Congratulations Terrorists, You are getting what you want!

[TaoPhoenix]

@4wd - BTW, you spelled "Godvernment" wrong there.

-Renegade (January 14, 2015, 04:18 AM)

I liked "godverment" more.

Especially now that so many are acting like divinely ordained beings, with godlike indifference towards their charters, rather than as legally constituted and defined bodies whose function was to serve those who created them.

Such monsters we create for ourselves and loved ones!

-40hz (January 14, 2015, 08:44 AM)

Well, vermin is spelled with an 'i' and they make their own money in the national mint, so is that "godvermint"?

[superboyac]

@4wd - BTW, you spelled "Godvernment" wrong there.

-Renegade (January 14, 2015, 04:18 AM)

I liked "godverment" more.

Especially now that so many are acting like divinely ordained beings, with godlike indifference towards their charters, rather than as legally constituted and defined bodies whose function was to serve those who created them.

Such monsters we create for ourselves and loved ones!

-40hz (January 14, 2015, 08:44 AM)

Renegade was being sarcastic, methinks 

-wraith808 (January 14, 2015, 08:50 AM)

Really? Gee thx... I had no idea.

-40hz (January 14, 2015, 09:42 AM)

Allow me...sometimes people will say something, and the words and logic are all reasonable.  But there's a mocking tone underneath it all.  This is called sarcasm.  The more you know!
Furthermore, sometimes, such a thing can occur, and the audience may not necessarily recognize it.  Which may leave you wondering why instead of laughter, you are now holding a steak on your eye.
Let me know if I can be of more assistance.

[wraith808]

^^ That steak on your eye SB... Yeah.... 

[crabby3]

There is a difference between sarcasm and dark humor.  They are not the same.

Dark Humor = Crabby3, Ren and most well known standup comedy; past and present.

Sarcasm = steak on your eye or stake in your eye.

 ...making it comical without pointing fingers is the hard part...   

[wraith808]

[40hz]

There is a difference between sarcasm and dark humor.

-crabby3 (January 15, 2015, 07:24 AM)

AFAICT the only difference is that one is a word in the dictionary, and the other isn't. Snark is snark. While possibly interesting for purposes of establishing background story, the motivation(s) behind someone's snarkiness aren't really all that relevant. At least not in that part of the 'humor' spectrum I can see visible light in.

YMMV.

[crabby3]

There is a difference between sarcasm and dark humor.  They are not the same.

Dark Humor = Crabby3, Ren and most well known standup comedy; past and present.

Sarcasm = steak on your eye or stake in your eye.

 ...making it comical without pointing fingers is the hard part...   

-crabby3 (January 15, 2015, 07:24 AM)

Wiki redirects Dark Humor to Black Comedy but it means what i thought it did.

A black comedy (or dark comedy) is a comic work that employs farce and morbid humor, which, in its simplest form, is humor that makes light of subject matter usually considered taboo.

Wiki's description of Sarcasm also means what i thought.

Sarcasm is a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt.

What am i not seeing?   

[KynloStephen66515]

[Deozaan]

President Obama is saying similar things:

Not long after British Prime Minister David Cameron did the same, President Obama said Friday that he opposes encryption methods that are inaccessible to law enforcement. Rather naively, he advocated that the technology should still exist, but with methods of access for approved entities like police and preferred spy agencies. This is his first clear issue stance on the matter, though it is not necessarily out of step with his previous actions and statements.

Of course, cybersecurity experts collectively groaned at the President's suggestion of strong encryption that is only accessible to authorities. Taking for granted that law enforcement can be trusted - and, of course, Edward Snowden and countless others have shown us we cannot - there are a host of problems. The basic problem is this: if someone other than the person doing the encryption can decrypt the information, then lots of people can do it.

-http://www.androidpolice.com/2015/01/16/obama-goes-record-encryption-says-exist-able-decrypt/

[Renegade]

^ It would be nice if they actually understood what they were talking about for a change.

[40hz]

^ It would be nice if they actually understood what they were talking about for a change.

-Renegade (January 17, 2015, 07:19 PM)

Unfortunately, I think they understand what they're doing all too well. In politics, it's always good to remember the adage that says: "Never let facts stand in the way of a good story." And that's what they're doing. Spinning a yarn.

[TaoPhoenix]

I think a moderately important exception about law enforcement might need to be "a lot of the time, the lowest uncontroversial law enforcement can be trusted". This is the tone of my response to everything from that "don't talk to cops" lawyer video all over youtube, to just talking to cops randomly while getting lost on the streets of NY City.  As long as it's "painfully easy" with no wrinkles, then you can (mostly!) trust them.

It's just the minute when it gets complicated that things begin to get hazy.

[Stoic Joker]

It's just the minute when it gets complicated that things begin to get hazy.

-TaoPhoenix (January 18, 2015, 01:21 AM)

^Amen to that!