301–310 of 366 posts
You guys ever heard of rsync? It's awesome.
I find this board appointment alarming for what it signals. We know that the NSA et al. are always seeking access to new sources of electronic data. It is beyond doubt that they have considered how to get access to Dropbox user data, and almost certainly beyond doubt that they have approached Dropbox about it. To me, this appointment signals that Dropbox wants to reach a negotiated settlement with the NSA over their…
There are two perspectives for this one --
#1 Dropbox wants an insider to help them be on the receiving end of better decisions related to non-consensual government surveillance
#2 Dropbox wants better information themselves on non-consensual government surveillance
From a PR perspective, this looks bad both to both Americans and international Dropbox users. It does not instill confidence in Dropbox.
Dropbox is a dominant platform right now but it certainly does not have to be the dominant platform. Any non-US company doing sensitive work is being negligent to their investors using platforms which enable easy spying (remember, the controversy in the US is about the NSA spying on American citizens, there is no legal barrier nor likely will there ever be one for spying on foreigners. The NSA has a blank check to do what they want if you are from abroad.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. With Condi comes access to all sorts of government entities, and the contacts to make those entities work in favor of whatever Dropbox needs them for. This appointment smacks of the corporate-political complex. It's practically inevitable that USG resources will be used in favor of Dropbox's business at some point.
I agree, that's probably what's going here. But the thing is, a lot of this stuff works quid pro quo. What might happen is, USG will pay Dropbox a nice penny to use some of its service... aaaaaand in exchange they also set up a deal to snoop on Dropbox users.
She is an intellegent person, so could somebody explain too me why so many deem this a bad move without mentioning the War,WMDs,NSA or some political bias? I'm all ears.
Not that anybody sane should be using dropbox to store any sensitive/private information.
Well, that's the end of my usage of Dropbox, effective immediately. I'll make sure to mention Condi's association with them in every conversation involving Dropbox, in hope of spreading knowledge about their profane selection of board members. It's a shame that they had to pick a Bush crony. These people should be in prison for malevolently misleading the public in order to start a for-profit war which killed hundred…
>>> It's a shame that they had to pick a Bush crony. Another great example of how partisanship and shitty double standards have ruined our country. The fact is, the vote to invade Iraq was a bi-partisan vote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Resolution_to_Authorize_t... "Introduced in Congress on October 2, 2002, in conjunction with the Administration's proposals,[2][7] H.J.Res. 114 passed the House of Representati…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to have forgotten that the Bush administration knowingly lied about the intentions and capabilities of Saddam Hussein in order to gain support for the war.
FactCheck.org: Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying Two intelligence investigations show Bush had plenty of reason to believe what he said in his 2003 State of the Union Address. http://archive.is/vAWQa#selection-283.0-300.0 Don't let facts get in your way though.
And if the opposite is true, and she will add alot of value, then who can blame Dropbox for making this call?
She is an intellegent person, so could somebody explain too me why so many deem this a bad move without mentioning the War,WMDs,NSA or some political bias? I'm all ears.
Well, she voted for unwarranted government surveillance. So there's that. Not that anybody sane should be using dropbox to store any sensitive/private information.
But yes your spot on about what you should store in the cloud and how. That does nail it but still leaves the unfetted tramplement of rights issue leaving a bad taste for the customer base. So I get that. Was just hard to cut thru everything as so many tangents going on that it was hard to get to the real issue at hand, which has people up in arms.
Thank you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to have forgotten that the Bush administration knowingly lied about the intentions and capabilities of Saddam Hussein in order to gain support for the war.
FactCheck.org: Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying Two intelligence investigations show Bush had plenty of reason to believe what he said in his 2003 State of the Union Address. http://archive.is/vAWQa#selection-283.0-300.0 Don't let facts get in your way though.
The CIA operative Valery Plame was crucified because her husband (a diplomat) that investigated the yellow cake claim in Africa wrote about how it was a sham drummed up for the war.
"He didn't technically lie" - Sure he did. They knew what the truth was. They knew they needed an event to galvanize American support for action in the middle east. They knew what they were doing with how they worded the "War on Terror" lumping in Saddam with fucking Osama. When 75% of Americans think Saddam had something to do with 911, we are way past just cherry picking stats. We had psychopaths that were concurrently trying to extend American power and their own gain invade a country that had very high strategic interest.
I'm not even partisan about this. Most of the American politicians that I like are Republicans. This is complete horse shit.