I agree with you on your splinter faction point. The group as a whole will be blamed for the actions of a few. It's the same reason that Islam is vilified and blamed for acts of terrorism in the US.
That being said, I do have to disagree with you on your second point. While I agree that the police are out of control and shooting everybody, the issues that BLM is doing its best to draw attention to have existed since before the founding of the US. Black people are disproportionately more likely to be shot, abused, overlooked, disregarded, and imprisoned than nearly any other minority group. This is a huge problem that goes overlooked by far, far too many people.
In a way, the name of the movement is unfortunately misleading. Many people have expressed concern that people mistake "Black Lives Matter" to mean "ONLY Black Lives Matter". In truth, BLM would perhaps be more appropriately named "Black Lives Matter Too"; while its focus is on black people, it's not intended to make people focus on the issues of only one race to the exclusion of all others.
If we're talking about abuse in general, I would be remiss to leave the Latino and Native American communities unmentioned. Both are incredibly underrepresented and much more likely to be imprisoned, harassed, and brutalized than Caucasians. In fact, minority groups as a whole are far more frequently the targets of abuse than their Caucasian counterparts. Many black people hold the view that Native Americans have it the worst out of anyone; while other minorities have faced decades of slavery and/or wholesale slaughter, nothing really comes close to the blatant government-sanctioned genocide of and ongoing disregard for the Native American people.
Again, BLM exists to draw attention to the disproportionate amount of abuse perpetrated towards black people specifically. It is not intended to be exclusionary; it has a narrow focus so as not to spread its resources or message too thinly to be effective. So far it has brought some issues to the forefront of conversation that have been ignored or glossed over for far too long.
As a side note, and just to be clear, the Black Lives Matter movement is NOT based on the premise of "an eye for an eye". People within BLM, as with any other group of people, may take that viewpoint or resort to violence, but they are not indicative of the values or beliefs of the group as a whole. BLM exists as a means for awareness, education, and rectification, not retaliation.
What's to stop people walking around the field and potentially harming the crops anyway? The farmer still has rights and Niantic is not infringing upon those rights in any way. I think the key point here is that Niantic has given gamers a reason to get out and walk around, but implicit within that is the need for gamers to still be mindful of where they're walking. If people are trampling the farmer's crops, that's a problem - but it's a problem with the people, not with the game.
Upon further consideration, I will add a critical caveat: If you're talking about Pokestops/Gyms rather than Pokemon, then I'm behind you 100%. Essentially, Pokestops and Gyms are immobile landmarks that see a lot of traffic, while Pokemon are randomly placed and ephemeral - they disappear in 10 minutes to half an hour. If a Pokestop or Gym is placed in an inappropriate or publicly-inaccessible place, then Niantic should absolutely have provisions for removing it. The difference here is that 'Stops and Gyms are player-submitted, Niantic-approved, and accompanied by an image of the location - but even more importantly, they're permanent.
While I can see how this situation could potentially cause issues and I see where you're coming from, I don't see how Niantic is obligated to do anything about it. They haven't "organized" anything. They've given incentives (Pokemon, Pokestops) for going out into the world but it's not as if they're enticing players into one particular area. If an area is restricted, players have an obligation to not enter that area, simple as that.
If someone is worried about people trespassing because of Pokemon, they could post signs marking their property and making it clear that entering would be trespassing - or simply notify the police of any trespassers. Even taking Pokemon out of the equation, there are any number of reasons why a person would choose to walk into a restricted area or onto private property. How would they normally handle such a situation?
Niantic is not hurting anybody. They're not inflicting pain OR suffering. They have essentially given players incentives for walking around outside; WHERE players walk is up to them. They've made a popular game and if people choose to break laws while playing, that is wholly and firmly on them.
I'm honestly not certain how you're drawing this conclusion. I don't see a need for this. Speaking as a player myself, I know that it's my job to make certain that I don't walk into traffic or off cliffs, enter restricted areas, trespass, or break other laws in the process of playing the game. I'm not going to break into someone's house in the middle of the night to catch a Pokemon, nor am I going to swim out to sea or walk into a swamp. If I see a Pokemon in an inaccessible area, I express disappointment and move on. It's my responsibility to make certain I'm following the rules, not Niantic's. Why on earth would it be necessary to establish Pokemon-free zones? I think the people who are concerned that Pokemon Go is somehow encouraging people to go places they shouldn't are gravely overestimating the draw of a possibly rare Pokemon versus the potential consequences of entering said area.
I guess the bottom line for me is that laws are laws, even when playing Pokemon. Play responsibly and be safe out there, people.
I think you're missing a critical point here. A warrant, by definition, permits an otherwise illegal action. Therefore:
- By its very nature, a warrant lays out very clearly that if you don't have a warrant, don't do the thing; it's illegal. - It also follows that if a potential issuer of a warrant doesn't have jurisdiction, they cannot legally issue the warrant. In so doing, they would be overstepping the bounds of their authority as defined by law and themselves performing an illegal action. - On top of that, the bar for getting a warrant in most cases has fallen so disastrously low as to be nearly imperceptible. There's no valid excuse to my mind that would justify the absence of a warrant.
Shiver me timbers, you're right! My limited testing has shown that while Adblock Plus is detected in even with NS and Ghostery, uBlock Origin flies under the radar even when using nothing else.
I used to read Wired. They have some interesting columns...or did. Now I have no idea - the no-adblock requirement sent a pretty clear message that they didn't want my page traffic anymore.
Show me someone who claims they'll vote for the good of The People over their own self-interests...and 99% of the time, I will show you a liar. This problem is systemic - the accumulation of decades of corruption, complacency, and ever-increasing greed by those in power. When the only candidates up for election are people who will extend the status quo instead of effecting any real change, you get our current situation: - Corporations are buying laws which increase their profits at the expense of The People - CEOs are suing the government when it tries to regulate monopolies - Officials who try to actually change things end up hung from nooses made of red tape
When those in power take their positions for the sake of said power, the only people who progress and get promoted are those who support that very same system. It's hard to climb high enough to fix the current power culture when everybody above and around you has a vested interest in keeping it broken - after all, a broken system is how they got their job. The system supports itself by making sure that people who support it, those who want the power, get more of it than those who don't. This is a historic trend and has happened all over the world; this is how villages gained chiefs, chiefs became warlords, warlords became kings, and kings turned into absolute dictators.
I looked really hard for a "/s" but I think you forgot to include it. Also I'm afraid that your argument is completely lost on me because I just can't get past your mixed analogies - how exactly does one go about pulling the rug out from under a ship, let alone multiple ships?
"The FBI has in its possession an iPhone that was used by one of the San Bernardino shooters. Because the phone is protected by full-disk encryption, the FBI is currently unable to access the data contained therein. Consequently, the FBI is attempting to compel Apple (who does not currently have a way of accessing the data stored on the phone) to create a new operating system and apply it to this phone. This operating system would downgrade the security of the PIN-entry mechanism on the phone so that the FBI could then brute-force the PIN. Should the FBI be allowed to compel Apple to comply with this request?"
Fixed it?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Synergy Waffle.
Re: Re: Re: Re: This creates all the right incentives
That being said, I do have to disagree with you on your second point. While I agree that the police are out of control and shooting everybody, the issues that BLM is doing its best to draw attention to have existed since before the founding of the US. Black people are disproportionately more likely to be shot, abused, overlooked, disregarded, and imprisoned than nearly any other minority group. This is a huge problem that goes overlooked by far, far too many people.
In a way, the name of the movement is unfortunately misleading. Many people have expressed concern that people mistake "Black Lives Matter" to mean "ONLY Black Lives Matter". In truth, BLM would perhaps be more appropriately named "Black Lives Matter Too"; while its focus is on black people, it's not intended to make people focus on the issues of only one race to the exclusion of all others.
If we're talking about abuse in general, I would be remiss to leave the Latino and Native American communities unmentioned. Both are incredibly underrepresented and much more likely to be imprisoned, harassed, and brutalized than Caucasians. In fact, minority groups as a whole are far more frequently the targets of abuse than their Caucasian counterparts. Many black people hold the view that Native Americans have it the worst out of anyone; while other minorities have faced decades of slavery and/or wholesale slaughter, nothing really comes close to the blatant government-sanctioned genocide of and ongoing disregard for the Native American people.
Again, BLM exists to draw attention to the disproportionate amount of abuse perpetrated towards black people specifically. It is not intended to be exclusionary; it has a narrow focus so as not to spread its resources or message too thinly to be effective. So far it has brought some issues to the forefront of conversation that have been ignored or glossed over for far too long.
Re: Re: This creates all the right incentives
Re: Re: Re:
Re: Re:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If someone is worried about people trespassing because of Pokemon, they could post signs marking their property and making it clear that entering would be trespassing - or simply notify the police of any trespassers. Even taking Pokemon out of the equation, there are any number of reasons why a person would choose to walk into a restricted area or onto private property. How would they normally handle such a situation?
Niantic is not hurting anybody. They're not inflicting pain OR suffering. They have essentially given players incentives for walking around outside; WHERE players walk is up to them. They've made a popular game and if people choose to break laws while playing, that is wholly and firmly on them.
Re:
I guess the bottom line for me is that laws are laws, even when playing Pokemon. Play responsibly and be safe out there, people.
Re:
I think you're missing a critical point here. A warrant, by definition, permits an otherwise illegal action. Therefore:
- By its very nature, a warrant lays out very clearly that if you don't have a warrant, don't do the thing; it's illegal.
- It also follows that if a potential issuer of a warrant doesn't have jurisdiction, they cannot legally issue the warrant. In so doing, they would be overstepping the bounds of their authority as defined by law and themselves performing an illegal action.
- On top of that, the bar for getting a warrant in most cases has fallen so disastrously low as to be nearly imperceptible. There's no valid excuse to my mind that would justify the absence of a warrant.
Re: Streisand Effect?
Re:
Re:
(untitled comment)
Re: Created Problems...
This problem is systemic - the accumulation of decades of corruption, complacency, and ever-increasing greed by those in power. When the only candidates up for election are people who will extend the status quo instead of effecting any real change, you get our current situation:
- Corporations are buying laws which increase their profits at the expense of The People
- CEOs are suing the government when it tries to regulate monopolies
- Officials who try to actually change things end up hung from nooses made of red tape
When those in power take their positions for the sake of said power, the only people who progress and get promoted are those who support that very same system. It's hard to climb high enough to fix the current power culture when everybody above and around you has a vested interest in keeping it broken - after all, a broken system is how they got their job. The system supports itself by making sure that people who support it, those who want the power, get more of it than those who don't.
This is a historic trend and has happened all over the world; this is how villages gained chiefs, chiefs became warlords, warlords became kings, and kings turned into absolute dictators.
Re: Re: Re:
(untitled comment)
Fixed it?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Synergy Waffle.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt