Total Posts:39|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

FBI Gains Sweeping Unprecedented Power

YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2016 2:50:48 PM
Posted: 3 days ago
http://www.reuters.com...

Changes to Rule 41 US Criminal procedure are happening today, and they are unprecedented. The changes have big implications for almost anyone who uses TOR, or anything like TOR.

The technical aspects of this are more complicated than I think most people here would be interested, but how the new administrative rules came into play are things I think people should be aware of.

There was a bill in the senate that would block or delay changes to the government's ability to abuse its technological abilities related to hacking personal computers. That measure failed. Now, judges can issue things that look like general warrants for computers around the country.

This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator from Texas: John Cornyn. Cornyn's efforts mean, now, that even *the use* of an anonymizing technological measure to conceal the computer's location may be enough to get a warrant to search a computer from a magistrate judge.

This is the beginning of the end of the fourth amendment.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2016 2:55:32 PM
Posted: 3 days ago
Now... that said, I can see legal challenges to this change mounting as we speak.

The ACLU, Journalists around the country, political groups of various kinds, privacy advocates, and most tech lawyers are going to be united in opposition to this measure.

I don't expect that this change could survive a challenge, but there is going to be a lot of mess that this is going to create before the changes are struck down.

This kind of stuff is already in place in China, Russia, Europe (most of it), and Australia/New Zealand. But now, it's in place in the US, too. Those who oppose the changes to Rule 41 have their work cut out for them.
Tsar of DDO
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM
Posted: 3 days ago
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?
kevin24018
Posts: 1,804
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2016 3:25:40 PM
Posted: 3 days ago
At 12/1/2016 2:50:48 PM, YYW wrote:
http://www.reuters.com...

Changes to Rule 41 US Criminal procedure are happening today, and they are unprecedented. The changes have big implications for almost anyone who uses TOR, or anything like TOR.

The technical aspects of this are more complicated than I think most people here would be interested, but how the new administrative rules came into play are things I think people should be aware of.

There was a bill in the senate that would block or delay changes to the government's ability to abuse its technological abilities related to hacking personal computers. That measure failed. Now, judges can issue things that look like general warrants for computers around the country.

This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator from Texas: John Cornyn. Cornyn's efforts mean, now, that even *the use* of an anonymizing technological measure to conceal the computer's location may be enough to get a warrant to search a computer from a magistrate judge.

This is the beginning of the end of the fourth amendment.

"As of now, a federal judge may authorize the feds to install malware to hack computers suspected to be involved in criminal activity. That judge may only issue the warrant when the device is in his or her jurisdiction, though. That barrier is scheduled to be lifted December 1, unless Congress prevents it."
https://www.rt.com...

I'm not sure how I feel about this, I think I understand the reasoning since computers are so mobile that the restriction of jurisdiction no longer makes sense and is too cumbersome. However I'm not a fan of giving any parts of the government more power generally speaking.

"The amendments do not change any of the traditional protections and procedures under the Fourth Amendment, such as the requirement that the government establish probable cause. Rather, the amendments would merely ensure that at least one court is available to consider whether a particular warrant application comports with the Fourth Amendment."
https://www.justice.gov...
The amendments would not authorize the government to undertake any search or seizure or use any remote search technique, whether inside or outside the United States, that is not already permitted under current law. The use of remote searches is not new and warrants for remote searches are currently issued under Rule 41. In addition, most courts already permit the search of multiple computers pursuant to a single warrant so long as necessary legal requirements are met.
FanboyMctroll
Posts: 168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2016 3:28:11 PM
Posted: 3 days ago
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

Excellent point
FanboyMctroll
Posts: 168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2016 3:30:20 PM
Posted: 3 days ago
At 12/1/2016 3:25:40 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:50:48 PM, YYW wrote:
http://www.reuters.com...

Changes to Rule 41 US Criminal procedure are happening today, and they are unprecedented. The changes have big implications for almost anyone who uses TOR, or anything like TOR.

The technical aspects of this are more complicated than I think most people here would be interested, but how the new administrative rules came into play are things I think people should be aware of.

