Live data from Hacker News

Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

osnews.com

11–20 of 236 posts

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#11
post #9
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But remember this was just one provision of a larger bill, and I don't think line-by-line veto is possible anymore.

Then you veto the entire bill - explaining why.

He would have, but this bill included the funding for salaries of military personnel. He actually said, at the time that he signed it, that Congress had forced his hand.

Edit: OK I don't really know if he would have. But he did say that.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#13
post #11
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you veto the entire bill - explaining why.

He would have, but this bill included the funding for salaries of military personnel. He actually said, at the time that he signed it, that Congress had forced his hand. Edit: OK I don't really know if he would have. But he did say that.

He still should have vetoed it. Once Congress knew he was willing to go that far, Congress would have been up against the wall and had to drop it in order for the paychecks to continue.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#14
post #2

It's worth noting that Obama, upon signing, issued a signing statement that said that he was against the indefinite detention provision, and importantly, that he would not indefinitely hold Americans without trial: "Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most import…

Then he should send a powerful signal, rally his base and do something right for a change:

Not sign the fucking document.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#15
post #11
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you veto the entire bill - explaining why.

He would have, but this bill included the funding for salaries of military personnel. He actually said, at the time that he signed it, that Congress had forced his hand. Edit: OK I don't really know if he would have. But he did say that.

You are being played. The Obama administration requested the indefinite detention provisions. What Obama actually means, albeit couched in very clever legalese, is that his problems with these "regulations" is that they even exist at all. He would rather his ability to prosecute the "war on terror" be completely unchecked.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#16
post #2

It's worth noting that Obama, upon signing, issued a signing statement that said that he was against the indefinite detention provision, and importantly, that he would not indefinitely hold Americans without trial: "Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most import…

Obama the candidate opposed the use of signing statements. http://technorati.com/politics/article/signing-statements-re...

Sometimes I really wished they had elected that guy instead of the other Obama.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#17
Agreed - Stallman was right all along. What's working against Stallman though is that his doomsday predictions are being delivered in piecemeal fashion. Each slight erosion doesn't seem too bad by itself. Only in retrospect does the magnitude of the problem reveal itself. Governments and corporations have evolved processes to change laws in such effective manners as to evade most human observation.

tldr; No one tells you the plane's not coming - they just tell you it's 20m late, perpetually...

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#18
post #2

It's worth noting that Obama, upon signing, issued a signing statement that said that he was against the indefinite detention provision, and importantly, that he would not indefinitely hold Americans without trial: "Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most import…

Obama the candidate opposed the use of signing statements. http://technorati.com/politics/article/signing-statements-re...

It's important to note that Obama makes clear in both his campaign assertion and his official memo that he does not consider signing statements to be problematic in and of themselves. Rather, he argues, their use should be limited in scope and reach, clearly stating that President Bush went overboard.

From Politifact's extensive discussion: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/pr...

Politifact consulted 5 experts, 4 of whom (at the time of consultation) felt he has kept his promise. Politifact itself has currently rated the promise as "compromise", meaning partial fulfillment.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#19
I just don't see the relationship between government overstepping the mark... and buying a proprietary product form a company you respect, because you want to use the product and are willing to sacrifice the desirable but non-essential quality of unfettered access to its innards.

...OK, actually I do see the connection. The suggestion is probably that if the technology is not totally open, you don't know how much power you're giving away (the manufacturers could be cooperating secretly with the authorities). But if you really feel like this, all you need to do is refrain from using your iClosedDevice for any type of work or communication that you wouldn't trust in the hands of the manufacturers/authorities.

... And OK, I see the point that we need to support the alternative methods or else their won't be any when we need them. It's just the either/or sentiment that bugs me.

Re: Richard Stallman Was Right All Along

#20
post #10
post #2

It's worth noting that Obama, upon signing, issued a signing statement that said that he was against the indefinite detention provision, and importantly, that he would not indefinitely hold Americans without trial: "Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most import…

"Niemand hat die Absicht, eine Mauer zu errichten." (Nobody has the intension to build a wall) - Walter Ulbricht Less than two months after that statement was made the work on the wall that separated Germany for decades started. Never should a citizen have to trust a representative. The moment you have to democracy becomes impossible.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN