Yeah you don't get to ignore a trial simply because you don't think it will be fair. Every criminal ever would be justified in fleeing the law in such a case.

I noticed you didn't answer my question.

We don't abide fleeing the law in any other situation, How come this is different?

We don't live in a country where we pick and choose the laws we want to follow.

Besides, turning himself in is win win. Snowden is virtually guaranteed that he will only die of old age because if anything happens to him, the US will be blamed.

His case is stronger if he turns himself in and argues his case. Fleeing hurts him.

Also, I hate to break it to you. Snowden's fleeing didn't create the public outcry you expected. The jury is in on this. Thanks to GPS and smartphones and other apps that use personal information. The public really doesn't have a lot of problem with being eavesdropped on. Most people already knew it was happening Congratulations, you created numerous internet memes but no actual change.

Attitudes on privacy are changing. Sorry you didn't get the memo.

Wow. They found personal information about the people. Go go go.. *cough*

Hackers target Westboro Baptist Church after Newtown threat

After church leaders announce plans to protest at site of school massacre, Anonymous posts the personal information for dozens of members of the extremist group, including names, e-mail addresses, and phone numbers.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57559468-93/hackers-target-westboro-baptist-church-after-newtown-threat/

Murder is a difficult thing to get away with most of the time, and there's a level of sophisticated social engineering required before you can really rack up a count, otherwise you'll get caught around the 2 to 10 mark, like most people serving prison sentences that aren't drug or theft related.

But in all honesty, murder is not lucrative unless you're commander and chief to an army. The real money maker is hacking -- why doesn't EVERYONE hack? People on the internet are just slinging their credit card info and personal information around willy-nilly.

If you're a homeless person, here's what you do: (this is assuming you are so poor you have no money and little education beyond your street smart observation)

1. Steal someone's smartphone.
NOTE: If you are unsure what a "smartphone" is, just look for the people that are walking around, seemingly lost, looking at their phone the whole time. If you feel in control, ask them if they're lost. If they reply with a fragmented sentence about "GPS" or "Google maps", you have found your mark. If you're proficient with this style of conversation, find a way to lead them down an alleyway -- you know what to do after that. Example: They say they know that their destination is "somewhere around here, they just can't find the entrance", tell them that's because "the place is using a side entrance down this convenient alley."
2. Steal a second person's smartphone.
NOTE: Hopefully at least one of them isn't password locked. If both are, keep stealing until you have one that isn't.
3. Setup a free email account at Gmail and then go to Craigslist and sell the first device.
NOTE: Or Hotmail or Yahoo or Mailinator or whatever.
4. On the second device, find someone on Craigslist who will help you reset the first device so that no one can trace it back to you.
5. Use Google to learn how to hack, or better yet, just learn how to create phishing emails.
6. NOW HACK (or phish)!
7. You probably gave up on life a long time ago, so if you've figured out a foolproof way to steal smartphones, keep doing that, because people with smartphones are pretty dumb and hacking is actually kind of hard.

Special thanks to Google, Craigslist, smartphones, and the blind entitlement of your victims.

Choggie had his chance and blew it. That's done.

dft is self-imposed. He issued a mea culpa in what he is temp banned for, and that should be that. He's coming back in force.

Blankfist left. I think it's overkill to ban him for doing what he did - at least from what he told me he did. Once we've had siftups and such, that cat's out of the bag already is it not? Shit, I know Jeremy, Heath, Rommel etc. from siftup posts anyway. It's not trivial to post "personal information" but there's a degree of discretion in it too. Saying "lucky lives at XX street and hates muslims" is obviously retardedly stupid, but from what I hear blankfist just linked to some movie thing dft was in as a kid. Not a huge deal I'd say, also considering they've actually met in real life and shit.

For what it's worth, I like both dft and blankfist even though I disagree about stuff with both on some issues, and I hate how those two bickering with each other has escalated to this level of paranoia and annoyance. You're both alright, now kiss and make up!

In anycase, dft and blankfist should both be unbanned in my humble opinion. I'm not sure bf would even come back either way.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Thanks for reaching out like this - I have to say I'm kind of intrigued. One way to prove identity would be to have these people make a short video wherein they address us directly. Although, it could be BlankFist in Mrs. Doubtfire makeup.>> ^Boise_Lib:

My correspondence with @silverpoint16 via Youtube.
Posted with permission.

I am not a sockpuppet
I think I begin to understand why you where checking up on me yesterday. I am communicating with you via YT to ask your advice on how to proceed because you contacted me yesterday.
The accounts in question are not sock puppet accounts. We are innocent of the charges and we are five real people.
Here's the backstory. It is not coincide that all accounts were opened within a short period of time. The 5 of us became friends on YouTube because we admired the videos each other has created. Most of them are cat channels. When one of us discovered Videosift and liked what we saw, we shared it with the others and all of us decided to set up accounts.
We are an enthusiasic, friendly and supportive group of people on YouTube and we have taken that behaviour to Videosift where we have apparently aroused some suspicions.
This group is active commenters and participants in the communities they join. And yes we have been upvoting and commenting on each other's submissions but it's because we truly like what each other has posted. Is this wrong?
I can't speak for the others but I love the Videosift site and I would hate to be banned because I have been over enthusiastic and mistaken for the sockpuppet of a guy I've never heard of before.
So what is the best way to clear up this misunderstanding? I assure you we have not been trying to deliberately harass anyone. We're just trying to make friends.
Silver

My response to silverpoint16 on Youtube.

Silver,
blankfist is an extremely intelligent and vindictive person who was rightly banned from videosift for being abusive of members here.
As far as clearing up any misunderstandings that's a hard one. Any protests you guys make could be seen (will been seen) as just another ploy by blanky. dag is a very careful person and will not take unwarranted action. If you just continue being yourselves--and avoid dystopianfuturetoday and Issykitty--you will probably be okay (as Issy has said someone posted personal information on reddit about them--if I knew who did that I would kick some ass).
I must admit that I still have doubts--but as I said if you are the person from Canada who puts video cameras on her cats I think you are neat.
Do I have your permission to post your message on the Sift Talk?
Boise_Lib

Received from silverpoint16

Yes you have my permission to post my previous message on the Sift Talk.
I understand that from your point of view it will be difficult to prove we are who we say we are. We will continue to be ourselves, those of us that choose to continue using your site. These accusations are very upsetting. I will tell the others to avoid dystopianfuturetoday and Issykitty. I am very sorry to hear that their docs have been dropped on reddit. That is very wrong and I agree that the culprit's ass should be soundly kicked.
I would like to say a word about Jazzy77. It seems a bit harsh to ban her for having the word puppet in her profile. I know she actually meant puppet as in marionette. I sincerely hope that you will reconsider that decision and ask her directly about any concerns you might have.
I am really the person from Canada who puts video cameras on her cats. I guess only time will convince you of that.
Silver

Is this proof that they are not sock puppets? No, but banning should only be used after actionable activity--not suspicious activity. We Do Not want to kick people out just because we think they might be up to something. @marinara please take the ban off of jazzy77 until we know more about this situation.
[Note to silverpoint16--I wasn't clear enough--I don't represent videosift, I'm just an interested person. dft and Issykitty are my friends and really great people who have reason to be leery--please don't think badly of them--or the sift.]

My correspondence with @silverpoint16 via Youtube.
Posted with permission.

I am not a sockpuppet

I think I begin to understand why you where checking up on me yesterday. I am communicating with you via YT to ask your advice on how to proceed because you contacted me yesterday.

The accounts in question are not sock puppet accounts. We are innocent of the charges and we are five real people.

Here's the backstory. It is not coincide that all accounts were opened within a short period of time. The 5 of us became friends on YouTube because we admired the videos each other has created. Most of them are cat channels. When one of us discovered Videosift and liked what we saw, we shared it with the others and all of us decided to set up accounts.

We are an enthusiasic, friendly and supportive group of people on YouTube and we have taken that behaviour to Videosift where we have apparently aroused some suspicions.

This group is active commenters and participants in the communities they join. And yes we have been upvoting and commenting on each other's submissions but it's because we truly like what each other has posted. Is this wrong?

I can't speak for the others but I love the Videosift site and I would hate to be banned because I have been over enthusiastic and mistaken for the sockpuppet of a guy I've never heard of before.

So what is the best way to clear up this misunderstanding? I assure you we have not been trying to deliberately harass anyone. We're just trying to make friends.

Silver

My response to silverpoint16 on Youtube.

Silver,

blankfist is an extremely intelligent and vindictive person who was rightly banned from videosift for being abusive of members here.

As far as clearing up any misunderstandings that's a hard one. Any protests you guys make could be seen (will been seen) as just another ploy by blanky. dag is a very careful person and will not take unwarranted action. If you just continue being yourselves--and avoid dystopianfuturetoday and Issykitty--you will probably be okay (as Issy has said someone posted personal information on reddit about them--if I knew who did that I would kick some ass).

I must admit that I still have doubts--but as I said if you are the person from Canada who puts video cameras on her cats I think you are neat.

Do I have your permission to post your message on the Sift Talk?

Boise_Lib

Received from silverpoint16

Yes you have my permission to post my previous message on the Sift Talk.

I understand that from your point of view it will be difficult to prove we are who we say we are. We will continue to be ourselves, those of us that choose to continue using your site. These accusations are very upsetting. I will tell the others to avoid dystopianfuturetoday and Issykitty. I am very sorry to hear that their docs have been dropped on reddit. That is very wrong and I agree that the culprit's ass should be soundly kicked.

