These are the kinds of questions one asks job candidates to see how they would behave. There is a wide range of behaviors available to prosecutors given the exact same potential cases crossing their desks.
It has zero to do with Google fiber and everything to do with other Google services which is already happening anyway. Unless, of course, you opt out, and/or block stuff. Or choose not to use Google services. Being able to choose among ISPs is an entirely different ball game.
Of course it's obvious. And I don't see how you aren't sure that it's any worse. It's also different in the manner of data gathering, ad targeting, and injection. And it occurs at your front door, not theirs.
Do you really need to pass a bill on specific internet crap viewed on the clock? Or could we just, you know expect employees anywhere to stop fucking around and get to work? And expect managers to manage their departments properly?
A bill? Seriously? And if it doesn't pass, what does that mean? All right everyone, choke 'em if ye got 'em?
Companies like Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Twitter are fighting back by paying “bug bounties” to friendly hackers who alert them to serious bugs in their systems so they can be fixed.
It is to laugh.
If companies like this had not spent most of the last 20 years attacking and criminalizing those who pointed out their security flaws and churning out piss-poor code and hardware, completely ignoring actual security for much of that time, they would not so much have that problem now, would they? It is merely trendy or convenient for them to be at odds with the insane overreach of the national security apparatus these days. They certainly don't mind the same behaviors when they are doing it.
Here's the counter argument to that, regardless as to whether I actually hold any following position:
If a law requires it, it is not extra-legal.
Actual pedophiles are... pedophiles (or ephebophiles, or habitual rapists), and they don't "get over it". The same way any character with a potentially dangerous problem rather has to stay in contact with the state on some sort of basis, what makes people with these particular criminal problems exempt?
If a person with a problem like this wants to rejoin society in any meaningful way, they need to own their damn problem.
What I do, in fact, believe is that there should be better integration for people with these problems or any ex-criminal into society, less bullshit from law enfarcement, and a dismantling of the prison industry. Specifically regarding sex offenders, the whole scheme seems upside down, where you do in fact get people rammed through the system and onto a registry for having a drunken public piss, people railroaded over extremely thin claims of child pornography or pedophilia, but actual rapes are dramatically under-investigated and victims are treated like shit. Bass-uckfing-ackwards.
These are the ones who look at a picture or read a few words in an FB post and then take the time to ask some stupid question that is answered right in the post (or heaven forbid, the main content one would access by clicking through), no?
I see this all the time. I thought it was confirmation bias on my part, or weirdly skewed sampling. This seems very much an Indo thing, but also seems to manifest itself quite a bit among Filipinos. They can't even figure out how to use an email address and make up a name and password for a simple registration on some other site.
But beyond FB and localizing the issue anywhere, I am constantly confounded by the complete inability to do simple things as is displayed by the purportedly tech-savvy generations who never even knew a world without internet.
Colonel: Right, cut to me. As Officer Commanding the Regular Army's Advertising Division, I object, in the strongest possible terms to this obvious reference to our own slogan 'It's a dog's life ... (correcting himself rapidly) a man's life in the modern army' and I warn this programme that any recurrence of this sloppy long-haired civilian plagiarism will be dealt with most severely. Right, now on the command 'cut', the camera will cut to camera two, all right, director... (cut to a man sitting at desk) Wait for it! (cut back to colonel) Camera cut.