It is possible that this woman has some kind of psychiatric imbalance, e.g. bipolar disorder. I knew a man who had that one; he was a kind, gentle, generous soul who loved animals-- and threatened to kill the neighbor's dog when he went off his meds.
If it's something like that, then although this woman's act was horrifying, punishment doesn't really make any sense, and if we are civilized people we won't relish the idea of her suffering for it.
I did not misunderstand. He made a used-even-if-not-used suggestion which is nonsense on its face, and you blurred his language into the almost meaningless term "involved", in order to hide the absurdity.
If you want a simpler illustration (albeit less colorful), try this: "Automatically double the sentence for any crime committed by a person in posession [sic] of shoelaces, whether or not the shoelaces were used, to disincentivise people from using shoelaces for evil."
Now is it clear that the proposed law doesn't make much sense? That murder by shooting with a gun isn't intrinsically twice as bad as murder by some other means such as garrotting with a shoelace or evisceration with a chainsaw? That something legal and harmless should not act as a magic crime-doubler?
"...Why not just... automatically double the sentence for any crime committed by a person in posession of a gun..., whether or not the gun was used, to disincentivise people from using guns for evil..."
Umm... increase sentences whether or not a gun was used, to discourage the use of guns? Well all right, sure, why not, but we get one to impose one on you: in Canada, you must double the sentence for any crime committed by a person who owns a chainsaw, whether or not the chainsaw was used, to dissuade people from using chainsaws for evil.
Seriously, which would you rather be murdered with?
"The administration, various members of Congress and heads of security agencies all agree: there must be a balance between security and privacy."
Somehow I'm not getting inured to this particular bit of newspeak; it still pisses me off.
Security and privacy are not naturally opposed. Privacy is part of security. People who talk about the "balance" are asking us to surrender our civil rights in exchange for protection against monsters under the bed.
And that's when my mental immune system rejected this whole "survey". When you ask many people a question, you can say "on average..." or "less than 10 percent", but the only reason to combine those phrases is to conceal a mutilation of the data.
I remember reading somewhere that chimps that had learned sign language spontaneously invented the insulting epithet "shit head". There are universal insults, and then there are universal insults.
“I think the American public can accept the fact if you tell them that every time you pick up the phone, it’s going to be recorded and it goes to the government."
In the America I grew up in, this would have been a bad joke, and a Police Commissioner who said this in earnest into a live microphone would've been out of a job within days. What the hell is going on?
Of what? Simply informing them is bad enough? To prevent that, we would have to forbid all communication with the outside world. And with anyone within our borders who might be an adversary.
Mike Hayden might North Korea too liberal for his tastes.
(But more likely his words just don't mean anything.)
An organized charity has two purposes: 1) to help those poor illiterate starving Lower Slobbovians, and/or 2) to give warm fuzzy feelings to donors in exchange for their money.
If the second goal dominates, then the less said about what really goes the better. The charity serves its purpose whether or not it does any good for the poor, or even whether or not the poor people in question really exist. Competition between charities will destroy those that waste their money on actually helping people (although "help" that cripples a society can be useful to the charity in the long run).
To pursue the first goal, donors must demand results-- real results, not just children's letters in crayon. And for getting results, nothing beats...
You know, this time I think I'll let somebody else take the heat for suggesting that capitalism is good for the poor.
"...[H]e has been particularly stung by the leak controversy, in large part because his department's—and his own—actions are at odds with his image of himself..."
If I found I had been doing things at odds with my image of myself, I would either revise my image of myself, or consult a psychiatrist about my Jekyll-and-Hyde behavior (and maybe consult a lawyer before turning myself in to the police). My first concern would not be stemming the public controversy I had caused.
Mr Hosein has convinced me that I don't want to pay the University of Washington for the privilege of attending his Digital Media Program, I cannot understand why anyone would hire Dan Safkow as a "video marketing strategist", and that short clip of "Pretty Much It" makes me wish that they would move their show behind the paywall so that I wouldn't run the risk of seeing any more of it by accident.
On the post: Writer of 'Daredevil' Comics: Equating Piracy With Lost Sales Is 'Baloney'
mark my words
On the post: Worst Woman In The World Burns Dog Alive, Is Caught After Bragging About It On Facebook
advocatus diaboli
If it's something like that, then although this woman's act was horrifying, punishment doesn't really make any sense, and if we are civilized people we won't relish the idea of her suffering for it.
On the post: 3D-Printer Manufacturer Creates Software Filter To Prevent Firearm Printing
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, I will not play gun control Whac-a-Mole with you.
On the post: 3D-Printer Manufacturer Creates Software Filter To Prevent Firearm Printing
Re: Need to ban printing printers first...
...The funny thing is, RepRap enthusiasts will actually boast that it can.