There was a bill in the senate that would block or delay changes to the government's ability to abuse its technological abilities related to hacking personal computers. That measure failed. Now, judges can issue things that look like general warrants for computers around the country.

This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator from Texas: John Cornyn. Cornyn's efforts mean, now, that even *the use* of an anonymizing technological measure to conceal the computer's location may be enough to get a warrant to search a computer from a magistrate judge.

This is the beginning of the end of the fourth amendment.

"As of now, a federal judge may authorize the feds to install malware to hack computers suspected to be involved in criminal activity. That judge may only issue the warrant when the device is in his or her jurisdiction, though. That barrier is scheduled to be lifted December 1, unless Congress prevents it."
https://www.rt.com...

I'm not sure how I feel about this, I think I understand the reasoning since computers are so mobile that the restriction of jurisdiction no longer makes sense and is too cumbersome. However I'm not a fan of giving any parts of the government more power generally speaking.

"The amendments do not change any of the traditional protections and procedures under the Fourth Amendment, such as the requirement that the government establish probable cause. Rather, the amendments would merely ensure that at least one court is available to consider whether a particular warrant application comports with the Fourth Amendment."
https://www.justice.gov...
The amendments would not authorize the government to undertake any search or seizure or use any remote search technique, whether inside or outside the United States, that is not already permitted under current law. The use of remote searches is not new and warrants for remote searches are currently issued under Rule 41. In addition, most courts already permit the search of multiple computers pursuant to a single warrant so long as necessary legal requirements are met.

Look the FBI is just going to smash down your door and take your computer because you have been talking trash about the Republicans
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM
Posted: 3 days ago
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
FourTrouble
Posts: 12,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 3:44:10 AM
Posted: 3 days ago
At 12/1/2016 2:50:48 PM, YYW wrote:
http://www.reuters.com...

Changes to Rule 41 US Criminal procedure are happening today, and they are unprecedented. The changes have big implications for almost anyone who uses TOR, or anything like TOR.

The technical aspects of this are more complicated than I think most people here would be interested, but how the new administrative rules came into play are things I think people should be aware of.

There was a bill in the senate that would block or delay changes to the government's ability to abuse its technological abilities related to hacking personal computers. That measure failed. Now, judges can issue things that look like general warrants for computers around the country.

This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator from Texas: John Cornyn. Cornyn's efforts mean, now, that even *the use* of an anonymizing technological measure to conceal the computer's location may be enough to get a warrant to search a computer from a magistrate judge.

The worst part would be the people unknowingly part of a botnet.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 4:38:28 AM
Posted: 3 days ago
It logically follows that a person who uses Tor would be much more likely to regularly engage in illicit online activities (I.e. downloading child pornography, buying or selling illegal goods/services, etc) than a person who doesn't.
If your home can be searched by the police, it stands to reason that the contents of your computer should also be open to investigators in the event that your behaviour is suspicious enough that a warrant is requested.
If you aren't doing anything illegal, you may still hate that your privacy is being intruded upon, but overall I think this is a good thing. Ultimately, the right to absolute, unalienable under any and all circumstances, privacy should only extend to the mind.

However, it seems like this could prove more trouble than it's worth. Anybody can delete data, destroy their computer, or put in place a really good password to keep the police from logging in. It can be a lot of trouble to defeat these measures and successfully recover a suspect's computer data, and played out hundreds of thousands of times over a single year this could prove more than our police can handle.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 4:42:02 AM
Posted: 3 days ago
The internet should not be some kind of wild west. There is a distinction between preserving a free internet and letting people do literally anything they want online.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Quadrunner
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 6:19:58 AM
Posted: 3 days ago
At 12/1/2016 2:55:32 PM, YYW wrote:
Now... that said, I can see legal challenges to this change mounting as we speak.

The ACLU, Journalists around the country, political groups of various kinds, privacy advocates, and most tech lawyers are going to be united in opposition to this measure.

I don't expect that this change could survive a challenge, but there is going to be a lot of mess that this is going to create before the changes are struck down.

This kind of stuff is already in place in China, Russia, Europe (most of it), and Australia/New Zealand. But now, it's in place in the US, too. Those who oppose the changes to Rule 41 have their work cut out for them.

My tax dollars going to the defense of invading my privacy...this is why the state should focus on influencing life and the fed should focus on the state to protect my life.
Wisdom is found where the wise seek it.
imabench
Posts: 21,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 7:36:52 AM
Posted: 3 days ago
"U.S. judges will be able to issue search warrants that give the FBI the authority to remotely access computers in any jurisdiction, potentially even overseas"

"Magistrate judges can currently only order searches within the jurisdiction of their court, which is typically limited to a few counties."

From what I can tell, the rule change only allows judges to grant warrants to computers to a greater number of jurisdictions than they were previously allowed to, meaning that the FBI still has to go through a judge in order to get a warrant to access certain computers (since no judge would let the FBI access ALL computers everywhere). The FBI themselves dont gain power, they only are granted an easier path to exercising the power they already have.

I wouldnt consider this news as a direct threat to the 4th amendment, but I can still see why it is concerning to some who fear government overreach, especially under a Trump presidency
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Chris Coons, D-Del., and Steve Daines, R-Mont., took to the Senate floor to seek agreement to bring up bills to stop the rule from taking effect or at least delay it for three to six months to give Congress more time to study it. Republican Senate leaders denied the three senators' requests for a vote.

https://www.google.com...
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 2:43:29 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

I don't need a safe space. I'm not contesting that something is fact, only noting how partisan the post comes across. Lol. Keep trying.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
kevin24018
Posts: 1,804
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 2:57:29 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 3:48:40 AM, FourTrouble wrote:
SCOTUS already reviewed the rule change, which really sucks.

I'm not necessarily in favor or support this, but I think I can understand it at least, it just expands the area of what they can already do, since what this is addressing really has no borders it seems logical the way I am understanding this, I accept that I may be wrong. Pirate bay was/is going to use a loophole were their server would be on a drone, and because it wasn't in a physical location it would be immune from the laws.
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 3:01:31 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 2:43:29 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

I don't need a safe space. I'm not contesting that something is fact, only noting how partisan the post comes across. Lol. Keep trying.

It is only partisan in that the Republican Senate leadership didn't allow it to go to vote. Facts are facts.
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 3:05:36 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 2:43:29 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

I don't need a safe space. I'm not contesting that something is fact, only noting how partisan the post comes across. Lol. Keep trying.

When Republicans do stupid shit_there is no reason why they shouldn't he held to account for it.

The fact is that no democrat would have allowed this to happen. However, this is the norm for Republicans, which is ironic in many ways. You would think that the party that wants to get government out of people's lives would hold the FBI's tentacles at bay.

Nope.

If you don't see how the GOP is at fault here, you need to reevaluate how you see the world.
Tsar of DDO
Vaarka
Posts: 7,546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 3:07:42 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
Aw crap, now the government's gonna find out that I abuse my X and Z keys
You're probably thinking right now "haha I'm a genius". Well you're not -Valkrin

inferno: "I don't know, are you attracted to women?"
ButterCatX: "No, Vaarka is mine!"

All hail scum Vaarka, wielder of the bastard sword, smiter of nations, destroyer of spiders -VOT

"Vaarka, I've been thinking about this for a long time now," (pulls out small box made of macaroni) "W-will you be my noodle buddy?" -Kirigaya
Vaarka
Posts: 7,546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 3:10:19 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

In this day and age, asking someone something like "was saying that really necessary" or something similar automatically grants them a "go find a safe space because you can't hand the truth" card now? Wow, we've really evolved as people for the better.
You're probably thinking right now "haha I'm a genius". Well you're not -Valkrin

inferno: "I don't know, are you attracted to women?"
ButterCatX: "No, Vaarka is mine!"

All hail scum Vaarka, wielder of the bastard sword, smiter of nations, destroyer of spiders -VOT

"Vaarka, I've been thinking about this for a long time now," (pulls out small box made of macaroni) "W-will you be my noodle buddy?" -Kirigaya
kevin24018
Posts: 1,804
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 3:16:52 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 3:10:19 PM, Vaarka wrote:
At 12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

In this day and age, asking someone something like "was saying that really necessary" or something similar automatically grants them a "go find a safe space because you can't hand the truth" card now? Wow, we've really evolved as people for the better.

everything is met with hostility these days S.J.W.s assemble!
http://libertyviral.com...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 3:28:19 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 3:10:19 PM, Vaarka wrote:
At 12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

In this day and age, asking someone something like "was saying that really necessary" or something similar automatically grants them a "go find a safe space because you can't hand the truth" card now? Wow, we've really evolved as people for the better.

In fact, I really don't mind sifting through the partisan snipes, because YYW sometimes makes very coherent, precise points. I just wonder when YYW is going to get over this whole "Pence thing" so we can get back to the old, logical YYW.
FourTrouble
Posts: 12,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 4:42:02 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 2:57:29 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 12/2/2016 3:48:40 AM, FourTrouble wrote:
SCOTUS already reviewed the rule change, which really sucks.

I'm not necessarily in favor or support this, but I think I can understand it at least, it just expands the area of what they can already do, since what this is addressing really has no borders it seems logical the way I am understanding this, I accept that I may be wrong. Pirate bay was/is going to use a loophole were their server would be on a drone, and because it wasn't in a physical location it would be immune from the laws.

Arguing that "it just expands the area of what they can already do" is a non-starter. That's what literally every expansion of power is, lol - but that don't make every such expansion okay.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,804
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 4:57:05 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 4:42:02 PM, FourTrouble wrote:
At 12/2/2016 2:57:29 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 12/2/2016 3:48:40 AM, FourTrouble wrote:
SCOTUS already reviewed the rule change, which really sucks.

I'm not necessarily in favor or support this, but I think I can understand it at least, it just expands the area of what they can already do, since what this is addressing really has no borders it seems logical the way I am understanding this, I accept that I may be wrong. Pirate bay was/is going to use a loophole were their server would be on a drone, and because it wasn't in a physical location it would be immune from the laws.

Arguing that "it just expands the area of what they can already do" is a non-starter. That's what literally every expansion of power is, lol - but that don't make every such expansion okay.

maybe it's not an expansion but redefining, since computers in a sense don't have borders then the law pertaining shouldn't either? Things need to change with the times, while I don't trust them, I'm trying to see how this might be abused by law enforcement, I admit I don't fully understand it, but I can't come up with any scenarios. If what they want investigated isn't in their jurisdiction, couldn't they ask a judge in that jurisdiction to issue the warrant? If this is possible doesn't this new proposal just stream line what can already be done?
Vaarka
Posts: 7,546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 5:03:30 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 3:16:52 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 12/2/2016 3:10:19 PM, Vaarka wrote:
At 12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

In this day and age, asking someone something like "was saying that really necessary" or something similar automatically grants them a "go find a safe space because you can't hand the truth" card now? Wow, we've really evolved as people for the better.

everything is met with hostility these days S.J.W.s assemble!
http://libertyviral.com...

Now, I know this was a joke, but it brought an obvious thing to mind that bothers me.

Right now, there are two groups. One is "censor what they said!" and the other is "can't handle my venom? Find a safe space you [random explicit]".

One says "they said something offensive! Censor them!", while the other says "I can say anything offensive that I want, and you can cry about it!", when in reality, there shouldn't be a need for either to exist. Sure, members of each party will always exist, but the majority should be (and probably, to an extent, is) the people who don't want to censor people, but also don't have to throw out every offensive slur and comment they can.

I can handle offensive stuff, but I can also easily refrain doing so. More people need to be like that.
You're probably thinking right now "haha I'm a genius". Well you're not -Valkrin

inferno: "I don't know, are you attracted to women?"
ButterCatX: "No, Vaarka is mine!"

All hail scum Vaarka, wielder of the bastard sword, smiter of nations, destroyer of spiders -VOT

"Vaarka, I've been thinking about this for a long time now," (pulls out small box made of macaroni) "W-will you be my noodle buddy?" -Kirigaya
kevin24018
Posts: 1,804
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 5:13:04 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 5:03:30 PM, Vaarka wrote:
At 12/2/2016 3:16:52 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 12/2/2016 3:10:19 PM, Vaarka wrote:
At 12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

In this day and age, asking someone something like "was saying that really necessary" or something similar automatically grants them a "go find a safe space because you can't hand the truth" card now? Wow, we've really evolved as people for the better.

everything is met with hostility these days S.J.W.s assemble!
http://libertyviral.com...

Now, I know this was a joke, but it brought an obvious thing to mind that bothers me.

Right now, there are two groups. One is "censor what they said!" and the other is "can't handle my venom? Find a safe space you [random explicit]".

One says "they said something offensive! Censor them!", while the other says "I can say anything offensive that I want, and you can cry about it!", when in reality, there shouldn't be a need for either to exist. Sure, members of each party will always exist, but the majority should be (and probably, to an extent, is) the people who don't want to censor people, but also don't have to throw out every offensive slur and comment they can.

I can handle offensive stuff, but I can also easily refrain doing so. More people need to be like that.

well that makes sense, the tactic is to yell and swear enough to drown out the other side, though mostly it's when logic and facts fail their argument, like the child to sticks their fingers in the ears and says lalalalalala so they can't hear what they don't want to.
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 5:45:39 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 3:10:19 PM, Vaarka wrote:
At 12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

In this day and age, asking someone something like "was saying that really necessary" or something similar automatically grants them a "go find a safe space because you can't hand the truth" card now? Wow, we've really evolved as people for the better.

What? What is good for the goose is not good for the gander?Almost every other post I see "snowflake", "safe room" taunts.
Quadrunner
Posts: 1,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 6:35:51 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 4:38:28 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
It logically follows that a person who uses Tor would be much more likely to regularly engage in illicit online activities (I.e. downloading child pornography, buying or selling illegal goods/services, etc) than a person who doesn't.

To me, this is like saying that putting up a fence is grounds for suspicion. Perhaps you just like your privacy...

If your home can be searched by the police, it stands to reason that the contents of your computer should also be open to investigators in the event that your behaviour is suspicious enough that a warrant is requested.

Could this not be requested physically with your full knowledge?

If you aren't doing anything illegal, you may still hate that your privacy is being intruded upon, but overall I think this is a good thing. Ultimately, the right to absolute, unalienable under any and all circumstances, privacy should only extend to the mind.

However, it seems like this could prove more trouble than it's worth. Anybody can delete data, destroy their computer, or put in place a really good password to keep the police from logging in. It can be a lot of trouble to defeat these measures and successfully recover a suspect's computer data, and played out hundreds of thousands of times over a single year this could prove more than our police can handle.
Wisdom is found where the wise seek it.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 6:39:58 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 5:45:39 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/2/2016 3:10:19 PM, Vaarka wrote:
At 12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

In this day and age, asking someone something like "was saying that really necessary" or something similar automatically grants them a "go find a safe space because you can't hand the truth" card now? Wow, we've really evolved as people for the better.

What? What is good for the goose is not good for the gander?Almost every other post I see "snowflake", "safe room" taunts.
When they go high, you go low.
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2016 7:14:46 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
At 12/2/2016 3:05:36 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/2/2016 2:43:29 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/2/2016 1:40:49 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 12/1/2016 5:04:38 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 12/1/2016 2:57:13 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
This bill was mainly thwarted by, as you could have imagined, a Republican senator...

Why do you have to sour your posts with partisan trolling?

+1

We will get all three of you a safe space so you can continue to shield yourselves from the facts.

I don't need a safe space. I'm not contesting that something is fact, only noting how partisan the post comes across. Lol. Keep trying.

If you don't see how the GOP is at fault here, you need to reevaluate how you see the world.

No, I'm not disputing the GOP is at fault. It disappoints me. I was only agreeing with Greyparrot that a lot of your posts are heavily partisan (though, I think it's a norm that most users have, myself probably included). Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy reading your OPs because they are normally better than most other users'.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW