Internet Zen Master (profile), 13 Aug 2013 @ 3:04pm
You're both wrong!
[impersonation of "expert" with weird hair from History Channel's Ancient Aliens]These fake reviews were clearly posted by aliens trying to keep people ignorant of their impending invasion.
Because it'd be too simple for it to be a bunch of telcos trying to smother dissenting opinions!
[/impersonation of "expert" with weird hair from History Channel's Ancient Aliens]
Internet Zen Master (profile), 12 Aug 2013 @ 10:39am
Hold up for a second here
Rep. Peter King does realize that the word "snooping" is synonymous with the word "spying" (although the former has a more derogatory and civilian connotation)? And that the latter term is actually part of the NSA's job description? Okay, technically the CIA is the one involved in the "boots-on-the-ground" spying and the NSA is the surveillance version of spying, but the point is still the same.
I honestly do believe that the men and women working in the NSA are well-meaning patriots (well, the ones who actually work in government at least. The private contractors I'm not so sure about). Part of the problem is that I think a lot of the folks in the NSA have had their head buried in surveillance for so long they may have become obsessed with their work and can't see the big picture (upholding the Constitution/protecting Americans' privacy) anymore.
The sad truth is, the NSA's may have good intentions with its worm, but if left unchecked, the NSA also excels at paving the road to hell for America.
Internet Zen Master (profile), 12 Aug 2013 @ 9:39am
Swartz was ruining Heymann's life plan
Regardless of the fact that Swartz broke the law (even though the law was ludicrous by the standards of most visitors to this site), it still in no way justifies the outrageous accusations Heymann et al. were leveling at the man.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Heymann considering running for office after this case, or was that Carmen Ortiz? If anything, it sounds like Heymann got pissed off that Aaron Swartz was ruining Heymann's grand scheme to climb further up the political ladder by protesting his innocence.
It's no secret that the DOJ often seems to think that "intellectual property" laws are designed to protect the moneyed interests of copyright holders,
Indeed. Which is why the knowledge that the NSA has been telling the other agencies to kindly fuck off in their little turf war when asked to provide data that could be used for tracking down copyright infringement is disturbingly comforting. It's kinda sad that the agency whose SOP is violating our privacy as discreetly as possible is the one that actually has its priorities straight. And it sounds like stopping copyright infringement is not one of those priorities.
Internet Zen Master (profile), 9 Aug 2013 @ 3:44pm
Sure, they're obligated to report it
What they don't say is that if you do report it, you'll be ostracized by your peers and probably fired, if not worse.
And while Obama did actually say that the intelligence agencies should have a review about their collection practices, it sounds like it wasn't about how they were possibly violating the Constitution with a broomstick and that it was a problem, but how to better to use that broomstick without getting caught.
Internet Zen Master (profile), 8 Aug 2013 @ 3:23pm
Hmm
Part of me wonders if Snowden knew about this information (50-50 chance he did), and decided not to leak it because he thought it could cause a lot of damage to the US intelligence community's ability to do their job (which is supposedly keeping America safe from whoever happens to be the "[classified enemy] du jour" through their spying/surveillance/whatever other clandestine crap goes on).
Honestly, this exposure of the domestic spying program sounds like it could hurt a hell of a lot more than pretty much any of the info released from Snowden's data so far.
If that's the case, I just gained a little more respect for Snowden, and am even more disgusted by the US government.
It feels like there's whole surveillance house of cards that has been set up over the last decade, and it's slowly but steadily falling apart.
Internet Zen Master (profile), 8 Aug 2013 @ 2:39pm
Re: Re: Re: 1st Amendment
Uh, sorry to break it to you AC, until there's a Supreme Court ruling that says otherwise, the current precedent, regardless of what you make thing of it, is constitutional and therefore legal in the eyes of the court.
But if you really think it's bad precedent, then by all means try and do something to get the precedent changed (civil disobedience, nonviolence, you get where I'm going with this).
[As for the yelling fire in a theater bit, I wonder if that's been extended to causing a panic in a room full of people yet (wouldn't be surprised since we're living in a "post-Aurora shooting world").]
Internet Zen Master (profile), 8 Aug 2013 @ 12:49pm
Two months later
It sure took Americans long enough to start to realize there was a problem.
What was it, June 6 (give or take a few days) when this whole NSA scandal broke? And each time we thing that the government can't go any lower, a new report comes out revealing "Yes they can!" tearing down people's faith in the government even more.
So it has only been a few days over the 2 month mark since Snowden/the Guardian released the first leak on the NSA's surveillance programs. Is that the time it takes for a scandal this big to breach the reality distortion field that is "reality tv (along wiht other Hollywood idiocy)" these days?
From what I can tell, while the specific points and programs involved aren't picked up and brought into the average American's long term memory, the general sense of "Holy shit the government's trying to play Big Brother on Americans" has sunk in and taken hold for the time being [along with some assorted rallying buzzwords of course].
Whether or not the NSA is actually spying on American citizens intentionally (YMMV on that) and not just foreigners inside and outside the United States is irrelevant at this point.
For better or worse, another seed of cynicism directed at the US government has taken root in the collective American consciousness. [Must be a damn forest of cynicism by now]
Internet Zen Master (profile), 7 Aug 2013 @ 8:54am
When someone lies
Then the person usually ends up having to come up with bigger lies to cover up the original lie. And even bigger lies to cover up those lies. And then even bigger lies...[Repeat ad nauseam.]
Why isn't it just easier for people to tell the truth? You look like less of an idiot afterwards.
Internet Zen Master (profile), 7 Aug 2013 @ 8:44am
Re: Just out of curiosity...
The only thing I could even remotely see getting labeled "harmful content" are the "possibly-seizure-inducing" flashing .gifs that assholes make and then attached them to a harmless looking urls for the innocent netizen to stumble across.
That and perhaps a ten-hour video of the "Lavender Town Theme" posted to Youtube...
Internet Zen Master (profile), 7 Aug 2013 @ 8:29am
Re:
Might have something to do with the fact that the DOJ's job is supposed to be investigating/removing corruption.
That said, considering how the DOJ's been more of a rubber stamp for government agencies than the FISA court lately, we really could use somebody to "watch the watchmen (the DOJ)" right now.
Internet Zen Master (profile), 6 Aug 2013 @ 11:00am
Y'know, this isn't all that surprising
Considering that the NSA is very reluctant to share any of the data it collects with the other government agencies, the DEA being the sole exception because drugs are generally considered to be imported from other countries, which (according to NSA logic) makes the suspects involved foreigners by default.
It's true that, I am less than thrilled by the NSA's invasive surveillance programs, I'll give them credit for (mostly) keeping all that data to themselves (*see caveat about sharing with the DEA above*).
Problem with that is now it sounds like the FBI wants to get in on the data-mining game because the NSA won't share data (even though they're not supposed to be collecting info on Americans, but that's beside the point right now).
In the end, I find myself trusting the NSA more than I trust the FBI. It's depressing when you find yourself having more faith in the massive spy agency than you do in the FBI.
Internet Zen Master (profile), 5 Aug 2013 @ 3:29pm
So
When is this Senator up for re-election again? Someone should forward this mind-blowingly stupid idea to the campaign manager of every single one of her opponents.
What better way to paint someone as incompetent and unworthy of their job than by portraying them as a person that supported SOPA and now wants to make showing a Youtube video in a public place a felony-level offense?
Internet Zen Master (profile), 5 Aug 2013 @ 1:37pm
At a secret government black site
Interrogator 1: Do you know why you're here?
Prisoner: No man! I just stole a bag of Doritos from 7-11! Why the hell have your friends been torturing me for the past six months!
Interrogator 1: Son, do you know how critical those Doritos were to the national security of the United States of America?
Prisoner: .....What?
Internet Zen Master (profile), 5 Aug 2013 @ 1:25pm
It's not surprising
Tor is nothing more than a wretched hive of child pornographers and terrorists. Anyone who says otherwise is clearly aiding the enemy and should be locked up with Bradley Manning!
Internet Zen Master (profile), 5 Aug 2013 @ 1:19pm
Before we get carried away here
We shouldn't be too quick to accuse people in the US Senate/their staff of being responsible for editing Snowden's page just because the the change was made from their IP Address.
This argument is almost identical to the claims made by Prenda Law and their ilk.
Just because something came an IP address does not necessarily mean the owner of that address was responsible.
That being said, the probability that the change was made by someone in Congress (or more likely, one of their tech-savvy staffers did it for them) is 51% at a minimum, especially considering the content of the wiki article in question.
On the post: Telco Astroturfing Or Elaborate Double-Reverse Sabotage Fakeout? You Decide
You're both wrong!
Because it'd be too simple for it to be a bunch of telcos trying to smother dissenting opinions!
[/impersonation of "expert" with weird hair from History Channel's Ancient Aliens]
On the post: British Library Network Blocks 'Hamlet' For 'Violent Content'
Re: Filter...
On the post: Rep. Peter King Says Referring To NSA Activity As 'Spying' Or 'Snooping' Is Slander
Hold up for a second here
I honestly do believe that the men and women working in the NSA are well-meaning patriots (well, the ones who actually work in government at least. The private contractors I'm not so sure about). Part of the problem is that I think a lot of the folks in the NSA have had their head buried in surveillance for so long they may have become obsessed with their work and can't see the big picture (upholding the Constitution/protecting Americans' privacy) anymore.
The sad truth is, the NSA's may have good intentions with its worm, but if left unchecked, the NSA also excels at paving the road to hell for America.
On the post: DOJ Decided To Ratchet Up Case Against Aaron Swartz Because He Spoke Out Publicly About Being Innocent
Swartz was ruining Heymann's life plan
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Heymann considering running for office after this case, or was that Carmen Ortiz? If anything, it sounds like Heymann got pissed off that Aaron Swartz was ruining Heymann's grand scheme to climb further up the political ladder by protesting his innocence.
Indeed. Which is why the knowledge that the NSA has been telling the other agencies to kindly fuck off in their little turf war when asked to provide data that could be used for tracking down copyright infringement is disturbingly comforting. It's kinda sad that the agency whose SOP is violating our privacy as discreetly as possible is the one that actually has its priorities straight. And it sounds like stopping copyright infringement is not one of those priorities.
On the post: NSA Tries To Justify Its Surveillance Programs With Ridiculous Assertions
Sure, they're obligated to report it
And while Obama did actually say that the intelligence agencies should have a review about their collection practices, it sounds like it wasn't about how they were possibly violating the Constitution with a broomstick and that it was a problem, but how to better to use that broomstick without getting caught.
On the post: Thief Steals Church Computer, Calls Church's Security Company So He Can Watch Porn
There's the criminally stupid
This guy clearly falls into the latter category.
On the post: Sen. Feinstein During 'Shield' Law Debate: 'Real' Journalists Draw Salaries
Huh
On the post: NY Times Reveals NSA Searches All Emails In & Out Of The US; Will It Offer Up Its Source For Prosecution?
Hmm
Honestly, this exposure of the domestic spying program sounds like it could hurt a hell of a lot more than pretty much any of the info released from Snowden's data so far.
If that's the case, I just gained a little more respect for Snowden, and am even more disgusted by the US government.
It feels like there's whole surveillance house of cards that has been set up over the last decade, and it's slowly but steadily falling apart.
As the Zen Master says, "We'll see."
On the post: Victim Of Obama's Crackdown On Whistleblowers Says Calling Leakers Spies Is Modern Day McCarthyism
Welcome to -insert secretive US Agency here-
The second rule of -insert secretive US Agency here- is: you DO NOT talk about -insert secretive US Agency here-!
....Unless you're a high-ranking official who has dirt on everyone who could come after you.
On the post: Ed Snowden's Email Provider, Lavabit, Shuts Down To Fight US Gov't Intrusion
Re: Re: Re: 1st Amendment
But if you really think it's bad precedent, then by all means try and do something to get the precedent changed (civil disobedience, nonviolence, you get where I'm going with this).
[As for the yelling fire in a theater bit, I wonder if that's been extended to causing a panic in a room full of people yet (wouldn't be surprised since we're living in a "post-Aurora shooting world").]
On the post: Civil Rights Leader And Congressman John Lewis Says Ed Snowden Latest In The Line From Thoreau To Gandhi To King
Two months later
What was it, June 6 (give or take a few days) when this whole NSA scandal broke? And each time we thing that the government can't go any lower, a new report comes out revealing "Yes they can!" tearing down people's faith in the government even more.
So it has only been a few days over the 2 month mark since Snowden/the Guardian released the first leak on the NSA's surveillance programs. Is that the time it takes for a scandal this big to breach the reality distortion field that is "reality tv (along wiht other Hollywood idiocy)" these days?
From what I can tell, while the specific points and programs involved aren't picked up and brought into the average American's long term memory, the general sense of "Holy shit the government's trying to play Big Brother on Americans" has sunk in and taken hold for the time being [along with some assorted rallying buzzwords of course].
Whether or not the NSA is actually spying on American citizens intentionally (YMMV on that) and not just foreigners inside and outside the United States is irrelevant at this point.
For better or worse, another seed of cynicism directed at the US government has taken root in the collective American consciousness. [Must be a damn forest of cynicism by now]
On the post: US Releases Redacted Document Twice... With Different Redactions
When someone lies
Why isn't it just easier for people to tell the truth? You look like less of an idiot afterwards.
On the post: UK's Ofcom Recognizes That Copyright Can Be A Threat To User Generated Content
Re: Just out of curiosity...
That and perhaps a ten-hour video of the "Lavender Town Theme" posted to Youtube...
On the post: Now That It's Been Exposed, DOJ Plans To 'Review' Information Sharing With DEA
Re:
That said, considering how the DOJ's been more of a rubber stamp for government agencies than the FISA court lately, we really could use somebody to "watch the watchmen (the DOJ)" right now.
On the post: FBI Pushing Real-Time Metadata-Harvesting 'Port Readers' On Service Providers
Y'know, this isn't all that surprising
It's true that, I am less than thrilled by the NSA's invasive surveillance programs, I'll give them credit for (mostly) keeping all that data to themselves (*see caveat about sharing with the DEA above*).
Problem with that is now it sounds like the FBI wants to get in on the data-mining game because the NSA won't share data (even though they're not supposed to be collecting info on Americans, but that's beside the point right now).
In the end, I find myself trusting the NSA more than I trust the FBI. It's depressing when you find yourself having more faith in the massive spy agency than you do in the FBI.
On the post: Administration Can't Let Go: Wants To Bring Back Felony Streaming Provisions Of SOPA
So
What better way to paint someone as incompetent and unworthy of their job than by portraying them as a person that supported SOPA and now wants to make showing a Youtube video in a public place a felony-level offense?
On the post: Administration Can't Let Go: Wants To Bring Back Felony Streaming Provisions Of SOPA
Re: You know that thunder you just heard?
Not something I recommend doing too often mind you.
On the post: DEA Not Only Gets Intelligence Data, But Then Is Instructed To Cover Up Where It Gets The Info
At a secret government black site
Prisoner: No man! I just stole a bag of Doritos from 7-11! Why the hell have your friends been torturing me for the past six months!
Interrogator 1: Son, do you know how critical those Doritos were to the national security of the United States of America?
Prisoner: .....What?
On the post: Feds Accused Of Distributing Malware That De-Anonymizes Tor Users
It's not surprising
/s
On the post: Someone Using A US Senate IP Address Edits Wiki Entry To Change Ed Snowden From 'Dissident' To 'Traitor'
Before we get carried away here
This argument is almost identical to the claims made by Prenda Law and their ilk.
Just because something came an IP address does not necessarily mean the owner of that address was responsible.
That being said, the probability that the change was made by someone in Congress (or more likely, one of their tech-savvy staffers did it for them) is 51% at a minimum, especially considering the content of the wiki article in question.
Next >>