The first is hope. Hope that someone with integrity will run for office and disguise that integrity long enough to gain office.
The second is to change the system. Get rid of parties, get rid of money in politics (let anyone, not just the rich or connected run), change the way lobbying works. We cannot get rid of lobbying, but we can 'adjust' laws so that any money (any free lunch or flights or contributions, or considerations from third parties or...etc.) part of lobbying is considered bribery, and aggressively prosecuted (I know, chicken or egg).
I know I have been plugging that second choice for quite a while, but it really seems like the only way out. Now, how do we get there?
Couple of problems with that. NSA does not report to Wray, he could ask, but the laughing would be louder than the laughing here. Second, NSA making open source code? Right.
Please share. We all want some of what you are taking/smoking/inhaling. Well, some of us do, that is some of us might. There are certain AC's that might benefit, though they might benefit more if they listened to actual doctors (a.k.a. psychiatrists, who can prescribe where as psychologist cannot).
"Regrettably, your recent decision to ban the practice of domain fronting will prevents millions of people in some of the most repressive environments including China, Iran, Russia and Egypt from accessing a free and open internet."
It is disappointing, but understandable, that they left out the USofA. When is too soon to classify the US as repressive?
I'm wondering about who might actually take over? Are there any 'good' alternatives? Are there any alternative companies that would do any better? What is the likelihood that the alternative would do worse?
There should be competition for the kinds of things Wikileaks does. Not that one should have say a greater market share than other, or make (or more to the point collect via contributions) more money than the others, but to have availability to people with different agendas. Hate Assange, fine go to a rival. Not in the US go to a rival that makes sense. You are in the US go to the rival that makes sense. Maybe they could all publish the same things.
My point is, there should be multiple venues for the dissemination of such information, and at least some of them out of the reach of various governments, with the division of work being 'We're out of reach of them' and others 'We're out of reach of those', with the end result being at least some one of them is out of reach of whoever is embarrassed.
In politics, having twice or ten times as much ethics as another is the same as multiplying by 0, except when it comes to getting support from cronies or making claims to voters, directly or indirectly.
Like the Catholic Church taking control of the printing press in its early development, it took society some time to come to grips with what had happened, and how it could be used, it will take some more time for society to come to gripes with the Internet, and how it can be used.
Currently we are running through a series of fads that include social media, eCommerce, replacing TV and/or cable, instant or very fast communication, etc.. Governments, and some companies, are posing in a like position as the Catholic Church tried to take with the printing press. I think, in the long run, society will get a handle on the Internet, maybe even in ways that haven't been thought of yet, and will over come the efforts of governments and corporations to control it.
It may take several generations (or maybe many generations) to get to this point, as pointed out above those in charge now grew up with out it and it might take not only growing up with it and then becoming in charge, and THEN recognizing how badly things have been handled to get pointed in the right direction. Of course, damage done in the interim will need to be cleaned up, but we screw things up all the time, and then clean them up afterwards. Well, at least some things, and some of those faster than others, and some we still need to get started on.
We have a couple, though neither are doing their jobs. Now we need a watchdog organization to watch over the watchdog organizations, who will eventually need a dog watcher watching over the watchdog watching watchdog organizations and hope they have enough treats already in their pockets so they won't also become compromised.
I have a similar issue. Internet only is more expensive than Internet plus cable. So I buy the Internet plus cable plan and just don't hook up the cable box. Now, if I could only get them to support IPv6.
This might explain why more reporting doesn't happen, though there may be some additional reasons. There remains the question of what, practically, politically, reasonably can be done about the situation. Half measures won't accomplish anything. Clear light of day on everything they do is what is needed. How do we get there?
It's not like anything but releasing information to those they are investigating is actually classified, and when those investigations are closed any needed secrecy goes away. The whole sources and methods argument is pure crap, as those sources and methods need to be disclosed to the defense anyway. There is that parallel construction thingy which should be held to be Brady material and disclosed to the defense. Cops should not be able to operate in secret, or only be able to keep their secrets until charges are brought.
How sure are you that you're not being closed minded? Can you argue that cops never behave improperly? Can you argue that cops who would be called good don't turn in, or even actively protect, or just look away at improper behavior?
The problem is that we don't actually know the size of each of these groups. Then there are those who think that just looking away or protecting the 'bad apples' are just as bad as the 'bad apples'. Hard to say they are entirely wrong about that.
Therefore, until things get a whole lot better, the generalizations will continue. Make sure your not condoning bad behavior by merely sticking your head in the sand. The bad behaviors need the light of day, and cops are in the position to do it. They don't...at least not as often as the bad behavior happens.
Scott Greenfield has a related post up over at Simple Justice called The Problem With “Make The Cop Pay” Solution He, nor the comments so far, mention any sensible solutions to this particular problem, though they don't mention the ever-greening of the 'cop license' by other agencies who hire cops with bad behavior who have left other jobs.
I think there is something to refusing resignations and firing for cause instead that speaks, though this does not help the victims who have been financially and socially and possibly physically or permanently burdened by the bad behavior. This should be extended to removing any law enforcement license or certification so they might not revise and extend their ways.
My reading says that it probably comes up under abridging the freedom of the press. If one suppresses the ability of the press to get sources for stories, then the press has been abridged. The actual rule probably came from case law, which I tried to find, but failed.
On the post: Senators Wyden & Rubio Ask Google And Amazon To Bring Back Domain Fronting
Re: Ron Wyden gets it
The first is hope. Hope that someone with integrity will run for office and disguise that integrity long enough to gain office.
The second is to change the system. Get rid of parties, get rid of money in politics (let anyone, not just the rich or connected run), change the way lobbying works. We cannot get rid of lobbying, but we can 'adjust' laws so that any money (any free lunch or flights or contributions, or considerations from third parties or...etc.) part of lobbying is considered bribery, and aggressively prosecuted (I know, chicken or egg).
I know I have been plugging that second choice for quite a while, but it really seems like the only way out. Now, how do we get there?
On the post: FBI Boss Chris Wray: We Put A Man On The Moon So Why Not Encryption Backdoors?
Re:
Please share. We all want some of what you are taking/smoking/inhaling. Well, some of us do, that is some of us might. There are certain AC's that might benefit, though they might benefit more if they listened to actual doctors (a.k.a. psychiatrists, who can prescribe where as psychologist cannot).
On the post: Senators Wyden & Rubio Ask Google And Amazon To Bring Back Domain Fronting
The direction we are headed
It is disappointing, but understandable, that they left out the USofA. When is too soon to classify the US as repressive?
It will be too late at some point.
On the post: FBI Boss Chris Wray: We Put A Man On The Moon So Why Not Encryption Backdoors?
Re: Man on the Sun
On the post: No, The Public Standing Up For An Open Internet Is Not A Criminal Google Conspiracy
Destroyed minds grew up
Finally! An explanation for Congress.
On the post: FBI Boss Chris Wray: We Put A Man On The Moon So Why Not Encryption Backdoors?
Re: Re:
/s
On the post: FBI Boss Chris Wray: We Put A Man On The Moon So Why Not Encryption Backdoors?
As a society
As a society the problem is easy to solve. Respect people, respect privacy, respect the Constitution.
For authoritarian's working on authoritarianism the problem is society. That is what is so hard to solve, we are in their way.
On the post: New York State Threatens To Revoke Charter's Cable Franchise For Bullshitting
Re: Re: Charter's Charter
On the post: Wikileaks Refused To Publish Manafort Family Texts, So Someone Else Did
Wikileaks Competition
My point is, there should be multiple venues for the dissemination of such information, and at least some of them out of the reach of various governments, with the division of work being 'We're out of reach of them' and others 'We're out of reach of those', with the end result being at least some one of them is out of reach of whoever is embarrassed.
On the post: No Matter What You Think Of Julian Assange, It Would Be Harmful For Press Freedoms For The US To Prosecute For Publishing Leaks
Re: Re: That's what trials are for
On the post: House Judiciary Committee Falsely Claims Credit For Stopping 90% Of All Sex Trafficking Because Of FOSTA
Re:
Too bad for those exceptions.
This rule is party irrelevant.
On the post: Listen To Stephen Fry Perfectly Analogize The Moral Panics Around Facebook To The Ones Over The Printing Press
Re: Re: The Printing Press and the Internet
On the post: Listen To Stephen Fry Perfectly Analogize The Moral Panics Around Facebook To The Ones Over The Printing Press
The Printing Press and the Internet
Currently we are running through a series of fads that include social media, eCommerce, replacing TV and/or cable, instant or very fast communication, etc.. Governments, and some companies, are posing in a like position as the Catholic Church tried to take with the printing press. I think, in the long run, society will get a handle on the Internet, maybe even in ways that haven't been thought of yet, and will over come the efforts of governments and corporations to control it.
It may take several generations (or maybe many generations) to get to this point, as pointed out above those in charge now grew up with out it and it might take not only growing up with it and then becoming in charge, and THEN recognizing how badly things have been handled to get pointed in the right direction. Of course, damage done in the interim will need to be cleaned up, but we screw things up all the time, and then clean them up afterwards. Well, at least some things, and some of those faster than others, and some we still need to get started on.
On the post: Survey: 5.4 Million Americans Will Cut The Cable TV Cord In 2018
Re: Re: Re: Cord Cut
On the post: Breaking With 30 Years Of Traditional Opacity, DOJ Releases FISA Warrant Applications For Surveillance Of Carter Page
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Survey: 5.4 Million Americans Will Cut The Cable TV Cord In 2018
Re: Cord Cut
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re:
It's not like anything but releasing information to those they are investigating is actually classified, and when those investigations are closed any needed secrecy goes away. The whole sources and methods argument is pure crap, as those sources and methods need to be disclosed to the defense anyway. There is that parallel construction thingy which should be held to be Brady material and disclosed to the defense. Cops should not be able to operate in secret, or only be able to keep their secrets until charges are brought.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re:
The problem is that we don't actually know the size of each of these groups. Then there are those who think that just looking away or protecting the 'bad apples' are just as bad as the 'bad apples'. Hard to say they are entirely wrong about that.
Therefore, until things get a whole lot better, the generalizations will continue. Make sure your not condoning bad behavior by merely sticking your head in the sand. The bad behaviors need the light of day, and cops are in the position to do it. They don't...at least not as often as the bad behavior happens.
On the post: Cop Costs Taxpayers $60,000 And One (1) Drug Bust After Lying About Almost Everything Related To The Traffic Stop
What to do, what to do...
Scott Greenfield has a related post up over at Simple Justice called The Problem With “Make The Cop Pay” Solution He, nor the comments so far, mention any sensible solutions to this particular problem, though they don't mention the ever-greening of the 'cop license' by other agencies who hire cops with bad behavior who have left other jobs.
I think there is something to refusing resignations and firing for cause instead that speaks, though this does not help the victims who have been financially and socially and possibly physically or permanently burdened by the bad behavior. This should be extended to removing any law enforcement license or certification so they might not revise and extend their ways.
On the post: If You're A Journalist Hiring Lawyers To Intimidate Publishers Into Killing Stories About Your Misdeeds, You're A Hypocrite
Re: Reading comprehension?
Next >>