Well there may be, as you point out, a difference between denigrating and discriminating, but on the receiving end that difference might be moot.
Which reiterates the point that English teachers may be failing their students in the ability to verbally send disparaging messages without violating anyone's rights or feelz.
Not that sending disparaging messages is a good thing. There is the opposite tactic of praising those portions of an opponents position that actually benefit their opposition. That takes critical thinking. Something not in an English teachers purview, nor in any high school curriculum that I know of (whoa do I wish that were different).
Eliminating institutional hatred is a different discussion, though there might be some in the defendants in this case.
I would add, this isn't Bamboo Harvester's normal discourse, and (to him) if something is going on there is no need to tell us about it, but there is also no need to take it out here.
Usually I look forward to reading Bamboo Harvester's comments. Not today. Chill! Take a pill. Whatever works for you. It takes more speech to correct inequities in speech.
If your trying to correct the speech of the high school student, you are way past time. If you are trying to correct us in our speech (over this issue) then tell us what the issue is where you think we have gone overboard. It's not clear yet simply because references to police officers is just not the same as race, religion, or sexual orientation or any of the other legally exempted traits. I don't think we have, but it appears you think differently.
Take it easy. Take a look at his profile. Bamboo Harvester has been a respected member of this community for quite a while now. He might be a lawyer, but if not his comments about the law have been regarded respectfully and sometimes as insightful. That there are issues with his point of view on this issue does not mean he is some Internet asshole. It means that he has some issues with points of view expressed by others here. I may think he is wrong, and others might think he is wrong, but there may be others still who agree with him.
Calling him an asshole is not the same as calling cops pigs. One is fairly generic, the other is personal. Many of my generation called cops pigs. If it was or is an accurate description is a matter of perspective (see my comments elsewhere on this page), but none of the references made today were personal, nor was the high school student whom the article was about.
I hear ya. Remember WordPerfect reveal codes? Tried the same thing in MS Word and was sadly disappointed. I only bring it up as it was an explicit example of MS denigrating program capabilities.
My first personal computer was an Apple IIc. A whole 128 KB of ram and one 350 KB floppy disk drive. Had to switch between OS and program and data floppies. Used the hell out of their spreadsheet and text programs.
Then I worked for a company that only had DOS style machines and Lotus 123, and WordPerfect (I forget the version). What I learned was how to do the things I did in Apple in dos based programs, but I learned how locked down the Apple OS was. They gave me enough to run the programs. DOS however gave a whole lot more, and as I tried, and erred, more and more and more. I learned that Apple wanted control, and DOS less. Then came Windows and the control started to disappear. Then came Linux and the control came back.
The police are just trying to aid the prosecutors in their preparations for Brady material. It's not such a bad thing, if it doesn't actually exist any longer, then it is not discoverable. Easy peasy. /s
The thing is, those communications are public records, they work for the public, and with some limitations they KNOW that they are required to be able to produce those records.
Now, since that app came from higher ups, and with instructions on how to use (which could mean technical or practical, without more detail who knows?) the app, there is culpability not just at the user level, but in the chain of command. How high up does it go? When who writes the budget, and who approves the budget and the product get bought, how could any of them be left out?
Since the messages are legally required to be available if needed, then there is no question about whether a law has been broken. What remains is politics. Where does the blame get put? What does the blamee get in return for accepting that blame (extra pensions, under the table payments, something from the union rather than the department)? And, let us not forget, those who should have been in the know, and were likely in the know (whether they share blame or not) are actually as guilty as the end users who texted things they KNEW would not be discoverable, and managed, somehow, to escape blame.
Given the 1st Amendment, it is not up to the teacher, nor school administrators to do anything about what any student says, unless they break some law in doing so. Threaten someone, law break. Denigrate a legally protected minority, law break. Cast aspersion on a not legally protected anyone, no law break.
The teachers and administrators are not there to decide how one thinks. They are there to aid in learning. In some respects they can only aid in the learning that is part of the curriculum prescribed by the school district. There should be no aiding in learning about ideology, other than that ideology exists and here are some examples. They should not be teaching 'an ideology'.
If the teacher thought the student could have been more respectful, then maybe they should have had a conversation with the parents. Beyond that, unless rules are actually broken. they should piss up tree while lying under it.
Slurs are dehumanizing, so blame the English teachers for failing to give the students sufficient vocabulary to express themselves (with denigration or not is not the point) with more appropriate disapprobation.
While your premise is likely true, I wonder about how one defines recent history vs very recent history vs current news and recent news, and this was the year that was?
