HegemonicDistortion (profile), 8 May 2014 @ 4:45pm
Re: Re: Grammar NAZI
I think AC means from the post:
Perhaps, now that the issue is finally getting renewed attention, we can get passed partisan bickering and focus on making sure that the internet actually remains open...
HegemonicDistortion (profile), 8 May 2014 @ 7:02am
Looks like they're trying to claim a much more general process:
It should be noted that angles, dimensions, distances, settings, parameters, and other numerical data may or may not be expressed herein in a range format. It is to be understood that the numerical data is presented herein and used for convenience and brevity, and thus, should be interpreted in a flexible manner to include not only the numerical values explicitly recited as the only workable parameters, but also to include all the individual numerical values that can be employed in a studio arrangement to achieve the desired effect discussed herein.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Justice Dept: Operation Choke Point
And now I can't open up an account for my new online store, PMFUK.com (that's Precious Moments Figurines and Unicorn Kisses you filthy-minded bastard!).
To see the list of may be a "high risk" account, see this page from the FDIC (scroll down about halfway). It includes many legal but "socially undesirable" operations, as: Ammunition Sales Coin Dealers Dating Services Drug Paraphernalia Get Rich Products Money Transfer Networks PayDay Loans Pornography Racist Materials Telemarketing Tobacco Sales
So why wouldn't any "star" buy something at some store and then just stand there in front of it waiting to be photographed and tweeted by a company rep?
Easier than working, eh, Katherine. Especially for you.
Exactly. Only the better route, I think, would be to file a tax lien on their property. The company can either hold up their end of the bargain or pay back the incentives.
Of course in many cases these things are just corporate welfare, and the companies receiving them don't really have any/many obligations beyond staying there for the duration of the incentives.
The way companies play states and municipalities off of one another in order to suck up public funds, I'm not sure that the best solution isn't for the federal government to levy a corporate tax that completely offsets these tax incentives, forcing companies to make decisions based on business concerns.
HegemonicDistortion (profile), 18 Feb 2014 @ 4:21pm
I don't know what members of Sovereign Citizens or Free Staters actually do there that they find so dangerous, but Occupy members are just protesters (save maybe the FBI/DHS humint plants).
HegemonicDistortion (profile), 13 Feb 2014 @ 12:57am
Re: Re: As soon as someone challenges this law
This applies to restrictions on speech though, not the use of a device. One could argue that you have all of your free speech rights intact on the plane because you could say whatever you wanted (that didn't constitute a threat or whatever).
I'm just not sure court would be willing to say, as a matter of constitutional principle, that you have a First Amendment right to use your cell phone. Even if it did decide that, the airline could still likely prohibit it.
HegemonicDistortion (profile), 26 Dec 2013 @ 12:48pm
Re: Wait a minute
It wasn't Franklin's position in the government that's key to Mike's analogy though, but rather the leaking of officials' plans against the rights of the people. The analogy you present of Franklin to the NSA would really only hold if the NSA leaked Clapper's (or Cheney's, Obama's, or other subverters of civil liberties, etc.) correspondence.
HegemonicDistortion (profile), 18 Dec 2013 @ 11:12am
The Fourth Amendment was a reaction against the very type of thing that we're talking about, and that the NSA is doing, here: the authority of the government to access and search people's records, communications, associations, etc. without any specific charges or reasonable suspicion of their involvement in some crime. This wasn't just some theoretical concern -- the use of such "general warrants" was common.
Hayden says the NSA isn't abusing the power, but the Fourth Amendment wasn't (and isn't) about the abuse of general warrants, it's about the government's power to conduct such searches at all, and it recognizes that not only was there no way to adequately prevent its abuse, but that the power itself was the abuse.
HegemonicDistortion (profile), 17 Dec 2013 @ 7:54pm
Re: Re: Re:
You seem to be offering this as the deciding principle when public obligations may trump individual rights or vice versa: since a 'business' is a societal creation, society can therefore impose requirements and limitations as a condition of doing business.
While that seems a good principle, here's where I think that's a bit of problem. There are some things you can't legally do at all without operating as business, such as running a hotel or a pharmacy. If we accept that, then there's nothing in principle that says we couldn't require that for any exchange of labor for money one has to either operate as a business or be an employee of a business. Thus to make any living at all, one has to accept society's terms for business, which may trump individual rights.
That's why I think we need a better principle (or set of principles) for deciding than this. It's messier, but we have something closer to ideal now: i.e. consideration of whether a rule/restriction serves a compelling governmental interest, the nature of the business (one of "public accommodation"), etc.
HegemonicDistortion (profile), 17 Dec 2013 @ 6:39pm
Re:
I understand your view and believe your argument is both logical and persuasive, but ultimately I think the argument that photography is "speech" or expression and is therefore something different than, say, a restaurant, hotel, auto repair shop, etc., is slightly more persuasive.
One nice "bright line" way of distinguishing between an "expressive" service vs a "regular" service is copyright, i.e. is the product subject to copyright? In the case of photography, yes, it is: the photographer holds a copyright on his/her photographs
HegemonicDistortion (profile), 24 Oct 2013 @ 3:50pm
Few U.S. officials think of their ability to act hypocritically as a key strategic resource. Indeed, one of the reasons American hypocrisy is so effective is that it stems from sincerity: most U.S. politicians do not recognize just how two-faced their country is.
The effect or "benefit" of our systematic and bribed hypocrisy hasn't only been in the realm of foreign/global affairs, and perhaps not even primarily so, as this quote illustrates. It has also acted as domestic propaganda, leading a very substantial percentage of Americans to strongly believe that the US is always on the side of right, a force for moral good, and to trust that the government needs whatever powers it claims and is justified in whatever actions it takes in order to protect us and look out for our interests.
HegemonicDistortion (profile), 27 Aug 2013 @ 5:56pm
Unredacted Text
What wasn't redacted? Misleading statements about the quality of safeguards and oversight such as this (p. 31):
"The addition of the targeting rationale [redacted] is helping to provide explanatory information to further understand why a particular [redacted] is being tasked."
As disclosed previously, however, analysts were instructed to withold information beyond a very basic statement "no longer than one short sentence."
HegemonicDistortion (profile), 23 Aug 2013 @ 10:47pm
Twice a fool
Sen. Feinstein also claimed that she didn't know about the Inpector General's report that first reported the thousands of NSA violations. Great oversight there Dianne. Thank Cthulhu we have you to protect our rights.
On the post: Diametrically Opposed FCC Commissioners Both Agree That Tom Wheeler Should Pull Back On Net Neutrality Rule Making
Re: Re: Grammar NAZI
On the post: US Patent Office Grants 'Photography Against A White Background' Patent To Amazon
Re: Re:
On the post: US Patent Office Grants 'Photography Against A White Background' Patent To Amazon
On the post: Chase Bank Slutshames Their Adult Performer Customers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Justice Dept: Operation Choke Point
On the post: Chase Bank Slutshames Their Adult Performer Customers
Re: Re: Justice Dept: Operation Choke Point
On the post: Chase Bank Slutshames Their Adult Performer Customers
Justice Dept: Operation Choke Point
Here are a couple of articles about it:
“Operation Choke Point” harmful to flow of commerce
DOJ's 'Operation Choke Point' May Be Root of Porn Star Bank Account Closings
To see the list of may be a "high risk" account, see this page from the FDIC (scroll down about halfway). It includes many legal but "socially undesirable" operations, as:
Ammunition Sales
Coin Dealers
Dating Services
Drug Paraphernalia
Get Rich Products
Money Transfer Networks
PayDay Loans
Pornography
Racist Materials
Telemarketing
Tobacco Sales
On the post: Sen. Coburn Offers To Put An Outdated Agency Out Of Its Misery With His 'Let Me Google That For You' Bill
Re:
On the post: Katherine Heigl Wants Six Mil-Do After Drugstore Tweets Picture Of Her Shopping There
Easier than working, eh, Katherine. Especially for you.
On the post: Lawmaker Responds To Studio's 'More Tax Breaks Or We Walk' Letter With Eminent Domain Seizure Amendment
Re: Re:
Of course in many cases these things are just corporate welfare, and the companies receiving them don't really have any/many obligations beyond staying there for the duration of the incentives.
The way companies play states and municipalities off of one another in order to suck up public funds, I'm not sure that the best solution isn't for the federal government to levy a corporate tax that completely offsets these tax incentives, forcing companies to make decisions based on business concerns.
On the post: Mark Zuckerberg Says The US Has Become A Threat To, Rather Than A Champion For, The Internet
Re: Not sure what to think...
(Hey fellow gawerkerite (??)!)
On the post: New Hampshire State Legislator Hopes To Push Back Against Police Militarization With New Bill
On the post: The DHS Sends Out The Call For A National License Plate Database
On the post: Congress Moves to Ban In-Flight Cell Calls, Blowhards at 30,000 Feet
Re: Re: As soon as someone challenges this law
I'm just not sure court would be willing to say, as a matter of constitutional principle, that you have a First Amendment right to use your cell phone. Even if it did decide that, the airline could still likely prohibit it.
On the post: From Snowden To Manning... To Ben Franklin And Sam Adams? A History Of Leakers Of Secret Gov't Documents
Re: Wait a minute
On the post: Hayden Says They Did Surveillance In A 'Madisonian' Way
Hayden says the NSA isn't abusing the power, but the Fourth Amendment wasn't (and isn't) about the abuse of general warrants, it's about the government's power to conduct such searches at all, and it recognizes that not only was there no way to adequately prevent its abuse, but that the power itself was the abuse.
On the post: Unfortunate: ACLU On The Wrong Side Of A Free Speech Case
Re: Re: Re:
While that seems a good principle, here's where I think that's a bit of problem. There are some things you can't legally do at all without operating as business, such as running a hotel or a pharmacy. If we accept that, then there's nothing in principle that says we couldn't require that for any exchange of labor for money one has to either operate as a business or be an employee of a business. Thus to make any living at all, one has to accept society's terms for business, which may trump individual rights.
That's why I think we need a better principle (or set of principles) for deciding than this. It's messier, but we have something closer to ideal now: i.e. consideration of whether a rule/restriction serves a compelling governmental interest, the nature of the business (one of "public accommodation"), etc.
On the post: Unfortunate: ACLU On The Wrong Side Of A Free Speech Case
Re:
One nice "bright line" way of distinguishing between an "expressive" service vs a "regular" service is copyright, i.e. is the product subject to copyright? In the case of photography, yes, it is: the photographer holds a copyright on his/her photographs
On the post: The Real 'Danger' Of Snowden And Manning: The US Can't Get Away With Its Powerful Hypocrisy Anymore
The effect or "benefit" of our systematic and bribed hypocrisy hasn't only been in the realm of foreign/global affairs, and perhaps not even primarily so, as this quote illustrates. It has also acted as domestic propaganda, leading a very substantial percentage of Americans to strongly believe that the US is always on the side of right, a force for moral good, and to trust that the government needs whatever powers it claims and is justified in whatever actions it takes in order to protect us and look out for our interests.
On the post: What NSA Transparency Looks Like: [Redacted]
Unredacted Text
"The addition of the targeting rationale [redacted] is helping to provide explanatory information to further understand why a particular [redacted] is being tasked."
As disclosed previously, however, analysts were instructed to withold information beyond a very basic statement "no longer than one short sentence."
On the post: NSA Admits: Okay, Okay, There Have Been A Bunch Of Intentional Abuses, Including Spying On Love Interests
Twice a fool
Next >>