Stand as Printed?
Its still happening, spamming. Bots roaming around finding ways into Forums and Blasting everything in 30 seconds or less.
Do you think FB moderates? MSN? Google? Any of the larger Net systems?
What about those sites that allow comments on their Food/products/goods? And there is a small line about NO BAD COMMENTS OR A $200 FINE?
(isnt that against the law, YEP)
So, if we/People/customers/Clients/all of us have the RIGHT to post anything we want, and IT CANT BE ERASED. does Copyright/RIAA/MPAA or any other Major corp have any rights to Sue us? IF' this is placed as PART of freedom of speech, they Should NOT have any ability to SUE.
On the post: Presidential Commission On Law Enforcement Says Pretty Much Everyone But Cops Are To Blame For The Shitty State Of American Policing
I find it disconcerting
That so many have forgotten WHY/for what the police forces are/were for.
Im sorry that we DONT educate them Much on anything except to shoot a gun at a person running away. We dont teach them to Think OUT of the box, Just that the Gun WILL solve the problem.
For all the money spent on Local police, its amazing we hardly see RIOT suits being used by Swat or Entry into homes. It should be some of the best protection we have, and all I see is Vests.
WE rig them up to use Camera's, to help the cities and towns from complaints, then they dont work? THAT should be against the law, but ISNT?
On the post: Presidential Commission On Law Enforcement Says Pretty Much Everyone But Cops Are To Blame For The Shitty State Of American Policing
Re: Rumsfeld's Law
I would still like to fix corp laws and the stock exchange. MAKE them work again, FOR THE NATION.
On the post: Presidential Commission On Law Enforcement Says Pretty Much Everyone But Cops Are To Blame For The Shitty State Of American Policing
Re: Re: No ability to think critically
And Biden wont be able to get anything done, cause the repubs wont let it pass to balance the budget.
On the post: Presidential Commission On Law Enforcement Says Pretty Much Everyone But Cops Are To Blame For The Shitty State Of American Policing
Re: Started out great,
"It calls for states to pass legislation demanding independent investigations of misconduct and excessive force deployment in cases that result in death or injury. "
Here is the problem.
THEY ALREADY DO. but it costs money. Where do you complain?(anyone got that list of contact agencies and Which one does what?), FOIA? anyone heard about that? and how well it works with the police?
Camera? what camera? Oh! that camera! the batteries fell out.
The recording of what? by whom, on what day? time? NOPE NOT HERE.
The Cop did what? can we see the tape? No tape, ok, then the complaint has Nothing to base this on.
On the post: Presidential Commission On Law Enforcement Says Pretty Much Everyone But Cops Are To Blame For The Shitty State Of American Policing
Re: Started out great,
"A military cannot function without discipline. As long a what the soldier is being ordered to do is lawful, they are required to do it under penalty of the uniform code "
"the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)―for simply enforcing the laws they were sworn to uphold. The misdirected hostility towards ICE stemmed from the fallacy that it was the executive branch, not the United States Congress, that determined what laws to enforce."
So, Who told them to be Idiots? And they Followed the idiots suggestions/comments/changes to BASIC COMMON SENSE?? Blaming the Congress?
SOME ONE WROTE A BILL telling ICE to separate Children from their PARENTS?
I would Love to see that bill.
On the post: Presidential Commission On Law Enforcement Says Pretty Much Everyone But Cops Are To Blame For The Shitty State Of American Policing
Re: Started out great,
"They do not enact the laws that they are required to enforce, nor do they dispose of the criminals they arrest."
Great comment, but alittle lite on the Foundation. WHAT LAWS? You started with, and only mentioned, The constitution. which is very basic, and simple. and 99% of Federal laws are for ???(which is a very large conundrum). The Laws they enforce tend to be STATE, because the state is supposed to follow the constitution, but the Other Fed laws is a BIG debate. And comes with a BIG question of Why arent the cops In those Corps arresting people? Or is that the Fed Job?
Next >>