Recent Posts
I can submit your copyrighted article to 200.000 forum, 200.000 blog, 10.000 article website, and thousands of guestbooks etc... only in 48 hours. Then you will have to send DMCA complaint everyday in the rest of your life-cybermen007 (February 01, 2012, 09:18 AM)
So was it worth it?
How do we feel about slowing down SOPA but we mostly missed the boat on ACTA?-TaoPhoenix (January 31, 2012, 06:30 AM)
'I'm going to destroy America and dig up Marilyn Monroe': British pair arrested in U.S. on terror charges over Twitter jokes
Two British tourists were barred from entering America after joking on Twitter that they were going to 'destroy America' and 'dig up Marilyn Monroe'.
Leigh Van Bryan, 26, was handcuffed and kept under armed guard in a cell with Mexican drug dealers for 12 hours after landing in Los Angeles with pal Emily Bunting.
The Department of Homeland Security flagged him as a potential threat when he posted an excited tweet to his pals about his forthcoming trip to Hollywood which read: 'Free this week, for quick gossip/prep before I go and destroy America?'
Leigh Van Bryan was due to go to Los Angeles with his friend Emily Banting but was stopped when he arrived in the U.S. over tweets he had sent
Offending tweet: Mr Bryan told security officials that 'destroy' is slang for party in the UK, but that was not enough to convince them
After making their way through passport control at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) last Monday afternoon the pair were detained by armed guards.
Despite telling officials the term 'destroy' was British slang for 'party', they were held on suspicion of planning to 'commit crimes' and had their passports confiscated.
Leigh was also quizzed about another tweet which quoted hit US comedy Family Guy which read: '3 weeks today, we're totally in LA p****** people off on Hollywood Blvd and diggin' Marilyn Monroe up!
Federal agents even searched his suitcase looking for spades and shovels, claiming Emily was planning to act as Leigh's 'look out' while he raided Marilyn's tomb.
These two were pretty foolish. After 9/11 we in the US take our security pretty seriously. We worked hard for our freedom and wil protect it however we can. This was why I joined the US Marines and went to fight for our freedoms in Iraq. Freedom is no lauging matter.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA~!20% of your body -- of YOU -- is OWNED thanks to patents on humans.
This reminds me of new movie - "In Time". It's crappy movie but pretty much touch on all these points of - capitalism, resource hogging and crime.-mahesh2k (January 30, 2012, 12:12 PM)
It seems some have learned lessons from history that would have been better left alone.I've often felt that way. While it's been said that those that don't study history are doomed to repeat it (by popular pontiffs). It seems more the case that half fixate on the wrong parts with "righteous" indignation ... And the other half look at the ruthless dictators in history thinking Okay, good plan...but here's what they did wrong.-Renegade (January 30, 2012, 06:51 AM)
The mistakes just keep get improved on...not learned from.-Stoic Joker (January 30, 2012, 11:33 AM)
Wouldn't destruction of evidence by police in a pending trial be a Federal offence? I don't understand that.
Usually the people who would be interested in the destruction of evidence would be the people being charged - because the evidence provides grounds (evidence) for the charges.
That would be Mr Dotcom in this case, I presume, so it doesn't make sense here.-IainB (January 30, 2012, 07:31 PM)
+1. The only thing preventing a revolt/revolution at this point is the ignorance of the unwashed masses, and the fact that there are so many bleeding-heart liberals endorsing such ridiculous behavior.-kyrathaba (January 30, 2012, 06:22 AM)
Thomas Jefferson once famously wrote:Full quoteIf nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation.
Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.
I think a lot of these boil down to reasonable expectations for privacy and the like.-Renegade (January 29, 2012, 07:20 AM)
I'm not sure about that. I've seen "expectation of privacy" bandied around on Slashdot for over 10 years now and used like it settles the score. I disagree. For one thing, expectation of privacy is highly sensitive to place, time, culture, etc. But laws are the same everywhere, and not just within a single country or state anymore. When Google does something, it affects everyone the same way. Ditto when ACTA gets passed. There only sensible thing one can say at that point is that there is no expectation of privacy at all, so as such the concept becomes meaningless.
