Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Evening Legal Briefs

View
32 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

32. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 17:05 Slick
 
I think the TD:DR is:

"Why do we think that %100 anon speech is somehow protected? Especially when it can be used to great societal harm? How can we ever combat this?"
 
Avatar 57545
 
A 'leet militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear virtual arms shall not be infringed! -Cutter
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 17:00 Slick
 
Mordecai Walfish wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 13:30:
Tracking people's online usage to be able to ban a person from the internet effectively opens up a whole new can of 1984 worms. If you think that is a good idea I would assume that you simply have not thought of the broader consequences of such a system.

Oh I have, I'm just starting to think that the means might justify the ends.

IMO if the "system" can learn to compromise so that stupid shit we hide because it's illegal, say smoking weed etc. became legal, if there were progressive laws so that no one had anything to hide that was reasonable, then would we really need to hide them from an AI?

The older I get, the more I'm coming around to the idea, it's the only logical way to combat certain kinds of shit in this world. The alternative is to say we will forever keep the gates open to this shit.

I know it's Orwellian, but I live in Montreal. The cops here don't care about people smoking weed, fuck they don't even care about weed dealers it seems like. I've seen dial-a-weed delivery guys just openly break out a bunch of product while parked on St Catherine, the busiest, most commercially dense street in the city, with no hesitation. It's not that they're stupid, it's that the cops genuinely don't give a fuck. Same reason the openly-advertised rub-and-tug parlours have NEVER been raided even once in this city's history.

See to me, this is the "benevolant big brother", if we had more laws that put this kind of shit into effect, then would I really care if an AI tracked my movements online with the ACTUAL intent of only catching terrorists? That's a concession I would make. A human would never see my shit unless an AI already had a credible case to make that a human needed to review my file.

Maybe it could never happen in the USA because there's too much embedded mistrust of your government, but it might be able to work elsewhere. Can you imagine a world where an agency is ACTUALLY only trying to prevent horrific shit, and GENUINELY doesn't care about whatever day-to-day stuff you get up to? I feel that most people just have a mental block that such a scenario even possible, and will always be impossible, the government will always try to fuck you somehow.

I mean, how else are we going to combat this stuff in the future? There are SOOOOOO many ways to get away with this stuff now, like everyone has access to their own enigma device with What's App and Signal already... So how can we fight it? logically? It seems that the only reasonable answer is that we just have to live with these anomalies in the system, that we will never be able to get rid of them, because that's the price of freedom. So how many more innocent people have to die until we start dreaming of a solution?

For the record, I have no idea that my idea would work, but in this climate, it seems like a better idea than having trolls literally run the free fucking world with their fingers on the nukes.
 
Avatar 57545
 
A 'leet militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear virtual arms shall not be infringed! -Cutter
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 13:46 HorrorScope
 
Cutter wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 01:43:
Tyler Barriss: Man behind Wichita swatting incident arrested in Los Angeles

So they got the little bastard. And this fuckin' clown has been arrested for multiple swattings and bomb threats already. They really need to make an example of this asshole. Yeah, life in prison at this point sounds about right.


This one's a lawyers wet dream.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 13:30 Mordecai Walfish
 
Tracking people's online usage to be able to ban a person from the internet effectively opens up a whole new can of 1984 worms. If you think that is a good idea I would assume that you simply have not thought of the broader consequences of such a system.  
Avatar 56178
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 13:13 jdreyer
 
Slick wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 09:02:
jdreyer wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 07:35:
Slick wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 05:51:
A guy who will willingly and repeatedly put innocent people's life in the balance for "the lulz" was arrested in 2015 for the same shit, and yet in 2017 here we are... But if he was doing drugs without harming anyone else he'd probably still be locked up.

America, we need to talk about your priorities...

And this guy REALLY needs to be made an example of. You'd think that setting precedent would be in the interest of everyone, even from a beancounters' POV, misuse/waste of public resources etc. Let alone the, you know, moral reasons not to have this shit happen.

The internet should be managed (come on NSA, PRISM etc.) like a videogame, if you become too toxic, you're banned. No reason this douche should have even had access to the internet 2 years after pulling the same shit.

Thing is, it's so easy to get on the internet unless you're in a controlled environment like prison. And controlling people's access on a per person basis is a huge legislative and infrastructure issue. There are also massive free speech and privacy issues. These kinds of abuses are the price we sometimes have to pay for freedom.

I don't disagree that it would be difficult, however...

The idea that taking away his freedom to be online is infringing his free speech is ridiculous. If the law can jail you, they already have the ability to take away your freedom.

I just think that with AI getting better and better, and with teh NSA's existant extensive spying apparatus, it's not impossible to monitor someone from going online.

Really I think that the anonymous nature of the internet is just responsible for soooooooooooooooooooooooooo much shit in the world right now, that if it was required to log in with your secure credentials to identify you then overnight so much shit would be dealt with. I know this sounds draconian, but there's nowhere else in life where anonymity is guaranteed. And if people were forced to interact with one another the same way they'd do in-person, the world would be a much different place.

Freedom of speech is not equavalent with freedom of anonymous speech.

I know this isn't well thought out, but it's where my heart is right now reading this news... and well all other news for the last few years.

It also can't be a unilateral disarming... it would have to be all or nothing. As anyone still anonymous could just further harass all of the cleartext people on the internet with ease, and without repurcussion.

This isn't a solution we could implement tomorrow, or maybe not even in the next 100 years, but maybe one day it will be possible, and it might be something we'll all agree is in our best interests, if we last that long to see it.

The troll movement is responsible for Trump (Breitbart was directly influenced by gaming troll tactics), and possibly WW3. I wonder how important being anon online is for everyone when faced with these very real consequences.

I wasn't referring to his free speech. I was referring to ours. Not allowing him access for a decade after he serves out his prison sentence (assuming he's guilty) seems like a good idea. My point is that the infrastructure to ensure that is both incredibly expensive and fraught with free speech and privacy issues. It's just so easy to get a laptop and log in to any wifi router, or hack into one. If we required a login tied to a personal ID for every single instance a person accessed the internet, that's onerous, expensive, and easily bypassed. China has spent two decades basically doing exactly that, to no avail. There's no way you could sell the idea of such a system to the American people. It's wishful thinking.
 
Avatar 22024
 
The only thing that flat-earthers have to fear is sphere itself.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 10:58 djinn
 
I know it's an emotional story, but you're starting to sound like the Jugend of old.

"The internet should be managed (come on NSA, PRISM etc)"
"if you become too toxic, you're banned"
"I just think that with AI getting better and better, and with teh NSA's existant extensive spying apparatus, it's not impossible to monitor someone from going online."
" if it was required to log in with your secure credentials to identify you then overnight so much shit would be dealt with"
"The troll movement is responsible for Trump"
"and possibly WW3"

You've slicked yourself this time. Mop up. Or something like that.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 10:17 Numinar
 
CJ_Parker wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 09:19:
Creston wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 00:26:
Cop and the asshole who called in the "swat" should both get charged with fucking murder. Enough of this bullshit with the fucking police shooting first and never bothering to ask questions or even assess the fucking situation anymore.

^ this

I mean that fucking pathetic asshole of a fuckstick "swatter" with his retard dickhead nick "SWAauTistic" is human trash of the first order but the dumbass motherfucker of a cop ain't off the hook.

Especially because...

The incident in Wichita began at about 6:15 p.m. on Thursday when police received a call stating that someone had killed his father by shooting him in the head. The caller further claimed that the shooter was now holding his mother, brother and sister hostage.

You know, I would maybe have a quarter ounce of understanding IF the caller would have only mentioned female victims so that -by default- if a man comes to the door, it sort of must be the perp but that obviously wasn't the case.

The shitcops were responding to a situation with a male perp and at least one male victim/hostage. Then why the fuck fire unscrupulously as soon as an unarmed guy steps out the door? Fucking unreal.

The guns/APCs/body armor/murder training are waaaaaay cheaper than having an on-call professional hostage negotiator.

My hand shakes so hard I cannot shoot straight in the final circle of PUBG most the time. It's easy to fuck this kind of thing up, Spec-ops dudes miss shots in combat they make 100% of the time in training, but maybe select and train people and give them procedures and practices that take this into account.

I wonder what attracts certain individuals to a specialty within a profession focused on violently entering peoples homes. It's a necessary task (sometimes), but surely the pay isn't worth the danger. Is it a good career move or is shooting perps/black people/junkies appealing on some level?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 09:19 CJ_Parker
 
Creston wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 00:26:
Cop and the asshole who called in the "swat" should both get charged with fucking murder. Enough of this bullshit with the fucking police shooting first and never bothering to ask questions or even assess the fucking situation anymore.

^ this

I mean that fucking pathetic asshole of a fuckstick "swatter" with his retard dickhead nick "SWAauTistic" is human trash of the first order but the dumbass motherfucker of a cop ain't off the hook.

