Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

Bay12 Presidential Focus Polling 2016

Ted Cruz
- 7 (6.5%)
Rick Santorum
- 16 (14.8%)
Michelle Bachmann
- 13 (12%)
Chris Christie
- 23 (21.3%)
Rand Paul
- 49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107


Pages: 1 ... 382 383 [384] 385 386 ... 667

Author Topic: Bay12 Election Night Watch Party  (Read 832966 times)

SalmonGod

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nyarrr
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5745 on: January 24, 2014, 07:39:09 am »

Just think about how broadly the word "terrorist" is applied by the U.S. government.  Peaceful protesters are labeled terrorists all the time.  Hell, government officials have labeled people terrorists for complaining about the quality of drinking water at their town hall meeting because of corporate pollution.  It seems to me like the most common application of the terrorist label is against people expressing class consciousness or vocal against corporate corruption.  The NSA is a program for monitoring foreign terrorism, but we've learned extensively that they collect massive amounts of data on U.S. citizens.  They may not act on it, but all these surveillance and law enforcement apparatus have been brought together over the last 10 years to the point that they're hardly separate entities.  They all have operations at fusion centers, where different agencies are often just down the hall from each other, so that they're able to cooperate and share information.  I would be very surprised if the NSA isn't a part of that big, happy family.
Logged
In the land of twilight, under the moon
We dance for the idiots
As the end will come so soon
In the land of twilight

Maybe people should love for the sake of loving, and not with all of these optimization conditions.

GlyphGryph

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5746 on: January 24, 2014, 01:26:56 pm »

Eh, Salmon - how exactly does the NSA serve the wealthy elite?

At the very least it serves certain American elites through the whole corporate espionage thing.
Logged

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5747 on: January 24, 2014, 01:46:20 pm »

More subtly, it also aligns with recent trends for corporations to spy on people.

You know, for all those tailored ads.

"Uncle Sam's allowed to do it! Why cant we!? Supreme Court, is massive dragnet metadata collection and retention OK?"

POTUS: "Erhm.. uhm......." (shuffles papers, whispers in secret) "Yes. Yes it is."

Corporate America: "SEE! It's PERFECTLY legal, and you need to be quiet about it! Now, I noticed that an IP address assigned to your address (We dont know for SURE that it's YOU, after all! It's just meta data!) has made some really interesting google searches-- We suspect that you would REALLY like the following products!"

Which of course, means the wealthy elite get more money, because the wealthy elite hold controlling interests in such corporations and corporate strategies.

Perhaps not a directly causal link, but still there.
Logged

GlyphGryph

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5748 on: January 24, 2014, 03:03:22 pm »

So it turns out Christie may get off after all. You know why?

David Samson (who ran the Port Authority and was the former Attorney General) is apparently a serious crook, and was apparently running the entire Port Authority for his own little corruption scandal. With the fact that he is pretty much guaranteed to see jail for his actions, there's quite a bit of talk going around that Christie's guys plan on pinning everything on him completely.

And it really might have been all him, and Christie really might have not been involved, because it turns out Samson was acquiring a LOT of ill-gotten-gains on the whole thing, and has a record of threatening people (and carrying out threats) if they didn't engage in activities that directly benefitted his pocket book, and his weapon of choice was "studies" with side effects and less-than-honest-intentions.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/top-christie-mans-business-thrived-he-chaired-port-authority/
Quote
Federal prosecutors are investigating claims by Hoboken Mayor Dawn Zimmer that Christie's lieutenant governor, Kim Guadagno, threatened that the state would withhold Sandy aid for Hoboken unless she supported the Rockefeller Group project - a plan backed by a $75,000 Port Authority-funded study.

Quote
In addition to his firm's tie to the Hoboken imbroglio, emails disclosed in the legislative inquiry into the George Washington Bridge traffic snarl show that Samson was in communication with two men who Christie fired for their roles in orchestrating the traffic jam.
Logged

Mictlantecuhtli

  • Bay Watcher
  • Grinning God of Death
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5749 on: January 24, 2014, 03:38:04 pm »

More subtly, it also aligns with recent trends for corporations to spy on people.

You know, for all those tailored ads.

"Uncle Sam's allowed to do it! Why cant we!? Supreme Court, is massive dragnet metadata collection and retention OK?"

POTUS: "Erhm.. uhm......." (shuffles papers, whispers in secret) "Yes. Yes it is."

Corporate America: "SEE! It's PERFECTLY legal, and you need to be quiet about it! Now, I noticed that an IP address assigned to your address (We dont know for SURE that it's YOU, after all! It's just meta data!) has made some really interesting google searches-- We suspect that you would REALLY like the following products!"

Which of course, means the wealthy elite get more money, because the wealthy elite hold controlling interests in such corporations and corporate strategies.

Perhaps not a directly causal link, but still there.

So, you're saying the NSA was around before corporate information collection policies? I think it's because 9/11ism and the fact that the government isn't foolish and noticed how no one seems to give a damn about Target/Google/Wal-Mart/Facebook collecting your data [to sell to the government and other entities], so why should the government not be allowed to 'in the name of national security'? Arguably a more reasonable use anyway. Either everyone should be allowed to collect metadata or noone should.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 03:43:11 pm by Mictlantecuhtli »
Logged
I am surrounded by flesh and bone, I am a temple of living. Maybe I'll maybe my life away.

Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth,
Card-carrying Liberaltarian

Lagslayer

  • Bay Watcher
  • stand-up philosopher
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5750 on: January 24, 2014, 04:43:01 pm »

How would you enforce a "no metadata" policy, anyways? How would such a law be written? Metadata is just organizing and analyzing the data you already have. It's recognizing trends in the data set. It is completely seperate from the methods used to collect the data in the first place.

As far as I'm concerned, the metadata itself isn't even the issue. The exact methods of collecting the data in the first place, and how the data is used are the only lawful points of attack. If the data is being collected illegally or if they are doing illegal activities with that knowledge, you can prosecute them for it. But how can you justify putting someone on trial simply for obtaining the info legally? Information that they need to have just to carry out day-to-day financial transactions.

GlyphGryph

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5751 on: January 24, 2014, 04:50:22 pm »

Either everyone should be allowed to collect metadata or noone should.
Is this part of a general policy of "either everyone should be allowed to (x) or no one should?" or do you have an actual argument as to why this should be policy is the case?

Because there's a long-standing tradition in this country, one with good reasons for being in place, for limiting government and especially law enforcement's abilities in certain ways beyond that which we allow for private individuals and corporations.

And there's also the whole "government is legally REQUIRING people to track this metadata AND give it to the government" thing which is a good ways beyond anything a private actor has done (and is why the government is reasonably not allowed to do certain things, since they tend to try and use the force of law to get what they want).
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 04:53:50 pm by GlyphGryph »
Logged

Mictlantecuhtli

  • Bay Watcher
  • Grinning God of Death
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5752 on: January 24, 2014, 04:51:59 pm »

I don't believe in selective corporate rights to infringe on the constitutionally granted rights to citizenry.

Are you going to argue that its less safe for the government to handle information on that scale? If so, why? I'd like to see this extrapolated; if the government is so dangerous with metadata why do we allow them to run our military? We could turn that over to Google as well.

And I'm glad you've noticed my desire not to make such things subjective. I try to look at this realistically; if it's so terrible for the government to collect such data it must be for corporations to be doing it [and selling it as well]. Atleast with the government we have a precedent of entrusting our security and rights to our representative government. I trust my information much less with a person willing to sell it to any bidder, in my opinion, but I'd rather neither took place.

We cannot part and parcel domestic surveillance as a distinction between corporate and government surveillance, it is all one and the same.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 05:03:44 pm by Mictlantecuhtli »
Logged
I am surrounded by flesh and bone, I am a temple of living. Maybe I'll maybe my life away.

Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth,
Card-carrying Liberaltarian

SalmonGod

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nyarrr
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5753 on: January 24, 2014, 08:05:56 pm »

Analogy:

A brick and mortar store keeps track of everyone who comes and goes from their building and what they buy while they're there.  Maybe they share some of this information with the companies that produce the products being sold in the store.  Maybe sometimes that information is used in questionable ways, such as sending catalogs to a customer's address without notifying the customer that when they submitted their address for some other purpose that it would also end up on a mailing list.  But for the most part, it's used for improving the functioning of the business, and any inconveniences caused are pretty easily amended or circumvented by any customer who cares.

A government collects all the information that every brick and mortar store in the country collects on its customers, threatens any that refuses to cooperate, and uses this information almost exclusively for the purpose of fucking with people they don't like.  They do this under the guise of providing protection from an astronomically unlikely threat, there is no recourse for anyone who disagrees, and anyone who disagrees is likely to be treated as a part of that threat.

I think there's a difference.
Logged
In the land of twilight, under the moon
We dance for the idiots
As the end will come so soon
In the land of twilight

Maybe people should love for the sake of loving, and not with all of these optimization conditions.

misko27

  • Bay Watcher
  • Lawful Neutral; Prophet of Pestilence
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5754 on: January 24, 2014, 09:03:12 pm »

Quote from: GlyphGryph
Quote from: Mictlanteculth
Either everyone allowed to collect metadata or noone should.
Is this part of a general policy of "either everyone should be allowed to (x) or no one should?" or do you have an actual argument as to why this should be policy is the case?

Because there's a long-standing tradition in this country, one with good reasons for being in place, for limiting government and especially law enforcement's abilities in certain ways beyond that which we allow for private individuals and corporations.

And there's also the whole "government is legally REQUIRING people to track this metadata AND give it to the government" thing which is a good ways beyond anything a private actor has done (and is why the government is reasonably not allowed to do certain things, since they tend to try and use the force of law to get what they want).
Analogy:

A brick and mortar store keeps track of everyone who comes and goes from their building and what they buy while they're there.  Maybe they share some of this information with the companies that produce the products being sold in the store.  Maybe sometimes that information is used in questionable ways, such as sending catalogs to a customer's address without notifying the customer that when they submitted their address for some other purpose that it would also end up on a mailing list.  But for the most part, it's used for improving the functioning of the business, and any inconveniences caused are pretty easily amended or circumvented by any customer who cares.

A government collects all the information that every brick and mortar store in the country collects on its customers, threatens any that refuses to cooperate, and uses this information almost exclusively for the purpose of fucking with people they don't like.  They do this under the guise of providing protection from an astronomically unlikely threat, there is no recourse for anyone who disagrees, and anyone who disagrees is likely to be treated as a part of that threat.

I think there's a difference.
So, corporations should have the right to do it but government? You guys went full libertarian.

So let me argue as I would against a libertarian: Corporations are not your friends. They are ruthlessly devoted to profit, and history shows that are far less benevolent then the government given the same powers. You speak of minor differences in service? I beg to differ. Google has control of its market, and is just beginning to expand its power. Monopolies, which can and do easily form by throwing around economic instead of legal weight, could take the situation to new heights; moreover, their political will would be unstoppable, so now you have a key holder who will do everything in their power to squeeze you dry.

And about the Government, you seem to genuinely believe that it will act in your interests less then a corporation in the same case. Look at private vs public sector and see where things are. Corporations don't have any pretense about trying to screw you, and they are guaranteed to have no one looking it for you(Except of course for government regulators) And to have the audacity to complain about corporate influence controlling everything, and yet on the same page to think they should be able to do something like this.

To believe that corporations should have a right to do what you call unethical, but not government, Is just; I don't even know. Google is not a brick-and-mortar store, Facebook isn't, and they have a lot of info. Your premise requires that I have absolutely Zero trust in my government, and more trust in the inability of Corporations to abuse. I simply will not believe that. I prefer a government to a corporation, simply, and nothing can be said that will convince me otherwise.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 09:05:21 pm by misko27 »
Logged
The Age of Man is over. It is the Fire's turn now

Descan

  • Bay Watcher
  • [HEADING INTENSIFIES]
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5755 on: January 24, 2014, 09:15:09 pm »

Voters are the shareholders of a country. >_>

... Dunno what else to say. Just figured I'd throw it in~
Logged
Quote from: SalmonGod
Your innocent viking escapades for canadian social justice and immortality make my flagellum wiggle, too.
Quote from: Myroc
Descan confirmed for antichrist.
Quote from: LeoLeonardoIII
I wonder if any of us don't love Descan.

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5756 on: January 24, 2014, 09:22:35 pm »

That's a better analogy than you realise descan.

While everyone "owns stock", some people have "Class A" stock.

Even if 100% of the "public stock owners" (who hold class "B" stock) combined in solidarity, it is unlikely that they could overturn the country club of the board of directors. (Who hold class A stocks.)

Government has been given too much power, and it serves its real constituency. Just like corporations have too much power, and serve THEIR real constituency (class A stock holders)

*edited per Mainiac's correction.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 09:38:33 pm by wierd »
Logged

MaximumZero

  • Bay Watcher
  • Stare into the abyss.
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5757 on: January 24, 2014, 09:23:56 pm »

What about those of us that don't think that it should fall to the government or businesses to mass-collect data? Perhaps we need a law of some sort that grants the right to some level of privacy, unless a warrant is obtained because of suspicion of illegal behavior? The issue I have here is consent.
Logged
  
Holy crap, why did I not start watching One Punch Man earlier? This is the best thing.
probably figured an autobiography wouldn't be interesting

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5758 on: January 24, 2014, 09:25:32 pm »

While everyone "owns stock", some people have "preferred stock".

Please learn the meaning of the terms you are throwing around, then return to the conversation.

You will be very surprised to learn what preferred stock actually is.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: FJ's Murrican Politics Megathread 2: So dysfunction. Much Congress. Wow.
« Reply #5759 on: January 24, 2014, 09:31:35 pm »

Fair cop--

Was pointing out that not all stock means 1 stock = 1 vote.

A rose by any other name. Thank you for the correction.

In this case, the correct names for these are "class A" and "class B", when the distinction exists.

A preferred stock is indeed very different.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 382 383 [384] 385 386 ... 667