In one way I could count recent history as history made while I was alive. Then you might be younger and use that definition to disclaim my version. Another way to look at it, is in the last 100 years is recent, whereas in the last 50 years could be very recent, and last week, while destined to become history, is current news, while last month is recent news. Where does one put 10 years ago?
It is not only a matter of perspective, but a matter of respecting the perspective of others. If I was dead I would not care. Since I am alive, and lived through the 60's and beyond, the reference to cops as pigs is something more than just history. It is something I lived through, and to some level, believed.
Today, being older, more mature (which are not necessarily the same thing) I don't call cops pigs, but I do disrespect them more than my brethren did in the 60's because they give me reason to.
To the good cops out there, know that I value you, but disdain your failure to out the bad ones, no matter what the cost.
Now, take out the age thingy and put these words in the mouth of a high school student expressing their concern over police brutality in recent weeks, months, years and tell us where those administrators have anything to yabber about.
Sorry, only some of that was directed at you Bruce C.
I haven't read the GDPR regs (I don't live in Europe so not directly effected) but from what I have read, I wouldn't see why not. For that matter, I wouldn't be surprised if the Holocaust gets redacted and France won WWI and WWII, Bonaparte turns out to be a good guy.
Besides, it is a legitimate historical reference when one is studying recent history, like say the 1960's and 1970's. Of course, in some cases there might be some more recent references.
I am wondering what proof we have that the NSA is not still using these exploits? For that matter, what proof do we have that the NSA isn't responsible for the Cryptocurrency Mining?
I can imagine there are some black ops for they don't want to ask for funding in any kind of an outright way. If one wants to keep a secret, tell no one. If one must, tell one other. Funding takes more than one.
That isn't the only arrogance. The corruption caused by the power over children led them to believe they could manipulate the child. That seems to have backfired.
But what do we do about the rest of the overbearing asshats that are out of control in our schools? They are there to help them grow intellectually and otherwise, into their own person. Not mold them into some ideological image of themselves.
I think it was the webhost, not the ISP that put pressure on, The article states that they are based in Germany, so their action is probably because they are afraid of what the EU might do to them, let alone Greenspan.
It seems Mr. Greenspan might be American, and the associated site is listed with an American non-profit tax rating, so it would appear that they have nothing to worry about. But then why would they use a Germany based hosting site?
First, Mr. Greenspan should find another hosting company. One based in the US.
Second, wouldn't a GDPR type program in the US violate the 1st Amendment? Whose speech could be considered more important, the person posting the docket or the person with butt hurt from the docket post. Both are equally important, and the only solution is more speech, not constitutional violations. Then what will this joker do when he loses the case? Deny, deny, deny (it is speech) only brings one to da Nile (alternatively denial). Will he try to take down his denials as well?
Third, the Streisand effect has made him more famous than he ever wanted. Good to know it has value other than mirth.
When one is severely focused on their agenda and see a path to aiding that agenda that also hurts those in opposition the blinders to other solutions impair thinking about other possibilities. Being reasonable isn't usually in the cards for such dedicated people. They want what they want and how they want it. Hurting the opposition can be as important to them as achieving their own objective, and may in fact be a significant part of their objective.
The issue is then how to go about getting them to focus not only on their cause, but to consider the unintended consequences of their actions. The result not in their plan but is inevitable given the lack of consideration of the whole picture. The 'for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction' concept only goes part way as it does not expose the big picture, the consequences not predicted, the ricochet. And the blinded by commitment to their cause will make it difficult to get through.
The method in this case then should be for the platforms to listen to all three sides and take the middle ground and give control over to individual users so they can get what they want but also not get what they don't want. At the same time, they should stick to their guns about enforcing an appropriate TOS for their platform, and enforce it strictly. When bias is charged they will then be able to point to the TOS issue and suggest that if the speaker had been a bit more moderate in their behavior then they would not have had the sanction.
If they get sued for doing their jobs but not misconduct or abuse then the case will get dismissed. Hell, even when it is misconduct or abuse the cases get dismissed. Both you and Sessions missed the point that there would be no consent decree if there had not been misconduct and/or abuse.
Then, one wonders, what is Sessions plan to stop misconduct and abuse? According to his statement, it is to give police respect, whether they deserve it or not, and to disobey the consent decree.
Re: A general message for all concerned: (What is sport?)
If my first comment was controversial then they're gonna love this.