I would like to say a word about Jazzy77. It seems a bit harsh to ban her for having the word puppet in her profile. I know she actually meant puppet as in marionette. I sincerely hope that you will reconsider that decision and ask her directly about any concerns you might have.

I am really the person from Canada who puts video cameras on her cats. I guess only time will convince you of that.

Silver

Is this proof that they are not sock puppets? No, but banning should only be used after actionable activity--not suspicious activity. We Do Not want to kick people out just because we think they might be up to something. @marinara please take the ban off of jazzy77 until we know more about this situation.

[Note to silverpoint16--I wasn't clear enough--I don't represent videosift, I'm just an interested person. dft and Issykitty are my friends and really great people who have reason to be leery--please don't think badly of them--or the sift.]

Let's get this straight. The above link cites @dag as stating @blankfist was banned for sharing a member's personal information, yet you still would like that personal information shared with you?

Will your hunger game for meatbag drama ever be satiated? Let it be, human. Let it be.

Below is a copy of the email I sent to Vic Toews, the sponsor of this terrible legislation. I again suggest that all thoughtful Canadians contact their Member of Parliament to voice their concerns.

MP's email addresses and other contact information can be found here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/MembersOfParliament/MainMPsCompleteList.aspx?TimePeriod=Current&Language=E

Dear Mr. Toews;

Thanks for taking the time to send an automated response to the automated email I had previously sent to you. In contrast to our previous correspondenced, this email represents my considered position and thoughts as a citizen of Canada, and not those of a robo-responder, nor of a political staff.

In response to the "Myths and Facts" listed below your correspondence, I respectfully submit that I don't buy a word of it. There's a common expression used to describe information which is not representative of the truth, which I'm sure that, coming as you do from an agricultural area like Provencher, you are quite familiar with. It's commonly used to fertilize pasture-land.

Bill C-30 is a poorly written, overly broad and dangerous piece of legislation. One thing which has been demonstrated over and over again is that when delegated powers that intrude on privacy, those in authority inevitably will abuse them. I have no doubt that the power resulting from C-30 will likewise be abused, and that it will, contrary to your statements, be used for non-criminal purposes. This legislation is fatally flawed and should be abandoned forthwith.

I'd also like to point out that though I vehemently oppose this legislation, I am certainly not "...with the child pornographers". I find your characterization of myself and other thoughtful Canadians to be offensive in the extreme. You remain unrepentant for this despicable comment, instead denying making it though one finds it readilly available in video and in Hansard. I would hope that at some time you might offer an apology to myself and those Canadians who might not agree with you. I suggest to you that it is un-Canadian to use such extremist rhetoric.


Paul Blank
Vancouver, Canada


From: vic.toews.c1@parl.gc.ca
To: xxxx
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:47:02 -0400
Subject: RE: Stop Online Spying

Thank you for contacting my office regarding Bill C-30, the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act.

Canada's laws currently do not adequately protect Canadians from online exploitation and we think there is widespread agreement that this is a problem.

We want to update our laws while striking the right balance between combating crime and protecting privacy.

Let me be very clear: the police will not be able to read emails or view web activity unless they obtain a warrant issued by a judge and we have constructed safeguards to protect the privacy of Canadians, including audits by privacy commissioners.

What's needed most is an open discussion about how to better protect Canadians from online crime. We will therefore send this legislation directly to Parliamentary Committee for a full examination of the best ways to protect Canadians while respecting their privacy.

For your information, I have included some myths and facts below regarding Bill C-30 in its current state.

Sincerely,



Vic Toews

Member of Parliament for Provencher

Myth: Lawful Access legislation infringes on the privacy of Canadians.
Fact: Our Government puts a high priority on protecting the privacy of law-abiding Canadians. Current practices of accessing the actual content of communications with a legal authorization will not change.

Myth: Having access to basic subscriber information means that authorities can monitor personal communications and activities.
Fact: This has nothing to do with monitoring emails or web browsing. Basic subscriber information would be limited to a customer’s name, address, telephone number, email address, Internet Protocol (IP) address, and the name of the telecommunications service provider. It absolutely does not include the content of emails, phones calls or online activities.

Myth: This legislation does not benefit average Canadians and only gives authorities more power.
Fact: As a result of technological innovations, criminals and terrorists have found ways to hide their illegal activities. This legislation will keep Canadians safer by putting police on the same footing as those who seek to harm us.



Myth: Basic subscriber information is way beyond “phone book information”.
Fact: The basic subscriber information described in the proposed legislation is the modern day equivalent of information that is in the phone book. Individuals frequently freely share this information online and in many cases it is searchable and quite public.

Myth: Police and telecommunications service providers will now be required to maintain databases with information collected on Canadians.
Fact: This proposed legislation will not require either police or telecommunications service providers to create databases with information collected on Canadians.

Myth: “Warrantless access” to customer information will give police and government unregulated access to our personal information.
Fact: Federal legislation already allows telecommunications service providers to voluntarily release basic subscriber information to authorities without a warrant. This Bill acts as a counterbalance by adding a number of checks and balances which do not exist today, and clearly lists which basic subscriber identifiers authorities can access.

This gawker quote sums it up for me:

The Reddit admin's defense of the pedophile sections has always been mind boggling. Erik Martin, Reddit general manager: "There's stuff on there that's extremely offensive and reprehensible. but we're not an editorial site. If something's legal we don't touch it."

...but there are other legal things that Reddit forbids: posting your own personal information, posting advice about eating disorders or suicide, offensive language, being under 13 years of age, having multiple accounts, bullying, commercial posts, letting someone else use your account, impersonating someone, duplicate posts, and, I kid you not, sexually suggestive images.

Video makes me smile.

I can see why you're enthusiastic about that video. It makes me laugh that you messed it up so bad.

Much love from my house,
marinara

In reply to this comment by enoch:
>> ^Confucius:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/enoch" title="member since April 22nd, 2009" class="profilelink">enoch...why the hell would you post such personal backstory about this girl?


because danny made me realize that the post alone might leave it open to ridicule.that people would see it for far different reasons than what my intentions were.
i should have anticipated this but my imagination failed.
i was rummaging through my old archives and came upon this old video and was just flooded with such great memories and wanted to share.
i thought the video was funny and the whole idea behind it just cracks me up but after my conversation with danny i realized that it doesnt make much sense without a backstory.

why would it be a bad thing?because it is personal?
this is my dear heart and knowing from where she came to where she is now is one of my greatest success stories and i am so very proud of her.

but now i am beginning to question my initial exhuburence.while my desire was to share, much is lost in translation and the thought of people ridiculing this wonderful person sickens me.
i was her protector for years and i find the instinct to protect her is still strong.

i live my life openly and honestly so the idea of personal information does not hinder my courage to just throw it out there, BUT the thought of people ridiculing this lovely free-spirit is a whole different matter.
i know she wouldnt care.she would most likely laugh.
but i care.
i think i may have made a mistake by posting this.
ah..
hindsight you are a bitch.

>> ^Confucius:

your intentions may have been good but now the entire world of the internet knows that she was gang-raped and drugged and comes from an abusive family. And what a coincidence that Im from tampa too......might make for an awkward encounter....Oh hi...Miss February of Tampa, i heard about you online.
You didnt make a mistake in posting this....you made a mistake in divulging personal information like that and then making it so that any twat with an internet connection can find out who she is.


she does not live here anymore.
but you are right.
bad decision is bad.
*discard

your intentions may have been good but now the entire world of the internet knows that she was gang-raped and drugged and comes from an abusive family. And what a coincidence that Im from tampa too......might make for an awkward encounter....Oh hi...Miss February of Tampa, i heard about you online.

You didnt make a mistake in posting this....you made a mistake in divulging personal information like that and then making it so that any twat with an internet connection can find out who she is.

>> ^Confucius:

@enoch...why the hell would you post such personal backstory about this girl?


because danny made me realize that the post alone might leave it open to ridicule.that people would see it for far different reasons than what my intentions were.
i should have anticipated this but my imagination failed.
i was rummaging through my old archives and came upon this old video and was just flooded with such great memories and wanted to share.
i thought the video was funny and the whole idea behind it just cracks me up but after my conversation with danny i realized that it doesnt make much sense without a backstory.

why would it be a bad thing?because it is personal?
this is my dear heart and knowing from where she came to where she is now is one of my greatest success stories and i am so very proud of her.

but now i am beginning to question my initial exhuburence.while my desire was to share, much is lost in translation and the thought of people ridiculing this wonderful person sickens me.
i was her protector for years and i find the instinct to protect her is still strong.

i live my life openly and honestly so the idea of personal information does not hinder my courage to just throw it out there, BUT the thought of people ridiculing this lovely free-spirit is a whole different matter.
i know she wouldnt care.she would most likely laugh.
but i care.
i think i may have made a mistake by posting this.
ah..
hindsight you are a bitch.

I'm male, and I never once even implied otherwise..so I am not sure why anyone would say I told them that. It sounds like they were playing telephone.

>> ^Boise_Lib:
>> ^shinyblurry:
At your service..
>> ^Boise_Lib:
shinyblurry
I'll take you off ignore for this posting.
I have a couple of questions for you.


Thanks,
Are you male, or female?
I guess this could be considered to be trying to get personal information about a user--which is not permitted here. But, I'm confused so I thought I would ask you personally.
I've heard some say that you have said that you are female. And I've heard from others that you have said you are male. So, if you don't mind, which is it?