Enter the "laws of nations". Who's at the party now?
The Common Ground: pedophilia, terror, anonymity and ?copyrights?. ( or could that simply be wrapped up under control mechanism? like terrorizing journalists and counter-culture entrepreneurs and their families ) Five eyes indeed.
Your little country is just as fucked as the next at this pace.
Politicians? I might think they're simply an ingredient in the recipe. We are meant to govern ourselves and yet every day another person is born who will grow up to believe that they are meant to govern much more then themselves.
Whatever "it" is that does go down I can imagine that any surprise will be fleeting and from those that knew better only to hide the truth from themselves the surprise will be a class act.
New Zealand is being led by, essentially, a gang of thieves.
I think Pixelation is pretty much right. The more agreements and treaties that the public shouts down the more desperate the perpetrators will become. The frenzy for politicians will escalate and the bounties will get higher. The laws will turn with the tide and, once again (or still, depends how you view it), we will have to fight for what is ours.. the right to govern ourselves.
Representatives? Yeah, OK. When agreements like this take effect any representing (still) won't mean shit. Your rights traded directly for money and power. Brilliant. Still brilliant.
When corporations drive the next level of "collaboration" for the inhabitants of the planet then we are all surely doomed. You think Hitlers, Mickey Mouse extremists and Magical States of Islam are bad? It's that and all the dystopian fiction you've ever read or seen combined into one reality. Seeds. Oil. Drugs. Media. Communication. Secrets. All feeding off of your lives. Pretty awesome. Some people just want to eat and other people just want to eat you. Because.
Oh hey guys, don't associate with known or suspected terrorists and your stuff might remain private. Don't be suspected of dealing drugs and you might not get shot. Don't be disrespectful of police and you might not get beaten. Don't stop in public and you might not get arrested. Don't speak or you might be heard.
"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" .. and with my golden key will listen to you all forever more from my golden throne and you will be secure. Fuck this guy.
Hm, I'd be of the opinion that it would appear that the officer was unreasonably executing a reasonable request. For the officer to be "reasonably" justified in touching another individual he must be reasonably certain that he's explained (or better, understands) the present circumstance. The officer committed an assault (his offensive, legally) for, apparently, no other reason than he could.
So, yeah, the officer is unreasonably executing a reasonable request. Anger, determination and authority coupled with fuckall intelligent design where a superior officer would be quite clear, polite and reasonable in this non-combative setting. (can confirm, have been superiorally officered)
As clear as it was that the officer was of the asshole persuasion ("I am your authori-tie, yield or die" as opposed to, you know, intelligent) the instruction to put the phone away seems a legit request being that the cyclist was detained for an infraction. If he had it rolling while attached to his bicycle instead of "derp, I'm recording this interaction, it's not a iGun, pinky swear" it may have never been an issue.
The schools let this guy in like that? Smack dab in the middle of higher ed institutions when he should probably be facing charges for being smack dab in the middle of the story of the century?
.. oh yeah, wasn't there something about letting military on university grounds as an equal access sort of thing? I didn't know it applied to liars and thieves. I guess they didn't do an internet search on him first.
And so you would have me believe that the rule of law finds its strength only by breaking that rule and that real security is only realized when the thing being secured is under complete control.
And so too you would have me believe that we are protected by mothers that devour their young.
So, if we can't give these guys a trial, you know, a real one, because, well, secrets, then... why don't we just set them free and count to ten and then let a drone loose? Seems to me that it might cost a bit less and be quick and then we can get on to, you know, secretly justifying that.
Then are we so afraid that we will not present the accused with the evidence against them? And this because we dare not say how it was acquired or what rules have changed so that it could be acquired for fear of being caught breaking the rules? And you would have me believe this is fostering a secure and prosperous future?
Ya'll need a nice long vacation in Colorado or something because you *need* to chill out. Heck there might even be a federal pen you could rejuvenate in for a ten or twenty year getaway.
Betty Crocker Big G cereals Bisquick Bugles Cascadian Farm Cheerios ** Booios Chex Cinnamon Toast Crunch Diablitos Underwood Fiber One Food Should Taste Good ** uhhh yeah, and not totally own you after. Frescarini Fruit Snacks Gardetto's Gold Medal Good Earth Green Giant ** Ho, Ho, Ho. Jokes on you, bitches. Häagen-Dazs ** There must be some mistake with this one, gotta be. Helper Jus-Rol Kix Knack & Back La Salteña Lärabar Latina Liberté Lucky Charms ** You feeling lucky? Macaroni Grill Monsters Mountain High Muir Glen Nature Valley Old El Paso ** Perhaps a little more like the Alamo you know? Pillsbury ** Fat little mother fucker. Pillsbury Atta ** Atta fat 'lil mo fo right there. Progresso ** Inverto Total **ly phooded. Totino's / Jeno's Trix ** The now infamous last word.
The thing is that these guys, "big broadcast?", should be climbing up the backs of those guys that they rely on to tally their viewership in order to more accurately reflect the size of that viewership and thus price accordingly. So if eyeballs=dollars what the fuck is the problem here? Too many eyeballs? Wut? Aero makes a public broadcast more available that "sells" things based on viewership and ratings. The only logical result here is viewership increases thus making the broadcaster's time more valuable.
The officers involved here are either completely and fantastically in over their heads, need huge write-offs or they're simply being manipulated.
Strong public signal good. Public win. No contest.
CBS? Let them eat cake. If I want to watch person of interest I'll read the NSA files. If I want to watch broke girls I'll cruise youtube. Elementary? Sherlock, you jest.
They're now in the Supreme Court of the United States and everyone wonders why people share. Business is booming in court and business leaders have their heads in their hands blocking their own vision.
If Aero wins or looses they've already lost and failed to recognize that regardless of outcome that CBS, broadcasters and their creators are in a brave new world and making enemies in it rapidly.
I'll take the wire and choose my own ride, but thanks.
The disappointing aspect of all of this is that through a simple script such as this the works would have been disseminated far and wide and this could only generate more interest. Through "poor" quality offerings that cost nothing works like these find a wider audience. Wider audiences generate more interest and, in some cases, a desire for both higher quality materials and more works, refined and raw. These, in turn, generate thought, discussion, ideas and, in the end, more creations.
Mr. Gottlieb has clearly failed to recognize pure opportunity due to a misguided sense of ownership entitlement to works that are not his own. A far, far too common stance by those that would believe that the rent is more valuable than the work. Greed and self-interest is what that is and this while hiding behind the espoused virtues of protecting the creators, protecting the creations and protecting an income unearned.