THEY don't want to ban encryption for everyone.
THEY want to ban encryption for us.
THEY will exempt THEMselves from any such ban.
After all, encryption is necessary to secure national... security.
This is yet another attempt to erode our rights, and increase the power gap between "authorities" and "civilians."
Ehud
Note: cops are civilians. So are firefighters. After 2001/09/11 they've pushed a narrative that they are not. Yeah, they are.
There is no "defense" and no "legal arguments made by the defense" and therefore none that "would be appropriate".
You just made all that up.
Ipso facto the host country has no responsibility to augment the security provided to the foreign dignitary by his own staff.
Please... if you must invent stuff, especially reasons why the US needs to beef up Erdogan's security, DO include at least some shred of information that backs up your absurd position.
No, they are not. Treaties are legal agreements between international entities and others. They have the force of law.
Perhaps you equate driving 56MPH in a 55MPH zone with a treaty. You would be wrong. The former gets you a possible civil traffic citation, and at best a pass for not going too far above the speed limit. Violating a treaty gets you a lot worse.
It takes someone as brain-dead as DJT to purposely violate a treaty or to threaten to (e.g. NAFTA).
Your statement is wrong on the face of it, and in its interpretation. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul. (h/t Adam Sandler).
Terrorism isn't to inspire terror. It is to chill behavior and create fear and uncertainty. We just call it terrorism because "Bully Fearmongering Bad Guys" just aren't scary enough.
Yes, the host government can revoke diplomatic immunity... but it's never done in retrospect. It's done with notice to allow the "soon to be ex-" diplomats to get secure transportation home.
Note: it COULD be done in retrospect but no country will do this because that starts the "nuclear option" of "if we do it then they will do it, and then our diplomats are in danger." Since the United States has more diplomats in more countries than Turkey, this is not the hill to die on.
Finally, it's unheard of to revoke DI from a head of state or his security team. They'd have to commit something a lot more reckless than attacking protestors. Maybe a brutal asphyxiation and then being sawn into pieces and put on a flight. Oops, wrong dictator. And even he still has his DI.
The irony is that his supporters don't "get it." They agree with him fully that there is an "invasion" and it's full of "terrorists" which are all Muslims. And yet, when he meets with Erdogan and shakes his hand, etc. they accept it as is and never wonder how this is.
...And yet when he offers to "meet with Iran with no preconditions," etc. they accept it as is and never wonder how this is.
...And yet when Muhammad Bin Salman kills Jamal Kashoggi BRUTALLY -- you know, like a Muslim terrorist would do -- and Trump and Jared and Junior all say "Hey guys it's all cool" they accept it and never wonder how this is.
I don't think it's humor. I think it's an ironic disaster.
So the article talks about how these people TALKED LOUDLY near Erdogan, and his goons beat them. The first amendment issues there are pretty straightforward.
The "no-fly list" you bring up is not a third-world dictator's attempt to prevent people from flying. No, Turkey doesn't have a no-fly list. No, that privilege belongs to the United States, where we claim to respect freedom, freedom to speak, freedom to travel, freedom to redress grievance (h/t John Gilmore). But 9/11 so no more rights.
Back to Erdogan and the "no-fly" list:
Diplomatic flights are not subject to our weird TSA rules.
The TSA and TSC do not screen Turkish flights.
Erdogan, a terrorist leader and dictator, came to meet with someone who loves both - Donald Trump. The latter is a criminal in all but conviction who breaks every law he can... because... he can.
There will be no guilty plea here. The Court will likely eschew jurisdiction because diplomat. The protesters will be victim-blamed. Justice will not be done.
What a wonderful world. (h/t L. Armstrong)
E
There's nothing being stolen here other than stolen valor. The anonymous work remains as is. Some liar claims he wrote it. Being assigned a copyright is a formality and unnecessary unless you intend to sue for statutory damages... at which point you still must prove to be the author.
This gets him nothing tangible (there's the Imaginary part of IP) but allows him to claim a copyright on a document he likely didn't write. Consider it a resumé padding device, not anything of value, and certainly not a theft of anything except his own credibility.
When I see [usually in WashPo] 1000+ comments I usually comment that "I'll be the last 900 readers couldn't be bothered to read other people's comments, but think theirs should be immediately made doctrine."
Well I saw 182 comments and started reading them, and honestly I had to scroll because most said what I wanted to -- offering congratulations, and affirming that Shiva Ayyadurai didn't invent email.
Borders should continue to exist. If you don't like what's legal in my country (alcohol, etc. for US but not for Dubai) you get to block our "freedom" from your non-freedom, but we don't have to change what we do.
Europol, Interpol, and other pseudo LEOs (no worries, the US has lots of bogus LEOs making stupid claims of their own and I'm not defending those) have no claim on US territories nor should they ever.
US websites - keep doing what you're doing.
