"There may be very real and very earnest commentors that want to stick up for Fox, but they will find zero purchase because the wider public is going to assume that [they may be] part of the astroturfing campaign."
Umm... I wouldn't take Fox News defenders seriously even if I'd never heard of the astroturfing campaign.
"It is the TSA's job to ensure that everyone who goes through security has [a valid pass]."
Why?
Seriously, why? What does it have to do with preventing mass murder? In what scenario is a person with the means to commit a major act of mayhem on board a plane unable to acquire a valid pass?
The first excuse, about the shutdown, is an obvious lie, but the second part actually makes sense. Checking boarding passes prevents people from flying without paying or swapping tickets (so the airlines like it), and allows the government to track everyone's movements ('nuff said), but it does nothing for actual security.
Wouldn't it be great if this started a movement to eliminate the ID/pass requirement?
Wanted: Executives for new US-based Internet Exchange company. Competitive salary and benefits. Must be prepared to act as hostages of the US government, up to and including imprisonment for failure to obey impossible orders. Dutch holding company will not pay ransom or legal costs. Applicants with relatives in Amsterdam will not be considered.
"Pure intellectual dishonesty"? Like talking about people whose chose family over career as if they'd been unfairly terminated? Like claiming systematic disadvantage without evidence (or perhaps without standard meaning of English words)? Like labeling a link "being drummed out of the fields" when the cited material says nothing of the kind?
I asked what was wrong with letting women make their own career decisions-- decisions with consequences. If that's what you call dishonesty, then you and I are simply speaking different languages.
Apparently those women who "opted out" caused a large part of this "problem". Is there something wrong with letting people make their own decisions and live with the consequences?
What specific and solid information do you think the FBI had on the 9-11 hijackers? Not just rumors of evil intent, not just hints that are ominous in hindsight, but information that would have justified arresting them at the ticket counter?
I'm really sick of arguments that boil down to "well of course they should have arrested Muslims who were going to pilot school!", or "they knew for years that Mohammed Atef was up to no good, how could they not, you know, do something?". The FBI does not have unlimited resources, the NSA does not know everything, neither organization has unlimited power, and they have different missions, procedures and charters; what I hate most about the connect-the-dots theory is that it tends to lead to arguments that we should change those things.
The feds might well lean on the person holding the switch, with either legal threats or blackmail. What we need is an anonymous Dead Man's Switch for a company:
Determine which people in the office would have to know about the arrival of a secret order, and have them draw straws with a crypto protocol to determine which of them will set up and maintain the Dead Man's Switch. Nobody knows who's sending the signals, but when the order arrives the signals stop, the switch trips, the key has ceased to exist and everyone has plausible deniability.
"[Group] will not post comments that contain... reports of criminal or suspicious activity - if you have information for law enforcement, please contact your local police agency..."
I'm not sure that my local police have the necessary jurisdiction.
The definition of cyberbullying, in this particular bill, includes “any electronic communication” that ”ought reasonably be expected” to... harm [another person's] "reputation.”
So when you accuse someone of being a cyberbully, don't do it by email.
"Male health professionals who said they regularly skipped breakfast were 27% more likely to die during 16 years of follow-up... And those who said they ate late at night were 55% more likely to die...
...Both relationships, however, fell shy of statistical significance after further adjustment..."
In other words, nothing. This is medical journalism?
On the post: Fox News Engaged In Institutionalized Astroturfing Of The Internet
can't get any lower
Umm... I wouldn't take Fox News defenders seriously even if I'd never heard of the astroturfing campaign.
On the post: 9-Year-Old Sneaks Onto Flight; TSA Blames The Government Shutdown, Then Says It Did Its Job Just Fine
Re: Re:
Why?
Seriously, why? What does it have to do with preventing mass murder? In what scenario is a person with the means to commit a major act of mayhem on board a plane unable to acquire a valid pass?
On the post: 9-Year-Old Sneaks Onto Flight; TSA Blames The Government Shutdown, Then Says It Did Its Job Just Fine
I can't believe I'm defending the TSA, but...
