Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 26 Oct 2018 @ 7:59am
Re: Y listen 2 NSA officials ?
"If the NSA complied with the 4th Amendment there would be no impetus for whistle-blowers, nor intricate NSA administrative procedures for handling whistle-blowers."
What, you don't think a massive government agency can screw up in many ways?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 25 Oct 2018 @ 7:49pm
Re: Re:
Indeed. The law might be good for victims, but if it so badly written that LEO's can use it to hide themselves, it is not a good law. I say might because that other recourse mentioned in the article, suing the purpetrator outside of any prosecutorial (state) action is available, but that would mean the victims names in a very public lawsuit. In that case the law is then null and void, for at least that case.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 25 Oct 2018 @ 4:59pm
Re: So actually you're for excluding police officers.
Well it is certainly evident that you are supporting police, right, wrong or indifferent. I think most of us would like to be in that same position, but numerous behaviors by various law enforcement agents have made that questionable, at the very least, and for some not currently in their line of thinking. (I am sure you can find the numerous instances of bad police behavior, but I am also sure you don't want to).
There appears to be a tendency for law enforcement agents to demand respect. The problem is that respect is earned, and demands work in the opposite direction in order to achieve it.
When LEO's approach every situation in an officious manner (assuming the 'command presence posture') they decrease their position when asking for respect. When this happens many, many, many times, it tends to be attributed to every LEO, whether they deserve it or not.
I am not suggesting that the 'command presence posture' isn't important. The question is when to implement it. At the beginning of every conversation, or when it actually become a necessity? It appears they are trained incorrectly and impose it at the start of many more conversations than they need to.
When the law enforcement constituency understands that being the bully is not going to engender empathy from the public, and starts to practice behavior that expounds respect for the public, in order to re-earn respect for themselves, things will get better. The thing is, they have been the bullies for so long, and the good amongst them have been silent for so long, that it is going to take a long, long, long time for this course to reverse itself.
It is not just up to them, the public might react in ways they are not likely to like. I am not talking about killing anyone, but the many political avenues available to them. If only they can get their act together. Don't bet they wont, someday.
Thing is, they, the LEO's, brought whatever that might be on themselves.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 25 Oct 2018 @ 4:33pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: comment section apparently doesn't like the underscore in th
I should also add that your sarcasm meter is broken, because I was entirely serious. bit.ly links are dangerous because you never know where they will take you. Even from people I trust. That might make be an untrusting person, I can live with that, at least so far as Internet relations are concerned.
I have a tendency (in person), and a policy, to give trust until I have a reason to not to. It has worked well for me through life, and 40 years of managerial responsibility that included up to 4000 employees. I sometimes was wrong to trust, but those situations were always correctable.
But on the Internet, things are different. I will not recklessly compromise my system by clicking on unidentified links. bit.ly links are by definition, unidentified. One cannot see where they are going.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 25 Oct 2018 @ 4:20pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: comment section apparently doesn't like the underscore in th
Maybe my bad, but the bit.ly shows up in my browser as a bit.ly link, not what it is.
I did not ken the rest of "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowflake_(slang) (relevant section is "politicized insult")" until I went to look at Wikipedia and then search for the full 'snowflake slang politicized insult' in Wikipedia. Then I got the link he was looking for, and as you can see, had no problem posting that link using markdown.
Other than my opposition to byt.ly links, no hostility intended.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 25 Oct 2018 @ 3:41pm
Re: Re: comment section apparently doesn't like the underscore in th
I did not question whether it would work. I questioned the lack identifying information by seeing the full link at the bottom of my browser telling me where I was going.
I don't click on links where I don't know where they go because I have heard (not experienced for the above reason) too many stories about how someone said 'this is a link for this' and it turned out to be a link for something else. Sometimes disgusting, sometimes dangerous, sometimes what they said. Why take a chance?
But you go ahead and click on whatever you wish to.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 25 Oct 2018 @ 2:59pm
Re: Losing the battle but winning the war
Doesn't a SLAPP suit kind of depend upon where the suit is filed? Lacking a National Anti-SLAPP law there is real strategy in where they file the suit.
They quote California law, which might be a hint, but given California's Anti-SLAPP rules it might not be a good idea for the suers. Then they are going after 'Founders' who might not all be from the same place. Hmm, which one to go after, or multiple suits in multiple jurisdictions, which probably creates the case to make it Federal.
Does that get them out of an Anti-SLAPP situation? not necessarily. Two things come to mind here. One is that the California Anti-SLAPP rules have been applied elsewhere (not always, but sometimes) and the other is...they mentioned California law.
It doth appear that this legal team is acting more like a PR firm than a law firm, but that doesn't mean they won't get paid. And that is very, very sad.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 25 Oct 2018 @ 2:11pm
Re: Re: "snowflake"
Left, right, centerist. Kinda depends upon where one is standing...doesn't it? Labels to those that understand are meaningless. State your position without the labels and more will listen.
Those on the outside, who depend upon labels will still try to label you, but then one has to understand where they are coming from. Which might kill the label.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 25 Oct 2018 @ 6:44am
Re: Re: Re: Re: It will...
You raise some good points. I agree it would be more difficult to share infrastructure and therefore spectrum between competing companies, mainly I think, because there are so many connection points (as apposed to fixed broadband where there is only one connection point, or location, per customer) I think those things could be worked out over time.
The issue with customer service is also something that would work itself out, if excellent customer service is not offered, then the customer goes to a competitor. Customer service would improve or they wind up losing all their customers.
The failed business is another issue. Bankruptcy or not, if one of the imagined 10 or 15 competitors fails to differentiate themselves and therefore loses sufficient market to make the business untenable then the choices would be to prop the business up artificially or let it go, and therefore, regardless, we lose a competitor. It is an important point.
I don't know what the right number of competitors is. I do know that 4 hasn't been enough, especially when they don't actually collude, but play follow the leader (so to speak) and all wind up doing the same bullshit practices.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 24 Oct 2018 @ 9:05am
Re: Re: It will...
Might I suggest that the number of competitors be higher than 3 or 4? It might help if we not only denied this merger, but break all the telecoms into 3 or 4 or 5 pieces (not regional, but directly competing with each other), and then not allow them to re-merge. Oh, and remove barriers to entry aggressively.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 24 Oct 2018 @ 9:00am
Re: Re: Re: Re: merger synergy
Think about it. When there is only one corporation left, because they merged/bought all the others, where does the growth come from?
My point is that constant growth forever is unsustainable, though it might take a while to actually get there. Think about all the harms that might be done with this process.
We haven't found a way to curb their insatiable appetites. In the mean time, even government rules are ignored and the mergers continue, which has to do more with political systems rather than business, though the business system of regulatory capture seems to be working well.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 24 Oct 2018 @ 8:10am
Re: Re: merger synergy
"what is the basic purpose of a "merger" of any two businesses any where in the world ? why bother merging?"
It has to do with investors (often just refereed to as Wall Street here in the US) and their possibly unreasonable desire for continued growth. Once a company has milked their market for all or most of the growth they can wring out, growth slows down, investors complain. Then they can either merge with a direct competitor or purchase some company in a different line and hope that the 'fit' won't bring them both down.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 24 Oct 2018 @ 7:15am
Sweet sweet MEME's
I think the problems is they are using refined sugar to sweeten those MEME's. They should use something natural, like honey. Our digestive systems are set up to digest things like honey, but all that refining causes those saccharides to just go to fat.
On the post: NSA Will Try To Stop Turning Whistleblowers Into Leakers With Kinder, Gentler Official Channels
Re: Y listen 2 NSA officials ?
What, you don't think a massive government agency can screw up in many ways?
On the post: Victims' Rights Laws Being Abused To Hide The Identities Of Cops Involved In Use Of Force Incidents
Re: Re:
Indeed. The law might be good for victims, but if it so badly written that LEO's can use it to hide themselves, it is not a good law. I say might because that other recourse mentioned in the article, suing the purpetrator outside of any prosecutorial (state) action is available, but that would mean the victims names in a very public lawsuit. In that case the law is then null and void, for at least that case.
On the post: Breitbart Snowflakes Threaten To Sue People Who Have Asked Advertisers To Stop Advertising On Breitbart
Re: Re: Re: Re: This screams SLAPP
On the post: Victims' Rights Laws Being Abused To Hide The Identities Of Cops Involved In Use Of Force Incidents
Re: So actually you're for excluding police officers.
There appears to be a tendency for law enforcement agents to demand respect. The problem is that respect is earned, and demands work in the opposite direction in order to achieve it.
When LEO's approach every situation in an officious manner (assuming the 'command presence posture') they decrease their position when asking for respect. When this happens many, many, many times, it tends to be attributed to every LEO, whether they deserve it or not.
I am not suggesting that the 'command presence posture' isn't important. The question is when to implement it. At the beginning of every conversation, or when it actually become a necessity? It appears they are trained incorrectly and impose it at the start of many more conversations than they need to.
When the law enforcement constituency understands that being the bully is not going to engender empathy from the public, and starts to practice behavior that expounds respect for the public, in order to re-earn respect for themselves, things will get better. The thing is, they have been the bullies for so long, and the good amongst them have been silent for so long, that it is going to take a long, long, long time for this course to reverse itself.
It is not just up to them, the public might react in ways they are not likely to like. I am not talking about killing anyone, but the many political avenues available to them. If only they can get their act together. Don't bet they wont, someday.
Thing is, they, the LEO's, brought whatever that might be on themselves.
On the post: Breitbart Snowflakes Threaten To Sue People Who Have Asked Advertisers To Stop Advertising On Breitbart
Re: Re: Re: Re: comment section apparently doesn't like the underscore in th
I have a tendency (in person), and a policy, to give trust until I have a reason to not to. It has worked well for me through life, and 40 years of managerial responsibility that included up to 4000 employees. I sometimes was wrong to trust, but those situations were always correctable.
But on the Internet, things are different. I will not recklessly compromise my system by clicking on unidentified links. bit.ly links are by definition, unidentified. One cannot see where they are going.