EU - if you don't like it, find the off switch and turn it off. Sorry if you can't Instagram your grandkids any longer. And by sorry I don't mean sorry.
Europol. It's like "Interpol" wasn't funny enough on 1980s VHS tape introductions they had to update it to make it even more scary/stupid.
The idiots going along with this nonsense won't have an internet any longer ...
Really anyone who says "cut the cable" is preaching isolationsim by vandalism. You'll note they don't say "I'll go cut the cable" but rather imply "You all should go do the cable-cutting thing."
Because there's one cable and if we cut it we fix the problem, right? Except none of that is true. There are multiple cables, owned by many companies, countries, etc., the majority of which are US ones -- with shareholders -- and neither I nor YOU nor THEY nor THEM nor ANYONE can "jest go kut them." Unless we're terrorists.
Isolationsism vandalism is good if you're a moron or an idiot, but in the practical world since th 1960s we try to connect to everyone but manage what data is sent through. We should isolate the morons and idiots... not engage in either isolationism or terrorism.
E
P.S. Don't take any of the above as an insult to Trump. He doesn't merit it.
If I was running Twitter or Facebook, I'd be seriously thinking about ...
Increasing shareholder value. That means you wouldn't shutter your offices, and you'd be trying to think your way out of the well British politicans had thrown you down.
Public companies, unlike us normal people, are obligated to increase shareholder value. Typically for media companies with an advertiser-supported presence that means eyeballs, page-views, and more and more people looking and interacting every day.
The US is a wonderful place, and we do have the First Amendment, but we also have lots of laws regulating content on the Internet. We're not perfect (and I'm not going to start with Whataboutism) but so far Internet content regulation exists in the US, UK, China, Japan, Russia, Turkey, Iran -- just to name a few.
Solving "the problem" means getting people to allow others to express themselves even when it horts their widdle feewings. That train has sailed.
It used to take six hours to drive from Los Angeles CA/US to San Francisco. So we built a bullet train and it shortened the trip to only one hour. Because we didn't have a lot of money or government support we used private rights of way and private cars, and well, you had to stand for that hour. That was still great because, hey one hour!
Then some newspaper people and some politicians wanted to come on our train and we said "Hey why not" and they rode. They said it was unsafe and passed laws. Now we had to put doors on... and seats... and seat belts... and nobody was allowed to stand. Still one hour!!
Then someone talked the train attendants into joining a club where they could collectively bargain to work less and earn more. Our prices went up but the service went down. Still one hour!!
Then Amtrak said it wasn't fair we were competing with them, and essentially taking money away from Amtrak, and they can't make the trip in one hour so we should slow down. They bought enough politicians to pass that law. So now... four hours.
The Internet started as a free-to-all communication media that equalized access to everyone. The various rules and laws from CDA to FOSTA to SESTA to GDPR to the Australia and now UK anti-harm laws... all they've done is gut the "free" "all" and "communication."
Censorship is bad, but people know it's there. This is much much more insidious and worse. You can also bet there will be carve-outs just as there are for spam callers.. allowing the politicians to say whatever they like, while us voters/taxpayers are gagged and robbed.
Six hours in a car never felt so good. Thanks, John Gilmore.
On the post: Here We Go Again: Trump Administration Considers Outlawing Encryption
Them vs. us
THEY don't want to ban encryption for everyone.
THEY want to ban encryption for us.
THEY will exempt THEMselves from any such ban.
After all, encryption is necessary to secure national... security.
This is yet another attempt to erode our rights, and increase the power gap between "authorities" and "civilians."
Ehud
Note: cops are civilians. So are firefighters. After 2001/09/11 they've pushed a narrative that they are not. Yeah, they are.
On the post: Turkish Gov't: Erdogan's Bodyguards Needed To Attack DC Protesters Because They Were Too Close When They Said Mean Things
Ipso facto and other made up things
There is no "defense" and no "legal arguments made by the defense" and therefore none that "would be appropriate".
You just made all that up.
Ipso facto the host country has no responsibility to augment the security provided to the foreign dignitary by his own staff.
Please... if you must invent stuff, especially reasons why the US needs to beef up Erdogan's security, DO include at least some shred of information that backs up your absurd position.
Ipso facto and all that.
E
On the post: Prenda Mastermind Gets 14 Years In Prison, Told To Pay Back Just $1.5 Million
Odds on an appeal being filed?
He didn't take a plea agreement, which suggests he will appeal.
Anyone offering/taking odds on that?
E
On the post: Turkish Gov't: Erdogan's Bodyguards Needed To Attack DC Protesters Because They Were Too Close When They Said Mean Things
Trumpian says treaties are only suggestions
No, they are not. Treaties are legal agreements between international entities and others. They have the force of law.