The first excuse, about the shutdown, is an obvious lie, but the second part actually makes sense. Checking boarding passes prevents people from flying without paying or swapping tickets (so the airlines like it), and allows the government to track everyone's movements ('nuff said), but it does nothing for actual security.
Wouldn't it be great if this started a movement to eliminate the ID/pass requirement?
On the post: Europe's Largest Internet Exchange Decides To Open US Office, Risks Making Itself Subject To NSA Demands
Re: Re: Several points.
On the post: Bolivian President Plans To Sue The US For Diverting Presidential Planes
Re: Re: what's the legal theory?
On the post: Bolivian President Plans To Sue The US For Diverting Presidential Planes
what's the legal theory?
The U.S. leaned of France, Spain and Portugal, and they all denied a particular aircraft permission to enter their respective airspace.
How is any of this illegal? Uncivilized, undignified, petty bullying, yes. But illegal?
On the post: DailyDirt: Women's Work
Re: Re: Re: 77%
I asked what was wrong with letting women make their own career decisions-- decisions with consequences. If that's what you call dishonesty, then you and I are simply speaking different languages.
On the post: DailyDirt: Women's Work
Re: 77%
On the post: Ex-MI6 Deputy Chief: 'Serious Actors' Already Knew About NSA's Techniques Before Snowden
Re: Intelligence gathering
On the post: Student Arrested And Charged With 'Terrorizing' For Shooting Classmates... With An iPhone App
Re:
Remember kids, don't touch that fire alarm, even if the school's on fire!
On the post: Ex-MI6 Deputy Chief: 'Serious Actors' Already Knew About NSA's Techniques Before Snowden
Re: Re: The logic
Yes, you can placate them. All you have to do is surrender all the ideals of a free society.
On the post: Ex-MI6 Deputy Chief: 'Serious Actors' Already Knew About NSA's Techniques Before Snowden
Re: The logic
What specific and solid information do you think the FBI had on the 9-11 hijackers? Not just rumors of evil intent, not just hints that are ominous in hindsight, but information that would have justified arresting them at the ticket counter?
I'm really sick of arguments that boil down to "well of course they should have arrested Muslims who were going to pilot school!", or "they knew for years that Mohammed Atef was up to no good, how could they not, you know, do something?". The FBI does not have unlimited resources, the NSA does not know everything, neither organization has unlimited power, and they have different missions, procedures and charters; what I hate most about the connect-the-dots theory is that it tends to lead to arguments that we should change those things.
On the post: Why Companies Should Start Regularly Reporting That They Have Not Received Secret NSA Orders
defense in depth
Determine which people in the office would have to know about the arrival of a secret order, and have them draw straws with a crypto protocol to determine which of them will set up and maintain the Dead Man's Switch. Nobody knows who's sending the signals, but when the order arrives the signals stop, the switch trips, the key has ceased to exist and everyone has plausible deniability.
On the post: Why Companies Should Start Regularly Reporting That They Have Not Received Secret NSA Orders
Re: Billy's right.
On the post: Fire Sale: TSA Now Offering You Your Civil Liberties For A Fee!
basic economics, again
On the post: NSA Review Board Now Accepting Public Comment On Policies NSA Won't Talk About
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
I'm not sure that my local police have the necessary jurisdiction.
On the post: Nova Scotia's New Cyberbullying Law Will 'Make Bullies Of Us All'
mittens!
So when you accuse someone of being a cyberbully, don't do it by email.
On the post: DailyDirt: Correlations Over Breakfast
Extra! Extra!
...Both relationships, however, fell shy of statistical significance after further adjustment..."
In other words, nothing. This is medical journalism?
On the post: Dear Hollywood: Giving Identical Scripts To Congress Reveals That You're Feeding Them Talking Points
you won't be small much longer
"Umm... rejoice?"
On the post: Pat Robertson: Murder Committed In Video Games Is No Different Than Real Life Murder
Inferno
(P.S. I used to play space war strategy games-- my body count is in the trillions.)
Next >>