121–130 of 222 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For people like me who had no idea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chanology
That article has no mentioning of the tiktok speedruns?
My thoughts as someone who doesn't know much about these types of things: 1. Terry Albury calling this list the "Panopticon" could have merit since he's a former FBI agent. However, I'd have to research more into him to figure out how credible he is, and why he is framing it like this. 2. Amazon and Facebook being in the title is most likely clickbait. They're literally only mentioned once in the article and the rest…
The thing is... under the laws as they're written today, if US Gov wants to take a peek at your stuff on FB and friends servers, FB can be barred from informing you that such a request has come in under the National Security Letter (NSL) guidelines. It's a very complicated thing :/.
Not saying it wouldn't get abused though, which seems like the primary concern of most people in these discussions..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
archive.is is one of the domains of archive.today, which used its end users for a DDOS attack on a blog. This caused English Wikipedia to deprecate it with the end goal of blacklisting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Archive.today_guidan...
Complaining about bad people is fun, don't get me wrong... but your post doesn't contain an alternative archive link. You're just siphoning people into your soapbox.
I, for one, found out about the archive.* situation recently, and am totally glad someone like the commenter pointed it out. My wanting to bypass paywalls to read content doesn't justify supporting the owner's behavior - not even close.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ah, yes, the little 8-line explanation there by the entity in question absolutely clears them of all suspicion, really. i am sure that information obtained by seattle shield is not shared to anyone outside of seattle borders. police departments and the FBI are not known to share information, after all. police are especially cagey about sharing with other agencies when it comes to counter-terrorism.
I'm just encouraging people to look at the website itself, not actually the particular blurb I linked
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or perhaps when Amazon facilities security encounters someone doing destructive or harmful things, then sharing that information with other companies in the city is a perfectly reasonable measure? This is functionally no different than sharing your encounters with disruptive people on NextDoor.
> Or perhaps when Amazon facilities security encounters someone doing destructive or harmful things, then sharing that information with other companies in the city is a perfectly reasonable measure? If only there were a way to address people doing destructive or harmful things. We could even make it reachable using a telephone, with a very convenient to dial, short, easily remembered number sequence. I don't know abo…
The irony is that curbing this "private intelligence network" would require infringing on the free speech of private people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
people believe in scientology as much as they believe in a literature club. If you listen to someone like Tom Cruise's statements he says "I have gotten to where I am today because of Scientology". He doesn't name off specific procedures, treatments, practices, etc. Partially because they are barred from naming them. But if you're looking for a club you can advance it, I highly suspect Scientology is as quid pro quo…
This is an interesting way of putting it, but matches my thoughts. I think most such organizations (political parties, religions, businesses, large organizations of many types) consist of true believers at the bottom of the pyramid, and moving up the ranks are folks who recognize that they can advance by understanding the game and utilizing the group mind to maintain credibility among the true believers, while displa…
>Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people":
>First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.
>Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.
>The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
people believe in scientology as much as they believe in a literature club. If you listen to someone like Tom Cruise's statements he says "I have gotten to where I am today because of Scientology". He doesn't name off specific procedures, treatments, practices, etc. Partially because they are barred from naming them. But if you're looking for a club you can advance it, I highly suspect Scientology is as quid pro quo…
Religion is all about social function, at least from social science perceptives I guess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Scientology is essentially a scheme to get private/incriminating information from very important people. Why the surprise?
Scientology is what happens when a science fiction writer acts out a dystopian plot in real life instead of writing a novel. Read Stranger in a Strange Land , read about Hubbard and Heinlein's friendship, and look at the timeline of when Scientology started and Stranger in a Strange Land was published.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is... under the laws as they're written today, if US Gov wants to take a peek at your stuff on FB and friends servers, FB can be barred from informing you that such a request has come in under the National Security Letter (NSL) guidelines. It's a very complicated thing :/.
I don't mean to be some annoying contrarian or something, but couldn't it be the case that if the govt was investing someone who was planning a terrorist attack, then notifying the person being investigated could work against stopping them? Not saying it wouldn't get abused though, which seems like the primary concern of most people in these discussions..
However, if the govt claimed that the person was a terrorist and the company knew for 100% fact that the person was innocent and the investigation was in bad faith... they could tip off the victim.
The NSLs only really help in the latter scenario. As long as the govt has a plausible story, there will be a 50% chance that the target is a criminal and the company will not risk notifying the target. With NSLs they can prosecute the company even though there was no legitimate basis for the investigation and everyone knew it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
people believe in scientology as much as they believe in a literature club. If you listen to someone like Tom Cruise's statements he says "I have gotten to where I am today because of Scientology". He doesn't name off specific procedures, treatments, practices, etc. Partially because they are barred from naming them. But if you're looking for a club you can advance it, I highly suspect Scientology is as quid pro quo…
You get or used to get true believers working in hellish conditions[1] on the boats, paid ~nothing. It might be a quid pro quo convenience for the Tom Cruises, but there are also some suckers. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Org#Lawsuits