By your definition then we could set up rules and organizations to define competitive television sports watching (International Couch Potato Events Organization or ICPEO). Points could be scored by things consumed (beer, pretzels, pizza slices, hot dogs, etc.) or by emotional output (screaming at the ref volume, creativity of scoring dances, color of face when fuming at coaching decisions, an outrage index when players screw up, distinctiveness and/or creativity of colorful language when denigrating anything happening on screen or aimed at competitive co-watchers, also etc.) and length of nap time when the game being watched is so boring that it puts one to sleep, and of course etc.. All in front of a screen.
If you really think the MSP are only keeping tabs on the public websites of these groups then you are delusional. Why would they have their headquarter locations marked? Why only these groups. Why not other groups?
There is an agenda here. It is not stated, but one certainly exists, otherwise their bookmarks would be for a larger variety of groups, not just ones like 'Action Against Police Brutality', or the 'Coalition to Organize and Mobilize Boston Against Trump', or 'Resistance Calendar'.
Is there a legitimate legal reason for the state police to keep an eye on anyone for 1st Amendment activity? Now if all of those groups regularly participated in violent actions, then maybe. Do you know of any such violent actions by any of those groups? No? Then one must wonder about an increase of attention by law enforcement.
By the same token, there is a certain amount of surveillance of us all by various government agencies, both local and national, are you really OK with that? What is the legitimate purpose of that? National security? Are you a threat? If not, and I believe that you are not, they why would the government be looking over your shoulder? Is a surveillance state really OK? Is increased surveillance of group that isn't directly involved with violence OK?
Every indication of government overreach should be taken seriously, and acted upon. The preferred method is speech, as happened here, but there are other methods. Do we want to get there, or use enough speech to make other methods unnecessary?
Where there is smoke there is usually fire. What would the legitimate reasons for the MSP to have these groups bookmarked and their headquarter locations noted?
I understand that the gamer's are playing sport related video games, but I have a hard time relating the actual concept of sport with the dexterity solely of ones phalanges, no matter how fast ones hand eye coordination is. Of course, the IOC expressing some interest, no matter how vapid, takes the concept down a notch for me, at least as far as considering it a sport is concerned.
I am not denigrating the activity itself. Nor the concept of one becoming a professional at that activity. The suggestion that it constitutes sport in the same way as track and field, or wrestling, or swimming, or gymnastics, or ice dancing or etc. do is another thing. Also, I would like to watch Olympic or even collegiate competitions, the way the presentations and marketing have evolved it is apparent to me, and many others, that it is more about the money than the sport. Esport does not seem to be progressing in anything that looks like an attractive manner, so far as the whole money thing goes.
Maybe I am too old and too set in my ways, but to me sport takes some sweat. Sport takes some physical effort. Sport takes something more than pushing buttons in an effective manner. Maybe when virtual reality gaming becomes more interactive, but then why not do it live and in person?
Now as an entertainment, watching someone execute a particular esport game excellently might garner some eye views. Whether that segment can generate the kind of money IRL sports do is another matter. Some of that has to do with how the coming generations wish to spend their time and money. I can think of more engaging things.
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
Re:
Which reiterates the point that English teachers may be failing their students in the ability to verbally send disparaging messages without violating anyone's rights or feelz.
Not that sending disparaging messages is a good thing. There is the opposite tactic of praising those portions of an opponents position that actually benefit their opposition. That takes critical thinking. Something not in an English teachers purview, nor in any high school curriculum that I know of (whoa do I wish that were different).
Eliminating institutional hatred is a different discussion, though there might be some in the defendants in this case.
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
Re: Re: tl;dr
I would add, this isn't Bamboo Harvester's normal discourse, and (to him) if something is going on there is no need to tell us about it, but there is also no need to take it out here.
Usually I look forward to reading Bamboo Harvester's comments. Not today. Chill! Take a pill. Whatever works for you. It takes more speech to correct inequities in speech.
If your trying to correct the speech of the high school student, you are way past time. If you are trying to correct us in our speech (over this issue) then tell us what the issue is where you think we have gone overboard. It's not clear yet simply because references to police officers is just not the same as race, religion, or sexual orientation or any of the other legally exempted traits. I don't think we have, but it appears you think differently.
Without attacking, tell us where.
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
Re: hmmm...
Take it easy. Take a look at his profile. Bamboo Harvester has been a respected member of this community for quite a while now. He might be a lawyer, but if not his comments about the law have been regarded respectfully and sometimes as insightful. That there are issues with his point of view on this issue does not mean he is some Internet asshole. It means that he has some issues with points of view expressed by others here. I may think he is wrong, and others might think he is wrong, but there may be others still who agree with him.
Calling him an asshole is not the same as calling cops pigs. One is fairly generic, the other is personal. Many of my generation called cops pigs. If it was or is an accurate description is a matter of perspective (see my comments elsewhere on this page), but none of the references made today were personal, nor was the high school student whom the article was about.
