Isn't the idea of this approach essentially the same as enabling, say, everyone's home routers to host content (including everything/anything you want, i.e. email, your favorite music, latest vids)? You know, before our lines were completely hijacked by the men in the middle (with limits, split pipes, blocks, rules, etc. etc.) and that essentially pushed these larger "platforms" into existence and relevance?
The protocol angle could definitely assist in tempering this permission ASS-HATTERY taken up by, who else, the mafiaa of culture theft and reset the field back to whence it came.
I like it, I want more. However, the idea of a reddit or twitter or whatever api seems... a little shortsighted, I think, especially if "freedom of voice" is really what's desired and/or needed.
The Internet is not for middle-men, this much I know, and that needs to stop at almost any cost.
Yeah, I think our police are a little too free for anyone's good and, at this point, there's a lot of training out there for these guys that is *highly* suspect. Taxpayers pay the bill for officers that kill. That seems flawed on many, many levels.
web site: "We didn't find any XXXX but here are some other options you might be interested in."
IMHO - if the above is all it takes to steer clear of any "initial interest confusion" and not, as someone mentioned above, as a bunch of almost but not quite relevant "clickbait" results, which they are, at least in part, then where's the actual issue?
I only see it this way because on several occasions I've been served initial query results that were initially presented as successful matches - which they were most certainly not. Yes, I can see that these things are not the things that I'm looking for but, sometimes, there is actually the gem you're looking for buried within the crap you weren't looking for but that sort of depends upon the sites you're frequenting. A clear indicator that what you're looking for does not exist is not too much to ask and, also IMHO, Amazon knows exactly when there is not a direct match for your query..
I'd call it a fucking courtesy, actually (and I'm very fond of courtesy fucks) and it's one of the reasons I try to avoid Amazon when I know exactly what I'm looking for, that and they absolutely crush (emphasis *crush*) my browser experience.
Perhaps because the whistle blower said so? But if you'll pay attention you might see that leaders, in general, aren't quite taking this tube thing altogether seriously. The efforts to preserve the global power structures are only going to get more interesting. And when you need to take a break from watching leaders rip apart their own insides you can watch a MAFIAA cartoon sideshow.
From this angle Russia seems to be led by a bunch of thieves and murderous villain types, at the moment. Israel? Sheesh, if God wrote down that's their land well I guess that gives them the right to, you know, kick shit over and plant a ranch. Great Britain? The "ban encryption" great britain? Snooper's paradise great britain? Fuck those guys.
They're all pissing in the pot that, by right of our own existence, belongs to all of us, and then some. Just ask one of the seven guys that practically own the planet, they'll tell you, power is intoxicating, even for idiots that figure out how to charm crowds and countries.
I think that the electorate chose to use a system, the legal system, to deal with these overwhelmingly(imho) unconstitutional intrusions. If that system is failing us then, reasonably, that failure falls squarely on the lawyers. It is when complete failure is realized that the electorate must face the question of whether or not they are willing to "back them up" - when the legal system fails (the real one and not this hokey-shit made up secret one) then "we", those that believe our liberties are dear, have no choice other than to fight or succumb to a New World Order, on that has been freed from the shackles designed by the Founders.
erhm, how about we count the number of active federal terrorism sting operations that were taking place at the time of the Boston event and then sit and continue to wonder how previously flagged individuals did not merit active observations and investigations?
Oh, and an investigation is not really a sting, is it? where the latter is a much more comfortable and controllable situation for those involved.. i.e. a setup, thus making your seemingly fear based comment somewhat irrelevant and fuddy in my eyes.
*I* would rather see the feds slip anonymous tips to these "vulnerable" folks tipping them off to the fact that they're being "watched" thereby helping to filter the fuckers from the idiots - but I like daydreaming too. I always think we're too hell-bent on catching a perp than protecting people, potential perp or not, fabricated or not, but I'm aware the entire structure is formed around "the crime" so it is what it is. Besides, a life free from risk sounds a lot like death so fuck any natsec that successfully drives a stake through the middle of why we have a nation in the first place.
And Feinstein..? just. wow. - time's well past up for that resident rep I'd have to say
Indeed. I'm going to investigate and see what's up because, to me, this sounds very attractive.
I wholeheartedly disagree with the premise that "they don't know what the internet is" because, well, internet. It doesn't take a genius to pop a tab and research along side what has piqued your interest.
I try to maintain a "verify thrice" approach to most things especially anything internet and just because one site doesn't attempt to lead me through my world on their leash for the rest of the hour or day doesn't make their position one of denial, it makes it refreshing, sort of like headphones when my mom is talking at me.