However, they can generally be ignored and as you point out, sometimes even stopped.
It's not easy to ignore incoming calls that drain your ten buck a month pay as you go minutes, and why is it incumbent upon us to stop them? They should be forced to get permission to start in the first place.
They're our phones, not theirs! We're paying the bill for it. Why are we expected to accept (eg.) Verizon getting its corporate nose out of joint so we end up getting robo-called half a million times because their billing data is SNAFU'd?
As for the comparison between some schmuck prosecutor vs. privates screwing with you, I'd rather have neither, thank you very much. One baddie with huge power vs. a thousand ticks sucking your blood are equally unattractive to me. They're both evil.
I don't believe ordinary Germans are turning back to fascism. It's far simpler to assume the NSA spying on German politicians has turned up enough dirt on them that the US can blackmail them into doing anything the USA pleases. What's Germany going to do about it? Declare war on the USA for tapping Germans' phone calls?
I've gotta hand it to the USA. This is first rate imperialism on their part of which the old empires could only dream.
However, something about these stories really has the feel of your typical local news exaggeration/moral panic. The coverage is always by local TV news reporters. The details are slim, but the moral panic aspect is ratcheted up quite high.
I'm beginning to think you're my long lost, separated at birth, twin brother. I wish.
No, I cannot see that a little plastic thingy has any chance whatsoever of standing up to the backwash of a prop driven water-bomber airplane, and holy !@#$ is this !@#$ overblown!
I suggest we follow the money, *AND* discredit a few very credulous supposed "journalists." It'll be fun!
I think the difference is that one of the calling cards of the left is that they ARE for the little guy while actually not being that.
I mentioned something along this line a few days ago. They both suck, but the Dems actually purport to be in favour of the "little guy." The GOP can't even bother to do that. They're outright beholden to Big Gov't, Bible Thumpers, tough on crime, who do we invade next, etc., yada yada.
So, GOP? Are you nuts?!?
Democrats? Fuck, no. They're just lieing bastards too.
Re: Re: Revolting? Yes. Surprising? Not in the slightest.
we will protest and we will win!
I hope so, but at the same time I suspect you're delusional. Are Wikipedia and Google going to weigh in on this as they did on SOPA? Are multiple millions all over the world going to understand backroom deal threats like TPP? I doubt it.
... it appears that the US has convinced a bunch of other countries -- who should know better -- ...
We do! Sadly, just like you, other countries' citizen voters don't matter here. Our politicians love the smell of cash as much as yours do. This's the Hollywierd MafiAA buying our elected representatives' access to lawmaking against our wishes, just as it has yours. I don't know why they can continue to get away with this, but apparently they can (so far).
I look forward to seeing them all hanging from meathooks in the town square. I dream about it, even. It would be very educational, I think. I think we should hope to hand that vision down to future generations, so they won't get suckered as we've been (so far).
This is so, bad, yet it still has legs! Astonishing.
I should have said "supposedly elite RCMP." I haven't considered them anywhere near elite for a long time. I consider them Canada's commercial version of the FBI. They're very good at collecting money from municipalities who don't want to run their own police force, but Constable Fraser from "Going South", they're certainly not.
... no reasonable consumer would buy a TV that could only be used by consenting to onerous and unfairly one-sided terms.
Commercial software users have been doing that for more than a couple decades. "EULA"s are known for being the least read and understood contracts ever devised by man. However, SCOTUS allows it anyway.
Linux users have been complaining about this "Microsoft Tax" for just as long, but can I now get a refund for the pre-installed Windows(TM) software on my new computer which I'll never use? Chyaa, right.
Clearly "capitalism" is not alive and well when the customer is always wrong.
Capitalism is alive and well (but the customer is not always right). It's just not prevalent. Would be tyrants and special interests mooching political favors that our taxes pay for tend to be prevalent these days. "We, the people" are too busy with 21st Century complexity, and our educators are not preparing us very well for dealing with any of it (they never really could). As a mostly self-taught individual, this's no surprise to me. We expected far more from public education than it was ever capable of delivering. It's a glorified baby-sitting service at best, and cradle to grave debt machine.
When I'm elected Dark Overlord, I'll disband public education and plow the money saved into universally accessible libraries free for all to use. I don't know why we didn't do that in the first place. I suppose free baby-sitting was too hard to pass up, given all the other crap people were finding they needed to deal with.
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink." Maybe the horse can smell the well's poisoned.
So true! Even more, we still practice the old Roman Empire tradition of stirring entrails. You go ahead and un-publish what you mistakenly published. We've got our own Wayback Machines containing cached copies of what you no longer want us to see. A few incantations of pdftotext piped through diff, and voila your tap dancing is revealed. Shazam!
There's a lot of eyeballs out here watching, and apparently you forgot. Mike nailed it before he even showed us what was going on.
You might want to put in a bit more effort next time, and know that you underestimate us at your peril. Have a marvy day!
Just like there is nothing wrong with Techdirt deciding that anonymous speech is acceptable.
TD didn't decide that. It was decided long ago by many others, for many well justified and perfectly valid reasons. TD is just staying the course and agreeing with that, to their credit. Eliminating anonymous speech is shallow thinking and dangerous revisionism which ignores that history. When a couple of corps decide anonymity is inconvenient for them, we need to read them the riot act and point out everything is not all about them or their convenience.
Remember what happens when you fail to learn the lessons of history. Do you really want to go there again? I don't. We fought too hard and too many people paid too much to get where we are, and we're still having to fight to stay at least where we are, much less backsliding. We still have a long way to go before we all end up as free as I'd like us all to be. Forgetting basic truths because they're inconvenient to a few corps isn't helping us get to that goal.