On the post: Leaked NSA Exploits Shifting From Ransomware To Cryptocurrency Mining
Re:
My first personal computer was an Apple IIc. A whole 128 KB of ram and one 350 KB floppy disk drive. Had to switch between OS and program and data floppies. Used the hell out of their spreadsheet and text programs.
Then I worked for a company that only had DOS style machines and Lotus 123, and WordPerfect (I forget the version). What I learned was how to do the things I did in Apple in dos based programs, but I learned how locked down the Apple OS was. They gave me enough to run the programs. DOS however gave a whole lot more, and as I tried, and erred, more and more and more. I learned that Apple wanted control, and DOS less. Then came Windows and the control started to disappear. Then came Linux and the control came back.
What's next?
On the post: California Police Officers Used Self-Destructing Messaging App For Years
The Tree of Deception (not disapeared)
The thing is, those communications are public records, they work for the public, and with some limitations they KNOW that they are required to be able to produce those records.
Now, since that app came from higher ups, and with instructions on how to use (which could mean technical or practical, without more detail who knows?) the app, there is culpability not just at the user level, but in the chain of command. How high up does it go? When who writes the budget, and who approves the budget and the product get bought, how could any of them be left out?
Since the messages are legally required to be available if needed, then there is no question about whether a law has been broken. What remains is politics. Where does the blame get put? What does the blamee get in return for accepting that blame (extra pensions, under the table payments, something from the union rather than the department)? And, let us not forget, those who should have been in the know, and were likely in the know (whether they share blame or not) are actually as guilty as the end users who texted things they KNEW would not be discoverable, and managed, somehow, to escape blame.
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Offending others is terrible... unless we're doing it.'
The teachers and administrators are not there to decide how one thinks. They are there to aid in learning. In some respects they can only aid in the learning that is part of the curriculum prescribed by the school district. There should be no aiding in learning about ideology, other than that ideology exists and here are some examples. They should not be teaching 'an ideology'.
If the teacher thought the student could have been more respectful, then maybe they should have had a conversation with the parents. Beyond that, unless rules are actually broken. they should piss up tree while lying under it.
Slurs are dehumanizing, so blame the English teachers for failing to give the students sufficient vocabulary to express themselves (with denigration or not is not the point) with more appropriate disapprobation.
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
Re: Re: Re:
In one way I could count recent history as history made while I was alive. Then you might be younger and use that definition to disclaim my version. Another way to look at it, is in the last 100 years is recent, whereas in the last 50 years could be very recent, and last week, while destined to become history, is current news, while last month is recent news. Where does one put 10 years ago?
It is not only a matter of perspective, but a matter of respecting the perspective of others. If I was dead I would not care. Since I am alive, and lived through the 60's and beyond, the reference to cops as pigs is something more than just history. It is something I lived through, and to some level, believed.
Today, being older, more mature (which are not necessarily the same thing) I don't call cops pigs, but I do disrespect them more than my brethren did in the 60's because they give me reason to.
To the good cops out there, know that I value you, but disdain your failure to out the bad ones, no matter what the cost.
Now, take out the age thingy and put these words in the mouth of a high school student expressing their concern over police brutality in recent weeks, months, years and tell us where those administrators have anything to yabber about.
Sorry, only some of that was directed at you Bruce C.
On the post: GDPR Being Used To Try To Disappear Public US Court Docket
Re: Criminal records
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
Re:
On the post: Leaked NSA Exploits Shifting From Ransomware To Cryptocurrency Mining
Follow the Money
I can imagine there are some black ops for they don't want to ask for funding in any kind of an outright way. If one wants to keep a secret, tell no one. If one must, tell one other. Funding takes more than one.
On the post: Judge Says Student Can Sue School For Suspending Her After She Called A Fictional Cop A 'Pig'
Re: And they still feel the need to keep fighting
But what do we do about the rest of the overbearing asshats that are out of control in our schools? They are there to help them grow intellectually and otherwise, into their own person. Not mold them into some ideological image of themselves.
On the post: GDPR Being Used To Try To Disappear Public US Court Docket
Re: ISP
I think it was the webhost, not the ISP that put pressure on, The article states that they are based in Germany, so their action is probably because they are afraid of what the EU might do to them, let alone Greenspan.
www.plainsite.org/
It seems Mr. Greenspan might be American, and the associated site is listed with an American non-profit tax rating, so it would appear that they have nothing to worry about. But then why would they use a Germany based hosting site?
On the post: GDPR Being Used To Try To Disappear Public US Court Docket
Three things
Second, wouldn't a GDPR type program in the US violate the 1st Amendment? Whose speech could be considered more important, the person posting the docket or the person with butt hurt from the docket post. Both are equally important, and the only solution is more speech, not constitutional violations. Then what will this joker do when he loses the case? Deny, deny, deny (it is speech) only brings one to da Nile (alternatively denial). Will he try to take down his denials as well?
Third, the Streisand effect has made him more famous than he ever wanted. Good to know it has value other than mirth.
On the post: Wherein Jean Luc Picard Learns How Not To Moderate Twitter
Seeing reason in the midst of commitment
The issue is then how to go about getting them to focus not only on their cause, but to consider the unintended consequences of their actions. The result not in their plan but is inevitable given the lack of consideration of the whole picture. The 'for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction' concept only goes part way as it does not expose the big picture, the consequences not predicted, the ricochet. And the blinded by commitment to their cause will make it difficult to get through.
The method in this case then should be for the platforms to listen to all three sides and take the middle ground and give control over to individual users so they can get what they want but also not get what they don't want. At the same time, they should stick to their guns about enforcing an appropriate TOS for their platform, and enforce it strictly. When bias is charged they will then be able to point to the TOS issue and suggest that if the speaker had been a bit more moderate in their behavior then they would not have had the sanction.
On the post: Jeff Sessions Says If You Want More Shootings And Death, Listen To The ACLU And Black Lives Matter
Re:
Then, one wonders, what is Sessions plan to stop misconduct and abuse? According to his statement, it is to give police respect, whether they deserve it or not, and to disobey the consent decree.
On the post: eSports Milestone: Pro Gamer Ninja To Be The First Pro Gamer Featured On ESPN Magazine Cover
Re: A general message for all concerned: (What is sport?)
By your definition then we could set up rules and organizations to define competitive television sports watching (International Couch Potato Events Organization or ICPEO). Points could be scored by things consumed (beer, pretzels, pizza slices, hot dogs, etc.) or by emotional output (screaming at the ref volume, creativity of scoring dances, color of face when fuming at coaching decisions, an outrage index when players screw up, distinctiveness and/or creativity of colorful language when denigrating anything happening on screen or aimed at competitive co-watchers, also etc.) and length of nap time when the game being watched is so boring that it puts one to sleep, and of course etc.. All in front of a screen.
On the post: State Cops Accidentally Out Their Surveillance Of Anti-Police Groups With Browser Screenshot
Re:
There is an agenda here. It is not stated, but one certainly exists, otherwise their bookmarks would be for a larger variety of groups, not just ones like 'Action Against Police Brutality', or the 'Coalition to Organize and Mobilize Boston Against Trump', or 'Resistance Calendar'.
On the post: State Cops Accidentally Out Their Surveillance Of Anti-Police Groups With Browser Screenshot
Re: Is reading public web pages "survellience"?
By the same token, there is a certain amount of surveillance of us all by various government agencies, both local and national, are you really OK with that? What is the legitimate purpose of that? National security? Are you a threat? If not, and I believe that you are not, they why would the government be looking over your shoulder? Is a surveillance state really OK? Is increased surveillance of group that isn't directly involved with violence OK?
Every indication of government overreach should be taken seriously, and acted upon. The preferred method is speech, as happened here, but there are other methods. Do we want to get there, or use enough speech to make other methods unnecessary?
On the post: State Cops Accidentally Out Their Surveillance Of Anti-Police Groups With Browser Screenshot
Re:
On the post: eSports Milestone: Pro Gamer Ninja To Be The First Pro Gamer Featured On ESPN Magazine Cover
Sport?
I am not denigrating the activity itself. Nor the concept of one becoming a professional at that activity. The suggestion that it constitutes sport in the same way as track and field, or wrestling, or swimming, or gymnastics, or ice dancing or etc. do is another thing. Also, I would like to watch Olympic or even collegiate competitions, the way the presentations and marketing have evolved it is apparent to me, and many others, that it is more about the money than the sport. Esport does not seem to be progressing in anything that looks like an attractive manner, so far as the whole money thing goes.
Maybe I am too old and too set in my ways, but to me sport takes some sweat. Sport takes some physical effort. Sport takes something more than pushing buttons in an effective manner. Maybe when virtual reality gaming becomes more interactive, but then why not do it live and in person?
Now as an entertainment, watching someone execute a particular esport game excellently might garner some eye views. Whether that segment can generate the kind of money IRL sports do is another matter. Some of that has to do with how the coming generations wish to spend their time and money. I can think of more engaging things.
Next >>