Of course not. That's only the translation. Apparently the wording was "Nazi Drecksau".
Here's the whole comment published:
https://philosophia-perennis.com/2018/04/24/alice-weidel-klagt-gegen-facebook/
It's what happens when your business is "catching criminals" and not "protecting people".
The FBI is interested in catching as many criminals as possible, therefore these criminals must have victims, and anything that protects people from being victims leads to no criminals the FBI can arrest.
This only sounds half bad if it's about encryption, but as it happens, the same happens with child abuse -- the FBI is actually interested in children being victims to abuse, just to arrest the perpetrators.
Something has gone very, very wrong with the FBI.
It doesn't say, instead some weird euphemisms are used as kind of self-censorship in the title.
Wannacry?
In other words: Already did. ALL major companies and everyone else IN THE WHOLE WORLD. For three years.
So, what would have been considered hate speech under the 3rd Reich? Would? Was, more to the point. Simply, anything against "Germany" or "Germanic people" or the Nazi party, or the government. Certainly nothing pertaining to invalids, gypsies, homosexuals, foreigners[1] and Jews. [1]: Note this applies to some pre-DNA-testing notion of origin, with rather absurd fantasy-constructs of "race" and "heritage".
I'd recommend something like this: "Virtual Freedom: Net Neutrality and Free Speech in the Internet Age" https://books.google.ch/books?id=S0UkDwAAQBAJ
Do campaign promises the candidates don't intend to hold onto when elected count as fake news?
Like "Macron has promised to boost France's slow economic growth, battle high unemployment and promote competitiveness by reforming the labor market and simplifying the tax and pension systems." -- which obviously in hindsight looks quite like fake news (even if he tried)...
Which just has been released. Some distros did patch older kernels themselves.
Actually, 4.14.12 is out as well, https://www.kernel.org/
The more interesting question is, how criminal will the first true AI be?
I was flabbergasted to learn that the US itself does allow what most of its states and most nations laws doesn't allow: having the subject of laws all over the carpet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-subject_rule
That's great, notice you only need to be party campaigner and you get to throw about this law? Create your own party, start participating in elections and wield the club of the new anti-intimidation law to intimidate people.
Much like those "free speech, but" people on the left who think the US should criminalize "hate speech,
...the ctrl-left, of course.
I consider the notion to prohibit passive protection equipment to be totalitarian and fascist. It doesn't matter whether this is encryption, bulletproof glass and garments, gas-masks, helmets or condoms.
The damage that will be done by all events together, seen macro-economically, will always be much greater when people aren't allowed to protect themselves.
Google always bends to copyright whiners. Yup, except when it's people complaining about copyfraud.
"This ginned-up weeping implies that idiots can impose costs on society without concern or limits." Like the idiots that initiated this "forbid to harm self" law in the first place whose costs of their war on drugs they imposed on society? Truly, if there ever was a more cynical plot to raise drugs profits, it couldn't be better than this prohibition with the excuse of "helping the poor addicts".
A lot of information is really NOT confidential, or totally needs not to be confidential, or shouldn't even be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerckhoffs's_principle
So yes, all "weapons information" probably falls under it, except launch codes and other keys.
Second, the locations where alien bodies lie are rather well known, for instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_massacre_of_1871 There's more of these, where alien immigrants were massacred, like the Ludlow Massacre.
You are so right! The dead deserve decent broadband. I mean, we also gave them 70 to 95 years of copyright, so they should be able to spend their gains made with their copyright-monopolies on the broadband-monopolies of the living.
Two criminal Bollywood Film Producers fraudulently Get Court To Block Tons Of Sites In India, Including Archive.org
Read all about the so-called "justice" in the US when it comes to espionage:
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7849
Also fits nicely the Stalinist USSR. Go figure. Or puke. Or weep.
Re: Re: Did someone really say that
Which, by the way, has a grammatical error. There must be a dash in between: "Nazi-Drecksau" would be correct. But the misspelling fits the rest of the post, which sounds very misogynist itself.