On the post: 3D-Printer Manufacturer Creates Software Filter To Prevent Firearm Printing
Re: Re: Re:
If you want a simpler illustration (albeit less colorful), try this: "Automatically double the sentence for any crime committed by a person in posession [sic] of shoelaces, whether or not the shoelaces were used, to disincentivise people from using shoelaces for evil."
Now is it clear that the proposed law doesn't make much sense? That murder by shooting with a gun isn't intrinsically twice as bad as murder by some other means such as garrotting with a shoelace or evisceration with a chainsaw? That something legal and harmless should not act as a magic crime-doubler?
On the post: 3D-Printer Manufacturer Creates Software Filter To Prevent Firearm Printing
Re:
Umm... increase sentences whether or not a gun was used, to discourage the use of guns? Well all right, sure, why not, but we get one to impose one on you: in Canada, you must double the sentence for any crime committed by a person who owns a chainsaw, whether or not the chainsaw was used, to dissuade people from using chainsaws for evil.
Seriously, which would you rather be murdered with?
On the post: Ed Snowden Explains To Former Senator, Who Emailed In Support, That No Foreign Gov't Can Access His Documents
This should be carved in stone somewhere. Schoolchildren should read it. It should be part of a pledge.
On the post: Former NSA Director On Privacy Vs. Security Balance: Would 'Shave Points' Off Effectiveness For 'Public Comfort'
false dichotomy
Somehow I'm not getting inured to this particular bit of newspeak; it still pisses me off.
Security and privacy are not naturally opposed. Privacy is part of security. People who talk about the "balance" are asking us to surrender our civil rights in exchange for protection against monsters under the bed.
On the post: Intellectual Ventures Says Patent Trolling, Shaking Down Actual Innovators Is The American Way
the sound of information in pain
And that's when my mental immune system rejected this whole "survey". When you ask many people a question, you can say "on average..." or "less than 10 percent", but the only reason to combine those phrases is to conceal a mutilation of the data.
On the post: DailyDirt: More Than Words, Is All I Have To Say...
older than words
On the post: NYPD Commissioner Blasts NSA Secret Monitoring For Being Secret
where's the camera?
In the America I grew up in, this would have been a bad joke, and a Police Commissioner who said this in earnest into a live microphone would've been out of a job within days. What the hell is going on?
On the post: NSA Claims Surveillance Programs Aided The Stopping Of 50 Attacks; Details Lacking
coffee mug, bumper sticker, mouse pad...
As to whether he would consider me "within" or "outside", or whether I am "more damaging" than the others, I have no idea.
On the post: Former NSA Boss: This Leak Teaches The World That America Can't Keep Secrets
May I shout "SILENCE"?
Of what? Simply informing them is bad enough? To prevent that, we would have to forbid all communication with the outside world. And with anyone within our borders who might be an adversary.
Mike Hayden might North Korea too liberal for his tastes.
(But more likely his words just don't mean anything.)
On the post: DailyDirt: Changing The Way We Think About Charity
Scrooge saves the world
If the second goal dominates, then the less said about what really goes the better. The charity serves its purpose whether or not it does any good for the poor, or even whether or not the poor people in question really exist. Competition between charities will destroy those that waste their money on actually helping people (although "help" that cripples a society can be useful to the charity in the long run).
To pursue the first goal, donors must demand results-- real results, not just children's letters in crayon. And for getting results, nothing beats...
You know, this time I think I'll let somebody else take the heat for suggesting that capitalism is good for the poor.
On the post: France Tells Apple To Pay Giant 'You Must Be A Pirate' Tax On iPads
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Apple should fight this no matter what its ostensible purpose, whether to prevent piracy, supress cultural corruption or save the Tridacna clam.
On the post: France Tells Apple To Pay Giant 'You Must Be A Pirate' Tax On iPads
Re: Re:
"...a tax break of €10M, plus an amount we will determine later to cover the costs of pulling up stakes, then returning."
On the post: Reporters Tell Attorney General Eric Holder They Won't Agree To 'Off The Record' Meeting As Scale Of Journalist Spying Expands
I've been haveing these ethical blackouts
If I found I had been doing things at odds with my image of myself, I would either revise my image of myself, or consult a psychiatrist about my Jekyll-and-Hyde behavior (and maybe consult a lawyer before turning myself in to the police). My first concern would not be stemming the public controversy I had caused.
On the post: Chinese Hacks Of Google Database Of Surveillance Targets Highlight How Dumb Technology Backdoors Are
tiny flaws in the plan
1: China has some brilliant programmers too.
2: where excellent security is possible and has not yet been implemented, half of the time it's because no one wants to pay for it.
3: ...and the other half of the time, it's because it's slightly inconvenient to use.
4: this is supposed to be a free society, so when you try to install secret police, you're going to run into some problems. That's as it should be.
On the post: Restaurant's Facebook Goes Nuclear Over Reviews & Gordon Ramsay; Owners Cry Hack
update
On the post: Silliest Argument Ever: Just Because A YouTube Paywall Launches It Means More Money Is Made
conclusions
Next >>