On the post: Breitbart Snowflakes Threaten To Sue People Who Have Asked Advertisers To Stop Advertising On Breitbart
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: comment section apparently doesn't like the underscore in th
Safety first.
On the post: Breitbart Snowflakes Threaten To Sue People Who Have Asked Advertisers To Stop Advertising On Breitbart
Re: Re: Re: Re: comment section apparently doesn't like the underscore in th
I did not ken the rest of "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowflake_(slang) (relevant section is "politicized insult")" until I went to look at Wikipedia and then search for the full 'snowflake slang politicized insult' in Wikipedia. Then I got the link he was looking for, and as you can see, had no problem posting that link using markdown.
Other than my opposition to byt.ly links, no hostility intended.
On the post: Breitbart Snowflakes Threaten To Sue People Who Have Asked Advertisers To Stop Advertising On Breitbart
Re: Re: comment section apparently doesn't like the underscore in th
I don't click on links where I don't know where they go because I have heard (not experienced for the above reason) too many stories about how someone said 'this is a link for this' and it turned out to be a link for something else. Sometimes disgusting, sometimes dangerous, sometimes what they said. Why take a chance?
But you go ahead and click on whatever you wish to.
On the post: Breitbart Snowflakes Threaten To Sue People Who Have Asked Advertisers To Stop Advertising On Breitbart
Re: Re:
/s
On the post: Breitbart Snowflakes Threaten To Sue People Who Have Asked Advertisers To Stop Advertising On Breitbart
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This screams SLAPP
Here you go
On the post: Victims' Rights Laws Being Abused To Hide The Identities Of Cops Involved In Use Of Force Incidents
Victim or victimized?
Now if they would only act like it.
On the post: Breitbart Snowflakes Threaten To Sue People Who Have Asked Advertisers To Stop Advertising On Breitbart
Re: Losing the battle but winning the war
They quote California law, which might be a hint, but given California's Anti-SLAPP rules it might not be a good idea for the suers. Then they are going after 'Founders' who might not all be from the same place. Hmm, which one to go after, or multiple suits in multiple jurisdictions, which probably creates the case to make it Federal.
Does that get them out of an Anti-SLAPP situation? not necessarily. Two things come to mind here. One is that the California Anti-SLAPP rules have been applied elsewhere (not always, but sometimes) and the other is...they mentioned California law.
It doth appear that this legal team is acting more like a PR firm than a law firm, but that doesn't mean they won't get paid. And that is very, very sad.
On the post: Breitbart Snowflakes Threaten To Sue People Who Have Asked Advertisers To Stop Advertising On Breitbart
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This screams SLAPP
I don't, and won't click on links that don't tell me where I am going. The full link would not have done any harm to anyone, or you could have used.
On the post: Breitbart Snowflakes Threaten To Sue People Who Have Asked Advertisers To Stop Advertising On Breitbart
Re: Re: "snowflake"
Those on the outside, who depend upon labels will still try to label you, but then one has to understand where they are coming from. Which might kill the label.
On the post: The President's Phone OPSEC Continues To Be, Well, Crap
Re: How are they eavesdropping?
On the post: T-Mobile CEO Insists New Merger Will Create Jobs, Competition. Wall Street, History Disagree.
Re: Re: Re: Re: It will...
The issue with customer service is also something that would work itself out, if excellent customer service is not offered, then the customer goes to a competitor. Customer service would improve or they wind up losing all their customers.
The failed business is another issue. Bankruptcy or not, if one of the imagined 10 or 15 competitors fails to differentiate themselves and therefore loses sufficient market to make the business untenable then the choices would be to prop the business up artificially or let it go, and therefore, regardless, we lose a competitor. It is an important point.
I don't know what the right number of competitors is. I do know that 4 hasn't been enough, especially when they don't actually collude, but play follow the leader (so to speak) and all wind up doing the same bullshit practices.
On the post: T-Mobile CEO Insists New Merger Will Create Jobs, Competition. Wall Street, History Disagree.
Re: Re: It will...
On the post: T-Mobile CEO Insists New Merger Will Create Jobs, Competition. Wall Street, History Disagree.
Re: Re: Re: Re: merger synergy
My point is that constant growth forever is unsustainable, though it might take a while to actually get there. Think about all the harms that might be done with this process.
We haven't found a way to curb their insatiable appetites. In the mean time, even government rules are ignored and the mergers continue, which has to do more with political systems rather than business, though the business system of regulatory capture seems to be working well.
On the post: T-Mobile CEO Insists New Merger Will Create Jobs, Competition. Wall Street, History Disagree.
Re: Re: merger synergy
It has to do with investors (often just refereed to as Wall Street here in the US) and their possibly unreasonable desire for continued growth. Once a company has milked their market for all or most of the growth they can wring out, growth slows down, investors complain. Then they can either merge with a direct competitor or purchase some company in a different line and hope that the 'fit' won't bring them both down.
On the post: Internet Memes Are Making UK Children Fat, Say Researchers Who Don't Understand Memes
Sweet sweet MEME's
Ban refined MEME's!
Next >>