For the love of peace, can someone seriously commit a freedom patch
Yes you can. Democracy is gov't open sourced, after all. It's not like that proprietary shit we put up with from kings and queens (and numerous religious tyrants) a few centuries ago.
Give it your best shot. Fire away. Not that I'm advocating violence or anything, but whatever floats your boat ...
Many did. However, it wasn't an actual word you'd find in a dictionary then. I've never seen the point in using unnecessary extraneous characters so even if I'm a Canuck, I prefer favor over favour (& etc). The British al-yoo-min-i-um cured me of that foolishness.
The problem with that logic is that if you care to, I'm sure you could stretch it to cover pretty much any government agency.
Feature! I'm surprised not to see the BBC on the list as they expend a lot of costly effort trying to sort out watchers vs. non-watchers. I'm sure they'll eventually be added, along with all the performance rights orgs who need this data to protect Imaginary Property rightsholders.
"Mission creep" is the term for this. We used to joke about the phenomenon of every program eventually gaining the ability to send email. Same with gov't programs, but in a manner leading towards totalitarianism instead.
That's merely the initial fault which allows what follows. Their need for cash is an ongoing thing, not a single up-front windfall. Donors want them to continue to be kept bought, and that's an installment plan arrangement.
Really? This sort of Puritanistic BS is usually a Republican trait. Hmm, maybe there's no longer any fucking difference to speak of between them and they're both reprehensible trash.
Weird little things, like the idea that a warrant could be necessary to track one car, but not to track every car.
Remember, a warrant is only necessary if you want to use that evidence in court. However, if you just use it to fish for offenders, then follow up with an investigation which finds other evidence on said offender, you need never mention the original warrantless search. It's sort of like parallel reconstruction, but even cleaner looking.
... all of those women are just ordinary citizens trying to make an honest living degrading themselves of their own free will and choice.
That sounds like a few jobs I've done in the past, some of which I found after a while were far more degrading, working for far less reputable people, and getting paid far less than prostitutes do. I found myself envying them at times.
It will be the families that are destroyed by Martinez's horrifically misguided proposal.
No, I don't think so, for all the reasons you stated. Nobody is going to take this sort of "tattle taling" seriously. It's just a very silly and misguided "idea" which should be laughed at by everyone. The fact that council is seriously studying this proposition (pun intended) does not speak well of them.
Perhaps a better idea would be placing a CCTV camera across the street from some of the better hotels in town, thereby allowing them to tattle tale on the high class call girls'/guys' clientèle, such as her fellow council members? That sort of hearsay dirt could be used constructively, such as when it shows up on TV during election campaigns.
If I were a journalist, I'd be looking for things like this from politicians as red flags. Anyone proposing such things would get 24 hour surveillance. "Lets find out what she's been up to, shall we?"
... why did we ever believe that "dude with a stick" could fight off an entire pack of wolves, anyway?
He had a sheepdog! Too bad the sheepdog forgot his job wasn't *just* to keep the sheep in line and got suckered into joining his relatives in the attack on the shepherd. Sort of like our police and their current war on domestic insurgents (us).
I was just reading the story (Columbia Journalism Review) on the video of a cop who pumped sixteen bullets into a kid. The police chief fought tooth & nail to suppress the video, but a suit forced it out. The cop's now been charged with murder. Now that's a flip flop!
This democracy, or representative gov't in general, only works for us all when everyone party to the deal knows the rules and limits and acts accordingly. To ensure that happens takes oversight. We all need to know that everyone else is sticking to the program, else some will expect more from it than is expected, deserved, or allowed.
Offhand, I'd say the wolves have been plying the shepherd with booze and he's sleeping it off, if in fact he hasn't already been eaten. The sheep are looking around wondering what happened to their friends, and their friends' family, and now that I think of it I can't remember the last time I saw my brother and sister. Hmm. Isn't that odd?
Re: Re: Re: "It's not our fault we had too much hay to sift through to find them in time! Completely unrelated, we need more hay."
If they can't even catch people who take no real security precautions, the idea that they would do any better against those that do is a joke without a punchline.
Yes, and we should be beating our elected representatives' doors down demanding to know why heads aren't rolling! For these incompetent "security professionals" to now be attempting to deflect their failure somewhere (anywhere!) else is pretty damning.
They weren't even trying, and it shows damningly! They sat on their hands with billions of dollars worth of taxpayer funded toys, surfing pr0n, buying Xmas gifts on Ebay, and demanding everybody else bend over so they had a decent chance of winning this, but they weren't even trying to use the tools they already had.
I want to see lots of heads rolling when incompetence like this shows up this glaringly. People died because they were lazy. That's inexcusable.
... shameless tabloid TV sensationalists like Nancy Grace (who, BTW, never apologised or even addressed her gross errors in judgement.)
You would think behavior such as that would make anyone think twice about believing anything she said, or even wanting to hear anything she wanted to say. Well, in a perfect world anyway.
I'm in favor of "everything public" regardless of who it's about, and of dumping/updating everything that's personal upon "not guilty" verdicts, and for the cops to just suck it up that wearing a uniform and badge and driving a souped up police car comes with a few "you may need to be a bit more careful than the average guy" warnings for the privilege. Still want the job? It pays pretty well, you know?
Sorry about indenting the xsl stylesheet with all the & n b s p ;'s.
Ptheh. It looked fine in the email copy I was sent (and which I saved for posterity, thanks :-). Webbish stuff, as everyone should know, needs specialized mangling (note what I had to do to your last word quoted) to get plain text through at all.
Of course, once you mix *nix, MS, and Apple charsets in (not to mention ISO-nnnn or utf-n), it's a crapshoot whether anything remains readable at the final destination.
Oh, and lest anyone resort to PC namecalling of "Islamphobia," need I remind you of what Bill Maher has been saying about there being only one group sticking out like a sore thumb who does this over and over and over and over again?
Uh, religious extremists?
IIRC a whopping zero Catholics blew themselves up at movie theaters showing Life of Brian. Even Scientology isn't this insane...
No, Catholics don't blow themselves up. Centuries of warfare between states, however, and genocidal colonization, persecuting heretics and witches, the Inquisition, the Crusades, ... Scientology are amateurs in comparison.
Pretty selective view of history you have there. Yes, you are an Islamophobe if you blame only Islam. Then there's Japanese Shinto and Zen Buddhism, the Inca, Aztec, and Mayan cults, Egyptian Pharaonic cults, ...
Islam's just the latest to join the party, and Christianity's only starting to slow down lately.
The secret to surviving on the Internet isn't to refrain from being stupid, or hiding your stupidity behind anonymity. I'm not sure either of those are completely possible.
I'll quibble with that. One, it's easy to refrain from being stupid on the net. Just shut up, and no-one will know you're stupid. However, if you're smart enough to do that, are you really stupid?
Two, anonymity doesn't hide stupidity. It just keeps it from being attributed to you. You'll still look stupid (or your posts will), but for some people, not having to wear it personally is good enough for them, and the point is to annoy people, not add anything to a discussion. It's like that little kid yelling, "Mommy, mommy, look at me mommy, mommy, mommy!" "Yes dear."
I wish forums would do a word count on posts. Anything less than X words or lines? To the bit bucket, Batman!
On the post: UK's Snooper's Charter Hands Over Access To User Data To Several Non-Law Enforcement Agencies
Re: Re: Re:
Yes you can. Democracy is gov't open sourced, after all. It's not like that proprietary shit we put up with from kings and queens (and numerous religious tyrants) a few centuries ago.
Give it your best shot. Fire away. Not that I'm advocating violence or anything, but whatever floats your boat ...
On the post: UK's Snooper's Charter Hands Over Access To User Data To Several Non-Law Enforcement Agencies
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Department for Work and Pensions
Pedantry is generally frowned upon, for good reason. Correctness is good. Minutia isn't. Hence, the well deserved reputation of "Grammar Nazis."
On the post: UK's Snooper's Charter Hands Over Access To User Data To Several Non-Law Enforcement Agencies
Re: Re: Re: Re: Department for Work and Pensions
Many did. However, it wasn't an actual word you'd find in a dictionary then. I've never seen the point in using unnecessary extraneous characters so even if I'm a Canuck, I prefer favor over favour (& etc). The British al-yoo-min-i-um cured me of that foolishness.
On the post: UK's Snooper's Charter Hands Over Access To User Data To Several Non-Law Enforcement Agencies
Re: Re: Department for Work and Pensions
Feature! I'm surprised not to see the BBC on the list as they expend a lot of costly effort trying to sort out watchers vs. non-watchers. I'm sure they'll eventually be added, along with all the performance rights orgs who need this data to protect Imaginary Property rightsholders.
"Mission creep" is the term for this. We used to joke about the phenomenon of every program eventually gaining the ability to send email. Same with gov't programs, but in a manner leading towards totalitarianism instead.
On the post: L.A. Politician Proposes Bold Plan To Wreck Homes, Destroy Lives And Abuse License Plate Reader Technology
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: L.A. Politician Proposes Bold Plan To Wreck Homes, Destroy Lives And Abuse License Plate Reader Technology
Re: Oh look, she is a Democrat
Really? This sort of Puritanistic BS is usually a Republican trait. Hmm, maybe there's no longer any fucking difference to speak of between them and they're both reprehensible trash.
On the post: L.A. Politician Proposes Bold Plan To Wreck Homes, Destroy Lives And Abuse License Plate Reader Technology
Re: Re: Re:
Remember, a warrant is only necessary if you want to use that evidence in court. However, if you just use it to fish for offenders, then follow up with an investigation which finds other evidence on said offender, you need never mention the original warrantless search. It's sort of like parallel reconstruction, but even cleaner looking.
On the post: L.A. Politician Proposes Bold Plan To Wreck Homes, Destroy Lives And Abuse License Plate Reader Technology
Re: Re:
That sounds like a few jobs I've done in the past, some of which I found after a while were far more degrading, working for far less reputable people, and getting paid far less than prostitutes do. I found myself envying them at times.
On the post: L.A. Politician Proposes Bold Plan To Wreck Homes, Destroy Lives And Abuse License Plate Reader Technology
Stupid is as stupid does.
No, I don't think so, for all the reasons you stated. Nobody is going to take this sort of "tattle taling" seriously. It's just a very silly and misguided "idea" which should be laughed at by everyone. The fact that council is seriously studying this proposition (pun intended) does not speak well of them.
Perhaps a better idea would be placing a CCTV camera across the street from some of the better hotels in town, thereby allowing them to tattle tale on the high class call girls'/guys' clientèle, such as her fellow council members? That sort of hearsay dirt could be used constructively, such as when it shows up on TV during election campaigns.
If I were a journalist, I'd be looking for things like this from politicians as red flags. Anyone proposing such things would get 24 hour surveillance. "Lets find out what she's been up to, shall we?"
On the post: The NSA's Bulk Collection Of Phone Records Ended Saturday. Long Live The Bulk Collection Of Phone Records!
Re: Re: What happened to the shepherd?
He had a sheepdog! Too bad the sheepdog forgot his job wasn't *just* to keep the sheep in line and got suckered into joining his relatives in the attack on the shepherd. Sort of like our police and their current war on domestic insurgents (us).
I was just reading the story (Columbia Journalism Review) on the video of a cop who pumped sixteen bullets into a kid. The police chief fought tooth & nail to suppress the video, but a suit forced it out. The cop's now been charged with murder. Now that's a flip flop!
"We will overcome, we will overcome, ..." Uh huh.
On the post: French Government Using State Of Emergency As An Excuse To Round Up Climate Change Activists
"Whatever" == "Quisling".
On the post: French Government Using State Of Emergency As An Excuse To Round Up Climate Change Activists
I hear stormtroopers marching.
Hey, a bright spot! At least I'll be saving C$70/mo. on my net connection. Woohoo.
So much for my "I'm old, so at least I'll be dead ..." line. I wonder when Emperor Trudeau signs C-51 into law.
On the post: The NSA's Bulk Collection Of Phone Records Ended Saturday. Long Live The Bulk Collection Of Phone Records!
What happened to the shepherd?
Offhand, I'd say the wolves have been plying the shepherd with booze and he's sleeping it off, if in fact he hasn't already been eaten. The sheep are looking around wondering what happened to their friends, and their friends' family, and now that I think of it I can't remember the last time I saw my brother and sister. Hmm. Isn't that odd?
On the post: Details Of How The Paris Attacks Were Carried Out Show Little Effort By Attackers To Hide Themselves
Re:
Damn, that'd look good on a t-shirt! And I'm not even a Star Wars fan.
On the post: Details Of How The Paris Attacks Were Carried Out Show Little Effort By Attackers To Hide Themselves
Re: Re: Re: "It's not our fault we had too much hay to sift through to find them in time! Completely unrelated, we need more hay."
Yes, and we should be beating our elected representatives' doors down demanding to know why heads aren't rolling! For these incompetent "security professionals" to now be attempting to deflect their failure somewhere (anywhere!) else is pretty damning.
They weren't even trying, and it shows damningly! They sat on their hands with billions of dollars worth of taxpayer funded toys, surfing pr0n, buying Xmas gifts on Ebay, and demanding everybody else bend over so they had a decent chance of winning this, but they weren't even trying to use the tools they already had.
I want to see lots of heads rolling when incompetence like this shows up this glaringly. People died because they were lazy. That's inexcusable.
On the post: The Paris Attacks Were An Intelligence Community Failure, Not An 'Encryption' Problem
Re: Re:
I wonder why the word "ass-hat" (asshat?) just popped into my head.
On the post: Sixth Circuit Appeals Court Prepares To Consider The Privacy Implications Of Mugshots
Nancy Grace, journalist?
You would think behavior such as that would make anyone think twice about believing anything she said, or even wanting to hear anything she wanted to say. Well, in a perfect world anyway.
I'm in favor of "everything public" regardless of who it's about, and of dumping/updating everything that's personal upon "not guilty" verdicts, and for the cops to just suck it up that wearing a uniform and badge and driving a souped up police car comes with a few "you may need to be a bit more careful than the average guy" warnings for the privilege. Still want the job? It pays pretty well, you know?
On the post: Montana Newspaper Announces Plans To Reveal The Names Of All Previous Commenters, Despite Promises To Keep Them Secret
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ptheh. It looked fine in the email copy I was sent (and which I saved for posterity, thanks :-). Webbish stuff, as everyone should know, needs specialized mangling (note what I had to do to your last word quoted) to get plain text through at all.
Of course, once you mix *nix, MS, and Apple charsets in (not to mention ISO-nnnn or utf-n), it's a crapshoot whether anything remains readable at the final destination.
On the post: Dumb Idea... Or The Dumbest Idea? Seize Terrorists' Copyrights And Then Censor Them With The DMCA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: That can't go wrong at all...
Uh, religious extremists?
No, Catholics don't blow themselves up. Centuries of warfare between states, however, and genocidal colonization, persecuting heretics and witches, the Inquisition, the Crusades, ... Scientology are amateurs in comparison.
Pretty selective view of history you have there. Yes, you are an Islamophobe if you blame only Islam. Then there's Japanese Shinto and Zen Buddhism, the Inca, Aztec, and Mayan cults, Egyptian Pharaonic cults, ...
Islam's just the latest to join the party, and Christianity's only starting to slow down lately.
On the post: Montana Newspaper Announces Plans To Reveal The Names Of All Previous Commenters, Despite Promises To Keep Them Secret
Re:
I'll quibble with that. One, it's easy to refrain from being stupid on the net. Just shut up, and no-one will know you're stupid. However, if you're smart enough to do that, are you really stupid?
Two, anonymity doesn't hide stupidity. It just keeps it from being attributed to you. You'll still look stupid (or your posts will), but for some people, not having to wear it personally is good enough for them, and the point is to annoy people, not add anything to a discussion. It's like that little kid yelling, "Mommy, mommy, look at me mommy, mommy, mommy!" "Yes dear."
I wish forums would do a word count on posts. Anything less than X words or lines? To the bit bucket, Batman!
Next >>