For another thing, I don't think we could even agree on what it meant in the first place, back when it might have still applied. Again from my slashdot experience, there was a fairly common understanding that you have no expectation of privacy out on the street. I always thought it was silly. Downtown in a city of a million people, you have nothing *but* privacy! Everyone can see you, sure, but absolutely no-one knows who you are, what your name is, what you do or what you think. A small village is a different thing, to be sure. But I'm putting this forth as an example of how unstable the notion of "expectation of privacy" is. It sounds reasonable, but I think it only serves to obscure what might really be significant disagreements in how we understand privacy.-tranglos (January 29, 2012, 09:02 AM)
Nice, Godwin's Law.-Tuxman (January 29, 2012, 08:04 AM)
anyone having potentially damaging conversations over someone else's network pretty much deserves to be caught IMHO.-Eóin (January 28, 2012, 11:02 PM)
Foresight is a good thing, yes. But *every* network is someone else's network. Just like every land-line is someone else's, yet we expect privacy of our (analog) phone conversations. Or used to, anyway.-tranglos (January 29, 2012, 07:11 AM)
Can you say: criticize your employer or the government and later face repercussions - and then wonder how they knew? Especially since you only did so in an email sent to your best friend?-40hz (January 28, 2012, 03:00 PM)
That's slightly conspiracy-ish. But at the same time, anyone having potentially damaging conversations over someone else's network pretty much deserves to be caught IMHO.-Eóin (January 28, 2012, 11:02 PM)
Ah yes. Once again the "blame the victim" mindset reveals itself. And not for the first time.
Ok i guess if somebody is so stupid as to speak their mind in private, they obviously "deserve" whatever happens by way of payback. Any rational and even slightly moral adult couldn't help but reach any other judgement.
Very sad. No wonder we have the world we do.
And BTW: Hardly conspiracy-ish. My company and I stopped dealing with private investigators some years back after watching how they operate. And what they're being hired to dig up. And by whom.
And I'm going to have to stop here. Because I'm too disgusted for further words right now.
-40hz (January 28, 2012, 11:57 PM)
Try here:
https://www.donation...index.php?board=55.0
Check at the very bottom of the forums list on the "Forum Home" page. You should see "My Personal Area".
HTH-Renegade (January 28, 2012, 07:01 AM)
Thanks, Renegade!
If by some chance I compose something I really like... can I post it from My Personal Area ?-crabby3 (January 28, 2012, 07:44 AM)
@Ren, I'm not supporting SOPA in the way it is mixed with political motives. But original intention of SOPA was to protect someone's intellectual property. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Freedom of expression doesn't mean stealing and if it means that there should be open stealing then I guess we're inviting flawed socialism with broken communist and capitalist model all in one by crushing authors/artists revenue model.-mahesh2k (January 27, 2012, 10:56 AM)
IIUC, in current versions of JavaScript the only kinds of numbers there are are IEEE 754...-ewemoa (January 27, 2012, 04:22 AM)
Maybe aggressive defence might be a good strategy to protect further erosion of freedoms: It’s Time To Go On The Offensive For Freedom Of Speech-IainB (January 27, 2012, 01:24 AM)
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.-Thomas Jefferson-Renegade (January 26, 2012, 01:55 AM)
just curious:
does he mean that (we) the patriots should fight the tyrants - or does he mean we gotta kill/bleed the patriots as well as the tyrants?
The latter seems quite apt in these "patriotic" days - but I suspect he meant the former. I know - he possibly had a cleaner version of patriotism in mind.
As someone who doesnt believe that that route brings anything worthwhile, I'd disagree with both anyway :p but as you say it could be where it's heading, more likely the "dark path" though I think-tomos (January 26, 2012, 04:35 AM)
