221–230 of 275 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The same civil rights movements that got a bunch of laws put on books barring discrimination? The same laws which have been proven to be ignored time and again by law enforcement? You say that like the current situation is no better than what came before the civil rights movement.
You say that like the current situation doesn't still garner a lot of attention.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean, like an election?
Lol that an election in the UK will change the direction of the country in terms of civil liberties. No one with a remote chance of winning will do that. (and the upcoming election send like it will just give Theresa May a free hand to do what she wants)
I happen to believe that trade off has gone a bit far and I'm worried that significant further erosion of civil liberties would start causing some serious issues, but lets face it if we believe that we have to argue the case before the public. Whining about living in a police state isn't going to be very productive, or lend that struggle much credibility.
V for Vendetta was supposed to be a cautionary tale, not a manual or goalpost. Britain really has gone to shit. Probably one of the last countries I'd want to move to.
Agreed, I am British and got out just before the full power of the Conservatives was realised. I would not plan on going back any time soon, I'm sure I'm not a minority in thinking this.
>> This alleged criminality is the result of a deliberate government policy of using the police and security services to [...] protect company profits and the status quo. [...] it is not simply the case that the police and security services are just being used by the government. In fact, the police and security services are becoming emboldened to take a more independent role as direct agencies of the ruling elite, ov…
> No comments needed Except that, you know, not sure how impartial the World Socialist Web Site is likely to be!!
Who is your favorite "impartial" reporter? Publication?
>> This alleged criminality is the result of a deliberate government policy of using the police and security services to [...] protect company profits and the status quo. [...] it is not simply the case that the police and security services are just being used by the government. In fact, the police and security services are becoming emboldened to take a more independent role as direct agencies of the ruling elite, ov…
> No comments needed Except that, you know, not sure how impartial the World Socialist Web Site is likely to be!!
I did not see this yet in any of the MSM sites I sometimes poll on these matters. Nothing yet! If this news if true, which I believe at this point, then it is a BIG story (proven total failure of democracy, high up officials in charge have to step down because of protests). Here on HN we seem to generally agree that it is a big story as it is on the front page for quite some hours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, at the very least, "the sixth was nearly a match" is pretty damning. "Nono, you've got it wrong, MY password is hunterTHREE - you see there was this incident..."
I'm gonna continue to play Devils advocate here and that person in question could of merely confirmed that it was close. But realistically I think your right. People will gladly handout passwords to people who sound authoritative. It's amazing to me how many DEFCON talks begin with: "So we just pretended to be X and asked for their password and got it."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure the German justice goes after people making unlawful postings and entire specialized police units are being established. Charges and successful verdicts regarding internet posts are nothing new at all. However, going after the posters (and even just identifying them) takes a long time. Much to long compared to the speed postings get shared.
It's not the German justice going after it, that's the point. Why would they? They're not looking to punish anyone, but simply make unwanted statements disappear. Right now, they've appointed a private organization (Arvato) that belongs to the Bertelsmann group, which has a strong lobbying branch and is very close to the government. So basically, a private corporation is allowed to run its own show on all ends and it…
Arvato was contracted by Facebook to enforce their own terms of service and comply with the law. They are free to contract any company they like to operate on their platform. It's not the government that chose Arvato.
If you think that law is the result of lobbying alone you haven't followed to large public debate that happened over this topic the last year at all.
And please refrain from name-calling. This doesn't make your arguments look any better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is partly why I am an anarcho-Communist, in favour of decentralised planning or to a lesser extent market Socialism. I'm not sure what to do about giving the vote to people; arguably democracy is very good, but I would rather have per-commune direct democracy (with instantly recallable delegates or without) rather than a representative democracy. In short, I want to do away with voting for masters, as it will be…
> This is partly why I am an anarcho-Communist You believe in an oxymoron?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given how easy a group can be swayed and controlled given our current centralization of media/culture, our technology, and our understanding of psychology, is it possible for there to ever again be a people's democracy? Giving the vote to the people seems to be inherently giving the vote to those who control the information being fed to the people, be that an oligarchy or the government.
This is partly why I am an anarcho-Communist, in favour of decentralised planning or to a lesser extent market Socialism. I'm not sure what to do about giving the vote to people; arguably democracy is very good, but I would rather have per-commune direct democracy (with instantly recallable delegates or without) rather than a representative democracy. In short, I want to do away with voting for masters, as it will be…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is partly why I am an anarcho-Communist, in favour of decentralised planning or to a lesser extent market Socialism. I'm not sure what to do about giving the vote to people; arguably democracy is very good, but I would rather have per-commune direct democracy (with instantly recallable delegates or without) rather than a representative democracy. In short, I want to do away with voting for masters, as it will be…
> This is partly why I am an anarcho-Communist You believe in an oxymoron?
In Marxist Communism (and, with variations that are important but not relevant to this discussion, it's derivatives through Leninism), "Communism" is the desired stateless end-state, and the "dictatorship of the proletariat" in which the workers seize control of the means of production through the State—Socialism—is a transitional stage used to get from Capitalism to Communism.
Non-Marxist Communism seeks the same stateless end goal by other means; Anarcho-Communism is, in a sense, among the purest forms of Communism, since it seeks fairly direct (not necessarily immediate, but constsntly in the same direction and not the out-and-back "empower the State to destroy the State" approach) transition to the statelessend end-state.