...just when Greenwald should be publishing more "leaks", he's not. Instead, he's going to an entirely new company started by a billionaire. So we may never learn more of the alleged trove that Snowden had.
Huh? Moving to a new company that encourages "independent journalists" seems like it will more likely increase the amount of leaks coming from Greenwald as opposed to a MSM outlet.
.... just the public has become accustomed to it and is now getting bored with the story.
Also huh? Who is getting bored? The national networks are just now picking up on these stories since so much attention is being paid to them online. That doesn't sound like anyone is even approaching bored yet.
Lighten up, Francis.
At the the time of the cable leaks his name was Bradley Manning. The article is correct as is, IMHO.
Perhaps because you can opt out of google, by simply not using their services, whereas the same is not true of government spying.
This is pointed out to Blue every single time he brings it up.
It's like we are beating a brain-dead horse at this point.
What news agencies publish top secret governmental/ ally documents and enable possible national security breaches with no second thought as to how that might really impact real human lives is nothing less than treasonous.
Care to point out where ANY of the Snowden leaks have impacted human lives beyond making those in power uncomfortable?
I also disagree with you labeling it "treasonous". I know this story concerns the UK and not the US, but Ben Franklin still expressed it the best with:
"It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority."
How about fixing incessant cyber stalking and bullying activities that drive people to want to take their lives?
How about realizing that those types of behavior have been a part of human nature since the first time more then two humans gathered in a cave. (Actually probably before, since that type of behavior also occurs in the animal kingdom).
The key is teaching children that their ego is derived from within, not from their peers and most certainly not from strangers online. While I, like most everyone else, cherishes acceptance from the group, the bottom line is that the only opinion of me that really truly matters is that of my own face in the mirror.
I make the content, my rules. If you make the content you can make your own rules.
That's true...up to a point. That point is the moment you make your content available to another human. Once it's past that point it's governed by society's rules, not yours. Copyright is a government granted monopoly granted by the will of the people. Without the force of the law behind them your "rules" would mean nothing.
I wish I got paid each time people walk along the pavement I finished laying the other day.
I like bring up the Master Plumber scenario in these types of arguments.
To become a Master Plumber you usually need an Associates Degree and years and years of work experience working your way up from Apprentice to Journeyman to Master Plumber. Then you need to pass a licensing test. Master Plumbers are of extreme importance to our modern society. (ie: you really want to go back to crapping in a hole in the ground or carting water from a nearby stream?)
Does a Master Plumber get to charge for every time you flush your toilet? No, they don't. So why do musicians believe they deserve compensation every time you listen to a song? I'm am seriously asking this question, because I really don't get the mindset behind that thinking.
Spotify adds nothing, and, just estimating at a mere 5% of revenue, that's SHEER PROFIT for doing nothing!
That's as dumb as saying that your local grocery store adds nothing to the food supply chain and they make SHEER PROFIT for doing nothing.
For someone who argues all the time about sunk (or fixed) costs, you have a really huge blind spot when it comes to developing and maintaining anything that involves technology. It's like you think magic elves build and program all that stuff and mystical unicorns pay for those rooms full of servers and all of that bandwidth.
And whatever happened to Mike's notion of selling direct? It's turning out in practice that some middlemen are necessary, right? So your ranting about middlemen as such was all wasted.
Now you are really showing your dumbass colors, Blue. Mike has never argued against middleman and has even argued that many of the middleman are absolutely required. What Mike has argued against are gatekeepers who attempt to place artificial restrictions on a market. There's a huge difference between the two. Get you facts straight before admonishing other people, otherwise it just makes you look even more ignorant.
... as they believe it annoys me...
Based on your reactions, I'd say it does annoy you quite a bit. Which is cool with me since you tend to annoy me pretty much every day.
It is quite amusing to see you go crying to Mommy...er... I mean Mike to make them stop making fun of you when all you really need to do is register an account. You've already stated that you include your email address when you comment, so making an account wouldn't compromise your anonymity anymore than you've already have.
Now, IF you repeat or fake the time stamp, kids, you are outside of protected free speech, and into deliberate fraud.
Hilarious!
.... then fanboys attack dissenters with ad hom...
Are you really so dimwitted that you don't see your own cognitive dissonance in that simple sentence fragment?
...mention of historically proven fixes to bring The Rich under control again...
Oh you've mentioned them before, but you've yet to provide any details on how you would actually implement them. All we ever get from you is rallying cries that lack substance.
Or did you miss the EBT outage this weekend? Looks to me like a test of succh control.
Actually it's a much wider conspiracy than all of that, Blue.
It's all being orchestrated by Big Tinfoil to drive up prices and you have fallen right into their trap.
...I've just stated an absolute FIX to this and future corporate abuse...
How would you handle the individual artist who wants to assign their copyrights to a corporation? Would you simply remove that option from them?
Also, how would you handle a huge group of artists doing work-for-hire for a enormous project, like say a Disney animated? Would they all get copyrights on the project?
Details Blue. The devil is in the details and you never offer any - just rallying cries.
...and mis-use of a perfectly good system...
Lol. If you mean a "perfectly good system" that isn't really achieving it's initial goal, then yeah, sure.
Bones heal, but the sense of self that one builds when growing up lasts a lifetime.
Right. Which is why my parents instilled the notion that words can't hurt. It was armor against bullying by promoting the idea that self-worth can only come from within and the words of others are insignificant.
I was slight of build growing up and was bullied by the "jocks" fairly often. My defense was usually humor. If you got the other guy laughing, even by being self-deprecating, the situation was usually diffused. Bullies are looking for a specific reaction and if you don't give them that satisfaction they usually search for easier targets.
That's the technique of quibbling about verbal approximations as if disproves the overall point.
At least it's better than calling those with opposing viewpoints "ankle-biters", "kiddies", "pirates" and "trolls" as if it disproves the overall point. Just sayin'
I think these statistics make a lot of sense. More actual bullying is likely to take place in person when the bully actually could do some physical harm.
Maybe I'm just getting old, but I've never really considered verbal insults or whatnot as bullying. Bullying (in my mind) is when it involves physical intimidation and/or some type of physical action.
I was raised on the motto that "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me".
Maybe all those padded, rubber coated, "safety" playgrounds are creating a generation of thin-skinned children who will have a very rude awakening when they find out that the world is a very hard place and very little is "fair".
This comment worked OK - but there wasn't any tags in it, so.....
FWIW I've been experiencing problems posting comments from the preview screen. It either screws up the html tags or gives me a nice red colored *** ERROR *** message without an explanation.
I've had to cut n paste my comment back onto the original reply window to make them work.
Hmmm... problem seems to be gone now. Cool beans.
Re: Re: Re:
Definition of 'traitor': "a person who betrays a friend, country, principle, etc.."
He doesn't meet that definition. It's not betrayal to prove those in positions of authority are abusing their power. It's patriotic, plain and simple.
If Snowden had handed over the documents to an enemy of the US, you might have a point. He didn't. He gave them to the press and to the citizens, neither of which are enemies of the state, no matter how much those in power would like to treat them that way. What he did was the exact definition of whistleblowing.