Perhaps you equate driving 56MPH in a 55MPH zone with a treaty. You would be wrong. The former gets you a possible civil traffic citation, and at best a pass for not going too far above the speed limit. Violating a treaty gets you a lot worse.
It takes someone as brain-dead as DJT to purposely violate a treaty or to threaten to (e.g. NAFTA).
Your statement is wrong on the face of it, and in its interpretation. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul. (h/t Adam Sandler).
E
On the post: Turkish Gov't: Erdogan's Bodyguards Needed To Attack DC Protesters Because They Were Too Close When They Said Mean Things
Terrorism
Terrorism isn't to inspire terror. It is to chill behavior and create fear and uncertainty. We just call it terrorism because "Bully Fearmongering Bad Guys" just aren't scary enough.
Leave Wikipedia behind and check out:
https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism
E
On the post: Turkish Gov't: Erdogan's Bodyguards Needed To Attack DC Protesters Because They Were Too Close When They Said Mean Things
Re: Re: Diplomatic Immunity
It's all in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and it's subtle and requires the cooperation of the sending country:
Article 9 (1) US tells Turkey their staff is persona non grata and Turkey should remove them or they lose their immunity.
Article 9 (2) If they have not been recalled they lose their immunity and can be prosecuted for events PRIOR to said date.
Article 43 (b) backs this up.
E
On the post: Turkish Gov't: Erdogan's Bodyguards Needed To Attack DC Protesters Because They Were Too Close When They Said Mean Things
Diplomatic Immunity
Yes, the host government can revoke diplomatic immunity... but it's never done in retrospect. It's done with notice to allow the "soon to be ex-" diplomats to get secure transportation home.
Note: it COULD be done in retrospect but no country will do this because that starts the "nuclear option" of "if we do it then they will do it, and then our diplomats are in danger." Since the United States has more diplomats in more countries than Turkey, this is not the hill to die on.
Finally, it's unheard of to revoke DI from a head of state or his security team. They'd have to commit something a lot more reckless than attacking protestors. Maybe a brutal asphyxiation and then being sawn into pieces and put on a flight. Oops, wrong dictator. And even he still has his DI.
E
On the post: Turkish Gov't: Erdogan's Bodyguards Needed To Attack DC Protesters Because They Were Too Close When They Said Mean Things
Re: Gollum
Yeah, about an hour I tweeted Erdogan:
"Hey, what have you got in your pocketses?"
I'll let you know when I get the lawsuit...
E
On the post: Turkish Gov't: Erdogan's Bodyguards Needed To Attack DC Protesters Because They Were Too Close When They Said Mean Things
Re: Irony
The irony is that his supporters don't "get it." They agree with him fully that there is an "invasion" and it's full of "terrorists" which are all Muslims. And yet, when he meets with Erdogan and shakes his hand, etc. they accept it as is and never wonder how this is.
...And yet when he offers to "meet with Iran with no preconditions," etc. they accept it as is and never wonder how this is.
...And yet when Muhammad Bin Salman kills Jamal Kashoggi BRUTALLY -- you know, like a Muslim terrorist would do -- and Trump and Jared and Junior all say "Hey guys it's all cool" they accept it and never wonder how this is.
I don't think it's humor. I think it's an ironic disaster.
E
On the post: Turkish Gov't: Erdogan's Bodyguards Needed To Attack DC Protesters Because They Were Too Close When They Said Mean Things
Re: Constitution
Sure, you can make up anything you like. It's just not correct nor true. WashPo covered this back when it happened.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/05/18/diplomatic-immunity-protects-a ll-officials-even-erdogans-thugs-thats-good/?utm_term=.ec4abd3ea265
E
On the post: Turkish Gov't: Erdogan's Bodyguards Needed To Attack DC Protesters Because They Were Too Close When They Said Mean Things
Re: The No Fly List
On the post: Trump Whines About AT&T, Ignores His FCC Has Spent Two Years Kissing The Company's Ass
typo
"resulted widespread layoffs."
Probably needs an "in" in there.
E
On the post: Copyright Office Weighs In After Wannabe Satoshi Craig Wright Registers Copyright On Original Bitcoin Paper
IP isn't property
There's nothing being stolen here other than stolen valor. The anonymous work remains as is. Some liar claims he wrote it. Being assigned a copyright is a formality and unnecessary unless you intend to sue for statutory damages... at which point you still must prove to be the author.
This gets him nothing tangible (there's the Imaginary part of IP) but allows him to claim a copyright on a document he likely didn't write. Consider it a resumé padding device, not anything of value, and certainly not a theft of anything except his own credibility.
Shiva Ayyadurai bis.
E
On the post: Copyright Office Weighs In After Wannabe Satoshi Craig Wright Registers Copyright On Original Bitcoin Paper
Analogies
Craig Wright:Satoshi :: Shiva : inventor of email
E
On the post: Our Legal Dispute With Shiva Ayyadurai Is Now Over
182 comments before mine
When I see [usually in WashPo] 1000+ comments I usually comment that "I'll be the last 900 readers couldn't be bothered to read other people's comments, but think theirs should be immediately made doctrine."
Well I saw 182 comments and started reading them, and honestly I had to scroll because most said what I wanted to -- offering congratulations, and affirming that Shiva Ayyadurai didn't invent email.
My 183 comment on this thread affirms that!
E
On the post: DC Legislators Push FOIA Amendment That Would Shield Government Emails From FOIA Requesters [UPDATE]
Tabled the ammendment
Table in US English: Remove from the table and stop discussion.
Table in UK English: Put on the table to start discussion.
If you're writing for an international audience, best to avoid the use of this term that as 180° meanings in different English-speaking countries.
E
On the post: EU Tells Internet Archive That Much Of Its Site Is 'Terrorist Content'
Censorship and borders
Borders should continue to exist. If you don't like what's legal in my country (alcohol, etc. for US but not for Dubai) you get to block our "freedom" from your non-freedom, but we don't have to change what we do.
Europol, Interpol, and other pseudo LEOs (no worries, the US has lots of bogus LEOs making stupid claims of their own and I'm not defending those) have no claim on US territories nor should they ever.
US websites - keep doing what you're doing.
EU - if you don't like it, find the off switch and turn it off. Sorry if you can't Instagram your grandkids any longer. And by sorry I don't mean sorry.
Europol. It's like "Interpol" wasn't funny enough on 1980s VHS tape introductions they had to update it to make it even more scary/stupid.
E
On the post: UK Now Proposes Ridiculous Plan To Fine Internet Companies For Vaguely Defined 'Harmful Content'
Cut the cable - see who screams
Really anyone who says "cut the cable" is preaching isolationsim by vandalism. You'll note they don't say "I'll go cut the cable" but rather imply "You all should go do the cable-cutting thing."
Because there's one cable and if we cut it we fix the problem, right? Except none of that is true. There are multiple cables, owned by many companies, countries, etc., the majority of which are US ones -- with shareholders -- and neither I nor YOU nor THEY nor THEM nor ANYONE can "jest go kut them." Unless we're terrorists.
Isolationsism vandalism is good if you're a moron or an idiot, but in the practical world since th 1960s we try to connect to everyone but manage what data is sent through. We should isolate the morons and idiots... not engage in either isolationism or terrorism.
E
P.S. Don't take any of the above as an insult to Trump. He doesn't merit it.
On the post: UK Now Proposes Ridiculous Plan To Fine Internet Companies For Vaguely Defined 'Harmful Content'
Public companies
Increasing shareholder value. That means you wouldn't shutter your offices, and you'd be trying to think your way out of the well British politicans had thrown you down.
Public companies, unlike us normal people, are obligated to increase shareholder value. Typically for media companies with an advertiser-supported presence that means eyeballs, page-views, and more and more people looking and interacting every day.
The US is a wonderful place, and we do have the First Amendment, but we also have lots of laws regulating content on the Internet. We're not perfect (and I'm not going to start with Whataboutism) but so far Internet content regulation exists in the US, UK, China, Japan, Russia, Turkey, Iran -- just to name a few.
Solving "the problem" means getting people to allow others to express themselves even when it horts their widdle feewings. That train has sailed.
E
On the post: UK Now Proposes Ridiculous Plan To Fine Internet Companies For Vaguely Defined 'Harmful Content'
Bullet trains
It used to take six hours to drive from Los Angeles CA/US to San Francisco. So we built a bullet train and it shortened the trip to only one hour. Because we didn't have a lot of money or government support we used private rights of way and private cars, and well, you had to stand for that hour. That was still great because, hey one hour!
Then some newspaper people and some politicians wanted to come on our train and we said "Hey why not" and they rode. They said it was unsafe and passed laws. Now we had to put doors on... and seats... and seat belts... and nobody was allowed to stand. Still one hour!!
Then someone talked the train attendants into joining a club where they could collectively bargain to work less and earn more. Our prices went up but the service went down. Still one hour!!
Then Amtrak said it wasn't fair we were competing with them, and essentially taking money away from Amtrak, and they can't make the trip in one hour so we should slow down. They bought enough politicians to pass that law. So now... four hours.
The Internet started as a free-to-all communication media that equalized access to everyone. The various rules and laws from CDA to FOSTA to SESTA to GDPR to the Australia and now UK anti-harm laws... all they've done is gut the "free" "all" and "communication."
Censorship is bad, but people know it's there. This is much much more insidious and worse. You can also bet there will be carve-outs just as there are for spam callers.. allowing the politicians to say whatever they like, while us voters/taxpayers are gagged and robbed.
Six hours in a car never felt so good. Thanks, John Gilmore.
E
Next >>