Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Forced Exposure

groklaw.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 430 posts

Re: Forced Exposure

#401

Post by BrandonMarc »

hyperventilator wrote: post #369
brianpgordon wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the opposite of what's happening. Money (power) is flowing from the few (the rich) to the many (the poor who actually use government services and social programs).

Having more people on the government dole actually makes the problem worse. We need less government, as little as possible, and more self reliance. Charity is injurious unless it helps the recipient be rid of it.

This, this, this!

If you give a person / family just enough money to live off of, in exchange for their promise not to productively contribute and achieve (with the pride, joy, and happiness that can go with that) ... you have effectively turned them into slaves.

A permanent welfare mentality = mental slavery. And tell me: are the people who are being "helped" happy, in the end? Do they live in peace? Travel their neighborhoods, talk to them in person, and you'll see the answer yourself. Yet sadly, they're convinced if they can vote for a little more money, and vote to take it away from certain others, then they'll be happy.

The system does little to truly help them. That's why it's disgusting.

Re: Forced Exposure

#402

Post by kabisote »

The scripture quoted in the article is Jeremiah 10:23. History verifies the truthfulness of that scripture. Government by man has not brought a better world, even when rulers have had high ideals and the best of intentions. Instead, "man has dominated man to his injury." -(Ecclesiastes 8:9)

Re: Forced Exposure

#403

Post by pixie_ »

cookiecaper wrote: post #107

...Can PJ not figure out GnuPG? Is she officially retiring from any and all digital correspondence contrary to her notice that "[her] email [addresses] still work"? She says she's getting off the internet to whatever extent possible, and then asks people to continue to send her mail. I also find it cute that people believe facilities based in other Western nations are outside of the NSA's reach. I gotta say that stop…

I think she just wants to take a break (maybe even subconsciously) and this is the excuse she can use to do it.

Re: Forced Exposure

#404

Post by yuhong »

grellas wrote: post #256

It is really tragic that we have reached a point where something so wonderful as Groklaw cannot effectively function. Nearly 200 years ago, de Tocqueville asked why the American experiment in self-government succeeded while its French counterpart led to the guillotine, mob excesses, and ultimate tyranny and he gave a complex answer whose core was that private moral restraints in the populace served to check the unbou…

I have been thinking that appointing Congress/Parliament by random selection from the population would be a good idea. Who do you think would be more likely to want to want power, for example?

Re: Forced Exposure

#405

Post by Dylan16807 »

agilebyte wrote: post #387
Dylan16807 wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just don't pretend it actually applies. You replied to a comment talking about whether such a service would actually be capable of backing up people's data, not in the slightest a discussion of price.

I can image a lot of people evaluating the price of having nothing to hide vs the capacity of 10GB -> 10TB. That is where the comment lead me.

While that is not unreasonable, you cannot get to that point of haggling between 10G/10TB unless the 10GB option can physically be accepted. If people take photos and videos, the 10GB option of uploading everything is logically impossible, and must be discarded.

Re: Forced Exposure

#406

Post by Smirnoff »

robg wrote: post #323
zackmorris wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last night Thom Hartmann interviewed Ron Paul in his Conversations with Great Minds segment. Paul's take on all of this is that what's happening is already illegal according to the constitution, but that we aren't able to enforce the law because corporations, special interests and political lapdogs write their own laws. I'm still not sure what my stance on Paul is but I like his core political belief of noninterventi…

The efforts aren't illegal, in the Constitutional sense (U.S.), so long as the searches are deemed reasonable. Two branches of government (Executive and Judicial) have generally been in agreement that searches for the purposes of National Security ( very broadly defined) are reasonable. And Congress has not passed laws to the contrary. In fact, Congress has been exceedingly pliant on these issues. They've been passin…

So why can't, let's say, German citizens sue Google and alike in Germany? I am pretty sure many foreigners feel that some NSA programs are unconstitutional according to other countries' constitution.

What if many foreign citizens from many countries sue internet companies for assisting the Big Brother in spying on these foreign citizens?

Will that force Google to stop assisting the NSA?

Re: Forced Exposure

#407

Post by chii »

iamwil wrote: post #353
subdane wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with everything here and in the original post. What isn't clearly explained is how/why the government's behavior is prohibiting the continuation of Groklaw.

Apparently Groklaw runs on private email messages between her and her readers. If people cannot be assured of the privacy of their messages, then what they say is necessarily constrained. Given the nature of the topics on Groklaw, having privacy to discuss and subsequently post on it, is essential to the running of it.

I dont get why they don't use a more secure form of email (say, a GPG implementation from end to end)?

Unless the problem is its not practical - which i think is only a matter of familiarity.

Re: Forced Exposure

#408

Post by dragontamer »

noblethrasher wrote: post #399
dragontamer wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, if you wanna be a defeatist. But IMO, that viewpoint is lazy, and unacceptable to the hacker. Governments change, be it to external factors (9/11 -> passage of Patriot Act -> PRISM), or internal factors (Erm... the Civil Rights Movement ) We, the Millennials, have a good shot at becoming the next greatest generation. We grew up during the rise of the internet. We witnessed 9/11. We fought in two oversea wars, w…

Whoa, whoa, whoa. I'll give you Reddit and (most of) SOPA. But Google and Wikipedia are definitely GenX products; we'll split the difference on Obama, and the wars ;-)

Sure. Gen X caused the wars, and we fought in it :-) Gen X was old enough to vote Bush into office, while Millennials were too young to vote but old enough to go to wars afterwards.

I looked up the technical definitions of Baby Boomer, GenX, and Millennials. Baby Boomers end at 1964. GenX ends in 1984. Millennials (GenY) end 2004. The current generation is Generation Net (GenZ), and will end 2024.

So I guess we Millenials haven't really done much yet... but GenX (Today, ages 28 to 48) are just getting into political leadership. Obama is still a Boomer, but GenX candidates will certainly be up for election this decade. A GenX President is unlikely for another decade or so... but surely House / Senate members are beginning to be filled with GenX. So I guess you guys have first dibs on fixing all of these issues, eh?

Don't mess things up too much before we Millennials get there!

Re: Forced Exposure

#409

Post by chii »

zenocon wrote: post #140
rolux wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While I understand his personal reasons pj = Pamela Jones But yeah, it's devastating -- especially when it comes just one day after a editor of the Guardian states that they can no longer report on certain topics from London. It seems like we need entirely new communication protocols.

> It seems like we need entirely new communication protocols How about new government - one that isn't broken and tramples on all of our civil liberties? The first step is to dismantle the military industrial complex

in order to dismantle the MIC, you first need equivelent or better millitary power. How else do you do it?

Re: Forced Exposure

#410

Post by chii »

prawn wrote: post #167

Chomsky noted in a speech recently ( http://www.salon.com/2013/08/17/chomsky_the_u_s_behaves_noth... ) that the very vast majority of us have absolutely no impact on the policy of our governments. Only the upper tiers have influence and the utter richest minority are likely to get what they want. In both the US and where I am in Australia, the two major parties are barely different and doubly so in regards to this wh…

perhaps causing some retail chains and corporations who own those to have less profit may have some benefit, but i doubt it will be very high.

i suspect that the problem is deep seated. For example, why can't just anyone enter the banking business? Why isn't there any mom & dad run banks - small, local banks with customers they can could with their hands (and toes)? Why is something as important as money (and teh ability to lend it out) controlled by so few?

Post reply on HN