Especially because...

The incident in Wichita began at about 6:15 p.m. on Thursday when police received a call stating that someone had killed his father by shooting him in the head. The caller further claimed that the shooter was now holding his mother, brother and sister hostage.

You know, I would maybe have a quarter ounce of understanding IF the caller would have only mentioned female victims so that -by default- if a man comes to the door, it sort of must be the perp but that obviously wasn't the case.

The shitcops were responding to a situation with a male perp and at least one male victim/hostage. Then why the fuck fire unscrupulously as soon as an unarmed guy steps out the door? Fucking unreal.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 09:09 panbient
 
jdreyer wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 07:35:
There are also massive free speech and privacy issues. These kinds of abuses are the price we sometimes have to pay for freedom.

There are also massive free speech and privacy issues around the use of the postal system. Didn't stop the Unabomber from getting 8 consecutive life sentences. I mean, he never pulled the trigger, he was not employed as a postal employee, he only sent packages in the mail.

What we need is a governing and legal system that can adapt to a rapidly changing world. Not a judge who's going to use old communication laws from the 70s (heck even laws from the 90s would be outdated considering what we have now) and give a stern tut-tut finger wag and ultimately dismiss the situation as "nerds being nerds". "Boys being boys" doesn't fly as a defence any more in cases of chauvinistic impropriety this has to change as well.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 09:02 Slick
 
jdreyer wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 07:35:
Slick wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 05:51:
A guy who will willingly and repeatedly put innocent people's life in the balance for "the lulz" was arrested in 2015 for the same shit, and yet in 2017 here we are... But if he was doing drugs without harming anyone else he'd probably still be locked up.

America, we need to talk about your priorities...

And this guy REALLY needs to be made an example of. You'd think that setting precedent would be in the interest of everyone, even from a beancounters' POV, misuse/waste of public resources etc. Let alone the, you know, moral reasons not to have this shit happen.

The internet should be managed (come on NSA, PRISM etc.) like a videogame, if you become too toxic, you're banned. No reason this douche should have even had access to the internet 2 years after pulling the same shit.

Thing is, it's so easy to get on the internet unless you're in a controlled environment like prison. And controlling people's access on a per person basis is a huge legislative and infrastructure issue. There are also massive free speech and privacy issues. These kinds of abuses are the price we sometimes have to pay for freedom.

I don't disagree that it would be difficult, however...

The idea that taking away his freedom to be online is infringing his free speech is ridiculous. If the law can jail you, they already have the ability to take away your freedom.

I just think that with AI getting better and better, and with teh NSA's existant extensive spying apparatus, it's not impossible to monitor someone from going online.

Really I think that the anonymous nature of the internet is just responsible for soooooooooooooooooooooooooo much shit in the world right now, that if it was required to log in with your secure credentials to identify you then overnight so much shit would be dealt with. I know this sounds draconian, but there's nowhere else in life where anonymity is guaranteed. And if people were forced to interact with one another the same way they'd do in-person, the world would be a much different place.

Freedom of speech is not equavalent with freedom of anonymous speech.

I know this isn't well thought out, but it's where my heart is right now reading this news... and well all other news for the last few years.

It also can't be a unilateral disarming... it would have to be all or nothing. As anyone still anonymous could just further harass all of the cleartext people on the internet with ease, and without repurcussion.

This isn't a solution we could implement tomorrow, or maybe not even in the next 100 years, but maybe one day it will be possible, and it might be something we'll all agree is in our best interests, if we last that long to see it.

The troll movement is responsible for Trump (Breitbart was directly influenced by gaming troll tactics), and possibly WW3. I wonder how important being anon online is for everyone when faced with these very real consequences.
 
Avatar 57545
 
A 'leet militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear virtual arms shall not be infringed! -Cutter
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 07:35 jdreyer
 
Slick wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 05:51:
A guy who will willingly and repeatedly put innocent people's life in the balance for "the lulz" was arrested in 2015 for the same shit, and yet in 2017 here we are... But if he was doing drugs without harming anyone else he'd probably still be locked up.

America, we need to talk about your priorities...

And this guy REALLY needs to be made an example of. You'd think that setting precedent would be in the interest of everyone, even from a beancounters' POV, misuse/waste of public resources etc. Let alone the, you know, moral reasons not to have this shit happen.

The internet should be managed (come on NSA, PRISM etc.) like a videogame, if you become too toxic, you're banned. No reason this douche should have even had access to the internet 2 years after pulling the same shit.

Thing is, it's so easy to get on the internet unless you're in a controlled environment like prison. And controlling people's access on a per person basis is a huge legislative and infrastructure issue. There are also massive free speech and privacy issues. These kinds of abuses are the price we sometimes have to pay for freedom.
 
Avatar 22024
 
The only thing that flat-earthers have to fear is sphere itself.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 07:33 jdreyer
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 02:30:
Cutter wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 01:43:
Tyler Barriss: Man behind Wichita swatting incident arrested in Los Angeles

So they got the little bastard. And this fuckin' clown has been arrested for multiple swattings and bomb threats already. They really need to make an example of this asshole. Yeah, life in prison at this point sounds about right.


Holy crap That story is just a downwards roller-coaster ride, why is this fucker not in jail for 10+ years already?

He will be shortly. Fucking dickwad.
 
Avatar 22024
 
The only thing that flat-earthers have to fear is sphere itself.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 07:22 Saboth
 
"I don't believe I'm the only guilty party involved in this whole incident". Yeah, well I have a feeling the courts are going to decide differently. Any time police are reacting to a volatile situation, there is going to be a chance for death, and this guy was responsible for this situation.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 05:51 Slick
 
A guy who will willingly and repeatedly put innocent people's life in the balance for "the lulz" was arrested in 2015 for the same shit, and yet in 2017 here we are... But if he was doing drugs without harming anyone else he'd probably still be locked up.

America, we need to talk about your priorities...

And this guy REALLY needs to be made an example of. You'd think that setting precedent would be in the interest of everyone, even from a beancounters' POV, misuse/waste of public resources etc. Let alone the, you know, moral reasons not to have this shit happen.

The internet should be managed (come on NSA, PRISM etc.) like a videogame, if you become too toxic, you're banned. No reason this douche should have even had access to the internet 2 years after pulling the same shit.
 
Avatar 57545
 
A 'leet militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear virtual arms shall not be infringed! -Cutter
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 02:59 NKD
 
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 00:40:
Is this the first swatting death so far in the US?

It wouldn't surprise me if it wasn't, but I don't recall hearing about one that actually resulted in a fatality until now.

Yeah I think it's the first. We had been pretty lucky up until this point.
 
Avatar 43041
 
I keep warning you. Doors and corners, kid. That's where they get you. Humans are too fucking stupid to listen.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 02:30 eRe4s3r
 
Cutter wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 01:43:
Tyler Barriss: Man behind Wichita swatting incident arrested in Los Angeles

So they got the little bastard. And this fuckin' clown has been arrested for multiple swattings and bomb threats already. They really need to make an example of this asshole. Yeah, life in prison at this point sounds about right.


Holy crap That story is just a downwards roller-coaster ride, why is this fucker not in jail for 10+ years already?
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 01:43 Cutter
 
Tyler Barriss: Man behind Wichita swatting incident arrested in Los Angeles

So they got the little bastard. And this fuckin' clown has been arrested for multiple swattings and bomb threats already. They really need to make an example of this asshole. Yeah, life in prison at this point sounds about right.

 
Avatar 25394
 
"If the snow begins to fall and you can't find the fire, let the water wash away your sins." - Hope County Choir
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Morning Tech Bits Dec 30, 2017, 01:07 Mordecai Walfish
 
To protect myself and serve up death to the lowest bidder. Another day another police murder. Will have to wait to hear all the facts but it seems pretty damning.

Folks are gonna need to start making homemade rocket launchers to neutralize these over-militarized armored killers before they even make it to the door soon. How would that pan out in a state with "stand your ground" laws? Simply "feeling threatened" has to be taken into account with those laws, and there are certainly many reasons to "feel threatened" when dealing with the police anymore. Who am I kidding, none would even be held accountable nor have any judgement from a court come down against them or their gang.
 
Avatar 56178
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 01:07 jdreyer
 
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Dec 30, 2017, 00:40:
Is this the first swatting death so far in the US?

It wouldn't surprise me if it wasn't, but I don't recall hearing about one that actually resulted in a fatality until now.

This is the first time I've heard of a death, too.

Wikipedia seems to confirm it.
 
Avatar 22024
 
The only thing that flat-earthers have to fear is sphere itself.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Evening Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2017, 00:40 MoreLuckThanSkill
 
Is this the first swatting death so far in the US?

It wouldn't surprise me if it wasn't, but I don't recall hearing about one that actually resulted in a fatality until now.
 
Avatar 54863
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo