Enjoyed the sift for many a year.
It took this video to push me to sign up.
Incredible, and just one guy.
-cyber

But who controls the thought police, cock smoker?

(P.S. I just like sounding like comic book and movie villains. Nothing personal. Today I'm a violent 1980s cyber punk hoodlum with an orange mohawk and jordie leforge goggles. Slice and dice!)

It seems you should take your own advice about reading comprehension - do you even realize that I wasn't referring to your whole post, just a particular statement? I guess not because otherwise you wouldn't be continuing to ramble on about something that I never even implied; show me where I wrote that her situation wasn't a bad thing. There, you see, I didn't.

Her situation is horrible but she is still responsible for the existence of those pictures as they were taken consensually and with her full knowledge. That her trust was misplaced and breached isn't the point of contention here. If you disagree, then consider if Ms Holten or her boyfriend had accidentally lost the phone containing the pictures and some unscrupulous person found it then posted the pictures online. It doesn't change the fact that Ms Holten is still responsible for the existence of the pictures to begin with and she should have retained tighter control over them (keep them on an encrypted hard drive, etc.)

Let's not forget that we are only hearing her side of the story. Have you seen these hateful emails that she speaks of? The details of whether her accounts were hacked or if the boyfriend just uploaded the pics from his phone are vague as well (but an important detail in my opinion.) Unless I missed an article, and that is always a possibility, I didn't see any mention of charges being brought against the boyfriend for an obvious crime - if he indeed "hacked" her phone or accounts, that is a criminal offence. I've also not seen any mention of legal action against the websites that host(ed) the pictures. I'm not trying to imply that she is lying and in all likelihood her ex-boyfriend is a douche, but I like to hear both sides of an argument first and get all the facts.

But I understand you quite clearly now: if you can't attack the argument, attack the person. Got it...you big cyber-bully...

bilisimsuclari, turkish = cyber crimes cute

Israel offering students grants to write favorable tweets.

http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/3605/israel-to-offer-students-grants-to-defend-it-on-social-media/#hU7kEFs8tgK4Rvlh.97

Israel Student Union working on social media to sell the attacks.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/israel-student-union-set-up-war-room-to-sell-gaza-massacre-on-facebook/5392888

Use and employ of Cyber Warriors for Israel

http://newmedia-eng.haifa.ac.il/?p=6614

http://electronicintifada.net/content/israel-investing-16-million-new-media-warriors/9245

Israel has been dominating the media, they have been dominating the responses. You can't have a discussion ANYWHERE about Israel which isn't aggressively challenged with lies, possibly even by people who are being PAID to challenge your posts. I said it just a bit ago, you can't argue about Israel it's gotten to be too much. Then Jon Stewart pointed that out as only he could.

Israel has the support of the US, the media we see is going to be very favorable to them.

In general, when it comes to new technology or scientific breakthroughs, anytime I hear that something will be ready in "just" 5 years, I know it is laughable. If we had actually achieved everything that was predicted to be ready in 5 years, the world would be radically different.

Secondly, this is very effective marketing, but in a subterfuge/propaganda sort of way. Everyone is talking about Amazon, its vision, its radical attempt to change the way things are delivered, etc. just in time for the holiday shopping season. What more could a brand want?

But what are we not talking about? Amazon's work conditions for and treatment of its seasonal workers (of which my aunt and uncle are two) and Amazon's business model being built upon a shell game of tax avoidance.

Amazon is waving some shiny new thing in your face that will never come to fruition so that you don't open your eyes to what they are really doing right now.

Beautiful eyes. I'm in love. Thanks for the name so I can cyber stalk her

edit: Ok yeah, born in 1998... If you want to see more videos of her there are many listed here (scroll down) http://www.lazygirls.info/Sarah_Ellen?tab=Videos&vloc=21

I agree with you as far as the seeming "changing of the guard" goes, but I've seen that happen elsewhere I reverse. When it comes down to it I think we see trends that have their time, and then move on. Right now after the US election season I would expect a lot of stupid pointless videos as people are tired of the politics for a bit (and not just people sifting these videos, the people making them as well). Now as to this video I think the initial argument made was certainly valid. The point in the video is extremely well worded, but you do have to consider the source on these things. As i mentioned, a brief glance at FIRE's website shows defense of a college student you is bullying and cyber bullying a girl about her weight in a malicious fashion. if you look at the conduct codes they are fighting against, every one of them is against this type of bullying. They are promoting this as free speech, but a University has the right to draw the line when this borders on harassment.

Agreed, this video creates a (admittedly well worded) argument that going to college is just liberal indoctrination and not actual education. Fire, the organization they cite seems to be very anti education and seems to be in support of bullying and cyber-bullying of campus students as "free speech".

"don't lump me in with Alex Jones"

HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHHA!

So if our government magically becomes tyrannical, they would obviously remove the 2nd amendment correct?

So if there is no second amendment and guns have been confiscated does this magically stop you from stealing/hiding/stockpiling guns and revolting anyway? Or do you just sit on your thumbs and accept the tyranny cursing "damnit! they revoked the 2nd amendment, we were so close to revolting too!"

And if our gov't becomes tyrannical in the right wing fanatic's fantasy world, how does your AR-15 plan on dealing with Apache helicopters? and F-22s? and laser guided munitions, and bunker busters...or SEAL teams?.

When has the lack of a 2nd amendment stopped anyone from revolting against an oppressive gov't?

If you're going to successfully revolt against a tyrannical 21st century America, you;re going to need at the very least"

1) popular support: in other words, if the guy you voted for doesn't win the election, that's not tyranny. Call me when we stop having elections, then you might have a stronger case for tyrannical govt. paying higher taxes isn't tyranny. Sorry.

2) military support: sorry, your cache of small arms, shotguns, and rifles (assault or otherwise) aren't going to cut it. you're going to need many military units to defect and oppose the government. And guess what, the commander of these units that defect will in all likelihood be leading said revolt, not the right wing pundits and chicken hawks (they'll be too busy cowering in the bomb shelters) and it won't be your "patriotic" militia wannabe survival nut.

3) lots of computer nerds and cyber warfare. Sorry son, the era of the jock is over. The world is digital now bitches. bits can be more powerful than bullets in today's world.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. the 2nd Amendment is largely symbolic and nothing more. It basically says that yes, the populace has the right to be armed (something both sides agree with, the degree of which is debatable but I'll get to that in a moment) and that *IF* the government gets tyrannical you aught to revolt

As for what kind of weapons should be allowed. If you acknowledge that its reasonable to keep nuclear arms, and military vehicles and planes and other heavy weapons and firearms out of civilian hands, then you acknowledge that the 2nd Amendments DOES have it's limits. When the founders wrote the 2nd amendment. Muskets were the pinnacle of weapons technology. Everyone was allowed to have them. So if you acknowledge that in TODAY'S world, that there are certain firearms that civvies shouldn't have, then you acknowledge that the founding fathers didn't think of everything and times do, in fact, change

In his defense, I wouldn't ever rule out the possibility that our gov't could ever become tyrannical. It's just not likely. That and there are going to be a huge number of signs leading up to it and "taking away guns" is not one of them. It's irrelevant because in either case it doesn't change the fact that if the government ever truly did become tyrannical, in order to successfully revolt against it you're going to need a HELL of a lot more than just some assault rifles to overthrow a government gone bad. You're going to need 1) popular support, 2) military defections/support to your side to provide training/support/supplies. In this age, intel and cyber warfare is going to be as valuable if not more valuable than bullets.

I'm sorry, but this romantic myth of a bunch of "patriotic" militia groups rising up armed to overthrow a modern government armed only with a small arsenal of weapons is just that...a stupid myth. News flash, Red Dawn was just a movie, a fictional story, not a how-to manual. You're going to need a hell of a lot more than a 2nd Amendment to overthrow a government in this age.

But yeah, going back to the original argument. It's not impossible, but the idea that gov't is going to go tyrannical is just as ridiculous. Losing an election is not the same as having a tyrannical gov't When we stop having elections, then come talk to me. A lot of shit has to happen in order for gov't to become truly tyrannical and your guy not winning the election isn't one of them. Taxes being raised is not tyrannical gov't.

>> ^chingalera:

I have realized my own complicity in what appears to others to be a denial of human impact on the climate-
A more pressing dilemma than the human impact on the climate though would have to be the systematic programming of humans being born to grow up fucking stupid. "Stupid" because they are not taught how to arrive at conclusions through traditional methods of information gathering and dissemination....I. E. research, critical thinking, etc.
RATHER, from primary school through university, people are taught to be herded and indoctrinated with bullshit-thinking skills. When education is shit, people become idiots.
This is where the world is and will continue to remain until elections become something more than a fucking propaganda pep-rally of imbeciles who vote because it's a robotic function that means you care rather than an effectual process of healthy social evolution.
What we need to do is legalize homicide in applicable situations, beginning with a new holiday: Murder a Politician Day.


With NDAA and pending cyber-security legislation, I wouldn't upvote that comment with a 10-ft pole...

Shit. I guess I kinda just did.

I created an account years ago when I was curious about the buzz and experienced an odd glitch. The first thing I did was walk off a pier and the I was standing underwater with no way to get back to the surface that I could find. My character was fine, and I got bored quick and logged off......Logged on about 2 years later out of curiosity again, and my character was still underwater standing beside that same pier!!

Oh and look man, don't feel offed because no one on the site will seem to respond to your character: Online paranoia, cliquish rules, etc. make any chat scenario unlike one in the world of flesh and blood...Call it human-interface nature or cyber-rules, I tend to label it developmental disability anymore
and trudge along my merry way. If people can't feel comfortable striking up a conversation with a stranger online from the comfort of their computer, well, they are probably equally as bad at it in the world of matter-manifest flesh.

Maybe Anonymous will take up the cause and give him a cyber hobbling.

In reply to this comment by Hive13:
I'd take a bat to that dad's ankles and give him that walk permanently.

Grow up and raise your kids with a shred of decency.

Isn't this a dupe of this? I can't invoke anyway, so have it folks. Meatbag lacks the necessary cyber nuts or something.