French Version of 'Patriot Act' Becomes Law 195
Taco Cowboy writes: Thanks to the Charlie Hebdo massacre and other instances of terrorism, the French legislature has voted 438 to 86 in favor of the "Intelligence Service Bill," essentially a French version of the Patriot Act. It awards the French intelligence services sweeping powers to tap and intercept any kind of digital correspondence, including phone conversations, emails, and social media.
The bill decrees that hosting providers and Internet service providers in France must be equipped with a "black box" that can retain all digital communications from customers. "The new law would create a 13-member National Commission to Control Intelligence Techniques, which would be made up of six magistrates from the Council of State and the Court of Appeals, three representatives of the National Assembly, three senators from the upper house of Parliament and a technical expert. ... The only judicial oversight is a provision that allows the commission to lodge a complaint with the Council of State, but lawyers are doubtful that it could be convened on a routine basis." We previously discussed news that ISPs may leave France in protest if the bill was passed. Now we'll know shortly if those ISPs will live up to their word.
The bill decrees that hosting providers and Internet service providers in France must be equipped with a "black box" that can retain all digital communications from customers. "The new law would create a 13-member National Commission to Control Intelligence Techniques, which would be made up of six magistrates from the Council of State and the Court of Appeals, three representatives of the National Assembly, three senators from the upper house of Parliament and a technical expert. ... The only judicial oversight is a provision that allows the commission to lodge a complaint with the Council of State, but lawyers are doubtful that it could be convened on a routine basis." We previously discussed news that ISPs may leave France in protest if the bill was passed. Now we'll know shortly if those ISPs will live up to their word.
We warned France not to follow our mistakes (Score:5, Insightful)
Now it seems France will learn the hard way as well that giving up freedom never buys you safety.
Mistakes? what mistakes? (Score:3)
So.. what you are saying is that having near constant surveillance on anyone the US government wants, internally and externally, has not worked out well for them (them of course being the state..)?
Or are you suggesting that the French government would not love to copy this political power grab to be able to monitor who/what/when they like for pretty much any reason?
I would suggest that these capabilities have worked out VERY well for the powers that be - there have been a few hiccups along the way, when the
Re:Mistakes? what mistakes? (Score:4, Informative)
Sorry for the vocab nazi-ism but I see this one very frequently and it's finally pushed me over the edge.
It's toe the line. As in "conforming to the order of things by putting your toes on the line like everyone else".
How does "tow the line" make sense? Is fishing somehow conformist?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm with you on that one, even though (to cite another of my favorite irritants), for all intensive purposes they're the same.
Re: (Score:2)
Queue the curtain!
Re: (Score:2)
He must've been trolling...
Re: (Score:2)
You are of course wrong. They just have to give up more freedoms! In the end, when you remove the right to breath from everybody, they will also not have terrorism anymore and ultimate security! See, works.
(Whenever something like this happens, I see the crowds cheering frenetically for Hitler. People are stupid and will increase their own misery relentlessly, if just told the right lies.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you are certainly right that there are more than just the terrorists that hate these freedoms. And I have to say, as terrorist actions go, 9/11 was probably the all-time most effective one, not because the damage done itself, but because of the counter-reaction that did implement exactly what the terrorists wanted.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and similar to us, they wont ever get their older style freedom back, either. once gone, freedom is damned hard to regain.
sigh. the US can -almost- be forgiven for their stupid plunge into insanity, but the french have seen what we have had to deal with (our citizens) in the past decade or so after all the 'SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING!' bullshit; and they STILL decided to go full retard!
stupid french. seriously stupid french. they saw how it mostly ruined us and they STILL wanted to join that club! ;(
see, peo
Re: (Score:2)
I fully expect that people in the USA are going to follow their own mistakes. If the recent attack in Texas had succeeded in causing mass casualties, it would be the government's excuse for new gun control measures.
I've been saying for years that it was only a matter of time before a Charlie Hebdo or Mumbai style attack happened on U.S. soil with legally purchased firearms. Then, the gun grabbers will be out in force trying to limit access to firearms in the name of "safety". It's happening now, but the
Re: (Score:2)
It's only those posting as ACs that favour privacy too much.
Re: (Score:2)
I only post as AC because I post too infrequently to not have my account get deleted...
Wait, what? I've gone as long as five years without posting, and several years without even logging in, and I've never had my account deleted. What do you consider "infrequent"?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
These actions are being taken in response to real threats that really killed real people.
Real threats by people they already knew were potential terrorists [express.co.uk] and yet they failed to stop them from carrying them out. In other words, they had all the intel they could have wished for and it didn't help. This push for more intel/less privacy has bugger all to do with stopping terrorists.
Re: (Score:2)
What you don't seems to see is that privacy is freedom. When you lose privacy you lose freedom. For example: your medical condition is your privacy, and say you have a back problem and you can't pull heavy weight. Let's say you want to do some sport like Aikido. You know that if you take care you can do it. But when your Aikido club ask you for a medical certificate for the insurance, you still have the freedom to cheat and go to a doctor who don't know to have that certificate who say that there is no prob
Because of the action of a few ... (Score:3, Insightful)
... everyone suffers
That's the price all of us have to pay when we, the majority, cannot and/or dare not to, control the action of the few
No matter if it's USA or France of Belgium or the Netherlands or Germany, as long as our society can not (and/or dare not to) confront those Islamists and get them to ditch their barbaric behavior, all of us will suffer
You guys saw what happened in Garland Texas just days before
You guys saw the length the government of Germany has to go --- including canceling at least tw
Re: (Score:2)
there is a limit to everything ... everyone suffers
And thus those few defeat us.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
>Not only in the United States, Europe, they also make troubles in Australia, in Russia, in Thailand, in Kenya, in China, in Nigeria, and so on, and so forth
>The world at large has been very tolerant with them, but there is a limit to everything
One could say the same about the USA...
Re:Because of the action of a few ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget "social justice".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody brings their own morality to their religion, not the other way around
Yep, I see religion as a reflection of humanity, not the other way around. Admittedly religion allows a few people to feed their chosen morality to many but people seem to follow the leader one way or the other.
Re:Because of the action of a few ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet more accurately: faith is the very essence of 'not being able to realize when you're wrong'. Faith is about stopping yourself from questionning your beliefs. Nothing could be more antethical to the pursuit of truth and good.
Good, bad, whatever you're doing, if you can pause and ask yourself whether what you're doing is good or bad then you're already far above the basic zealots who won't pause nor ask themselves. And by zealot, I also mean the ordinary everyday-man, the Eichmann-sort that have faith in public/democratic authority figures, be they secular or religious.
You might want to review the Stanford Prison experiment. Giving someone power over other people and little accountability DOES turn people into bullies.
Re: (Score:2)
What an excellent description of faith. I'd mod you up if I could. I don't think I've ever seen it described more succintly.
Re: (Score:2)
The whole of the USA has turned into a gigantic SPE.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, I tend to conflate the two concepts, even though I'm a devout Discordian. But then this faith without the blindness is very much what "opinion" should mean.
Re: (Score:2)
I wasn't aiming at the Bible specifically, nor at theologists, most of whom are capable of entertaining in their thoughts interpretations they don't believe in. Quite the opposite, I wish more people would care enough to study at least some theology, and I find an alarming number of secular agnostics and atheists are just as blind or lazy.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, I found the comments by Erich Fromm, will read.
One word rebuttal (Score:2)
Here's the one word rebuttal: Circumcision
Re: (Score:2)
Positions of power attract sociopathic and authoritarian personalities. They in turn tend to create toxic environments that push other types out and allow and even reward bad behaviour.
Re: (Score:2)
My karma can take it. You mods can go back to chanting "USA" over and over while you chew your cud.
Re: (Score:2)
I was restricting the example to the passage quoted...
But feel free to pretend that your WWF-style straw man take-down was a victory.
Re:Because of the action of a few ... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the price all of us have to pay when we, the majority, cannot and/or dare not to, control the action of the few
No matter if it's USA or France of Belgium or the Netherlands or Germany, as long as our society can not (and/or dare not to) confront those Islamists and get them to ditch their barbaric behavior, all of us will suffer
Yes, governments are trying to get more control over you and intelligence agencies are wanting more powers because of actions of few Islamists.
I will never stop being amazed at human naivety.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but unless you want ordinary people to revert to codes of personal honour and clan protection, the state has to be strong.
A strong state isn't a bad state. A bad strong state is a bad state.
"Bad" meaning, dictatorial, nepotistic, corrupt, abusive, etc. And people being flawed, all states have this problem in their government. But my impression is, the level of corruption in say, a Zambia or a Pakistan, is bigger than the corruption in a China, which is in turn perhaps more corrupt than a USA, which is
Re: (Score:2)
That's the price all of us have to pay when we, the majority, cannot and/or dare not to, control the action of the few
That's called tyrany. Our country was founded on the "few" having protections from the majority.
No matter if it's USA or France of Belgium or the Netherlands or Germany, as long as our society can not (and/or dare not to) confront those Islamists and get them to ditch their barbaric behavior, all of us will suffer
Define "confront".
You guys saw what happened in Garland Texas just days before
Yeah, some retards got shot by the police without inflicting any serious harm.
You guys saw the length the government of Germany has to go --- including canceling at least two public events --- just to prevent the events becoming a bloodbath by the hands of the Islamists
That's debatable and begs for citation. Even if they did cancel events due to terrorist threats, it doesn't imply that there would definitely have been a bloodbath had they not.
And that's not all ... the Madrid train station bombing, the Boston Marathon bombing, the London Tube bombing, what happened to the World Trade Center of New York City, and so on
There have been significant acts of terrorism well before Islamic terrorism was all the rage. Oklahoma city
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
If you guys want to have your own Islamic State in Saudi Arabia, nobody cares
You guys can take down the House of Saud
You guys can turn Mecca into whatever you want
Nobody cares
But no, you guys want to have your "Islamic State" in places where Islam is not the original religion --- In Northern Iraq and in Syria there were Christians and the Yazidis living there even before you goddamn pedophilic Mohammad was born --- and you guys attempt to build your so-called "Islamic State" by murdering the Christians, the
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
islam has, as part of its philosophy (if you call it that; its hardly a 'love of mankind'!) that everyone on the earth HAS to convert to islam. they may not say that to your face in english on camera, but its there and they all know it.
there are 'temporary peaces' where they regroup to refight you again. there is NEVER a perma peace. they do not want it and they will not accept it.
basically, I hate saying this but this religion is toxic to the earth and should be removed.
how long do you want to give them
Re:Because of the action of a few ... (Score:5, Informative)
hell, name ANY religion that has changed even one bit since its creation.
I'm going to ignore the rest of your post (sorry, not jumping into THAT quagmire) and nitpick the above. The answer is "pretty much all of them." In fact, it's especially odd that you said this in a post about islam, which claims that their god is the same god ("of abraham and isaac") worshiped by both the christians and the jews. If that's not enough example of a change for you, when's the last time you saw a bunch of orthodox jews sacrifice an animal to yahweh? I won't even go into the changes that roman catholicism has seen over the last two millennia, but suffice to say that the current pope would probably be burned for heresy by his predecessors of just a century or two ago.
Religions, like everything, change over time. Changes can be small, or large, but they're always there.
Re: (Score:2)
Congratulations: you've refuted part of my argument, but, by doing so, have made my point. The story you're linking to is about a centuries old argument against the practice. How is this not an example of a religion changing?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How does a reduction in privacy *not* entail a corresponding loss of freedom?
Go ahead, we're waiting.
Re: (Score:2)
May I suggest, Zondar the Mindless, that you look up 'Sarcasm' in a dictionary.. you remember that woosh you heard a while ago above your head? That was something flying over you..
Of COURSE a reduction in privacy is a loss of freedom, that is the point. Sigh.
Let me guess, you are American? My mistake for not punching the message violently into your consciousness..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not that it's at all relevant to the topic at hand, but I was born in the US, although I've not lived there in a long time, as a quick check of my /. profile would have told you. But are you sure you're not American? You seem to have that annoying American trait of being chronically unable to spell things correctly, even when they're right in front of you.
My sarcasm detector seems to work pretty well most of the time--better than average, I daresay--and I found absolutely nothing in the post to which I orig
Re: (Score:2)
I do not understand where you think the FBI harassed him into his state of mind. "Look at that shooter in texas - read his tweets and you can see how the FBI's harassment over the years drove him from a regular dude to someone deeply angry."
Makes no sense.
Btw, France has the highest illegal and immigrant population in current sand wars. And remember peace to some = Yo
Re: (Score:2)
Look at that shooter in texas - read his tweets and you can see how the FBI's harassment over the years drove him from a regular dude to someone deeply angry.
I know several people who over the years made the transition from "regular dude" to "someone deeply angry". None of them, though, have made the transition from "someone deeply angry" to "someone who tries to kill people who insult his religion".
Solution (Score:2)
Encrypt everything!
Re: (Score:3)
Encryption without license and key escrow is already illegal in France, they did not enforce it against private citizens though.
Re: (Score:2)
You just start using tradecraft. Almost certainly, the terrorists already are. Encryption *already* makes you stand out as a weirdo, precisely because it's uncommon.
Not law yet (Score:5, Informative)
Only the National Assembly has voted; the bill must also pass the Senate. That said, given the multipartite consensus on it, there's not much chance that the Senate won't pass it.
You never know, though: given that the Senate is often deemed useless (in France, the Assembly has priority), sometimes it attempts to actually work on the bills, debate in more depth.
Also, the bill has been submitted to the Constitutional Council (which is unusual, before it's voted on). They too can veto it. We'll see.
Re:Not law yet (Score:5, Informative)
In any case, the french hosting company altern.org [altern.org] has announced it is definitely moving to Norway.
Their CEO left this message on their main page, here it is translated:
Re: (Score:2)
I have mail and many domains at gandi, a french registrar and hoster.
sigh. I guess if this law passes, I have to transfer my accounts to some new company. even if gandi relocates (I doubt it) they'll still be a french company and therefore, subject to the french set of bullshit laws.
damn. this is a big hassle. any recommendations for 'good countries' that host domains, etc? swiss? holland? who still has 'good freedom' left?
Re: (Score:2)
I also use Gandi but only for DNS. As far as I can tell there's not much useful that intelligence agencies could do with that, except get IPs of ISP resolvers that are looking up the names. So I will probably leave things be for now. But I wouldn't buy any other more critical services from them. Shame - seems like a good company.
Freedom is an illusion (Score:5, Insightful)
Thinking about all those people that fought in the world wars for our freedom. I wonder if they would have fought if they knew their children would piss every freedom they fought for away in a generation.
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." - John F. Kennedy
Re: (Score:1)
How is preventing people from committing acts of terrorism giving away our freedom?
Re:Freedom is an illusion (Score:5, Insightful)
Simple: This removal of freedoms does not prevent terrorism _at_ _all_. Just read up on things a bit. Like both of the Charlie Hebdo attackers were already under special surveillance, not just the general one they want everybody to be under. It did help not one bit. They were also both idiots, whit one leaving his passport behind when they changed cars.
Anybody that has looked at the known facts can only conclude that this is bot about fighting terrorism at all.
Re: (Score:3)
How is preventing people from committing acts of terrorism giving away our freedom?
Because by the very doctrine rammed down our throats it's our freedom that terrorists hate. So if we were fighting terrorism we would be *increasing* freedom, not destroying it. Giving away our freedom increases terrorism because now society cannot discover what provoked the acts of terrorism in the first place.
Society in a free country will never be a safe place from anything, however it will be free.
You should be asking So how does giving away our freedom prevent people from committing acts of terrorism
Re: (Score:2)
we can solve all crimes by preventing you and everyone else from leaving home.
we want to solve crimes right?
(do you NOT see how stupid your post was?)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You say he is a cow, yet you are the one making cow noises. How odd.
Oh give it a rest (Score:2)
That tired old appeal to "what they fought for"
You know, perhaps you and people like you who spout this drivel should go to a quiet room and consider the difference between mass genocide of jews, gypsies, gays and eastern europeans by the nazis (yes, hello Godwin) plus the indescriminate bombing of civilian populations in Britain and elsewhere, and the recording of your phone conversations and emails on a little black box. Which if you work in any large company is already done anyway and has been for decade
Re: (Score:2)
Collecting data on the population to know who is jewish, gay, communist etc. and sorting it on electromechanical machines was how the nazis committed their mass genocide.
Re: (Score:2)
Except in this case its being made public knowledge that this can be done. Though frankly I'd be amazed if the facilities to do it haven't been there for years anyway.
And as you prove by your statement - if a government wants to collect information on its population its been able to do it for centuries. The normans did it in the 11th century with their Domesday Book. This little black box changes nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
in the WW2 days, the US rounded up japanese americans and put them in 'camps' for 'safe keeping'. quite a shameful thing to do and a black mark on US history ;(
how did they find the japanese americans?
CENSUS!
a lot of us have refused to feed the census since we consider it immoral (given how it was abused in the past). there are good things that come from it, but I'd still rather not take part in it.
many of us are at the point of being so suspicious of any 'info request' that comes across our desk, my new
Re: (Score:2)
Gay communists have different noses?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Oh give it a rest (Score:4)
That tired old appeal to "what they fought for"
In my context I was thinking of my grandfather who fought in both world wars against the very thing that is happening in our western societies today.
You know, perhaps you and people like you who spout this drivel should go to a quiet room and consider the difference between mass genocide of jews, gypsies, gays and eastern europeans by the nazis (yes, hello Godwin) plus the indescriminate bombing of civilian populations in Britain and elsewhere,
Nazism is exactly what I was considering when I posted. How these establishment of police states leads to state sponsored terrorism, which is scarier than fundamentalism in a different way.
and the recording of your phone conversations and emails on a little black box. Which if you work in any large company is already done anyway and has been for decades.
Oh, I see. Your one of these people that cheer on the erosion of peoples right to privacy because companies do illegal things. This is best compared to anal fist fucking, you may be a willing participant, but most people would not.
GTFU!
All things considered, that's an oxymoronic statement.
Re: (Score:2)
"In my context I was thinking of my grandfather who fought in both world wars"
We've all got grandparents or great grandparents who fought in something so you can cut off your cross for a start.
"How these establishment of police states leads to state sponsored terrorism, which is scarier than fundamentalism in a different way."
Whatever. The exact same "police state" rhetoric arguments was wheeled out when fingerprinting was indroduced, then DNA matching, then CCTV. Change the bloody record.
Re: (Score:2)
We've all got grandparents or great grandparents who fought in something so you can cut off your cross for a start.
Well they'll be able to empathize with the situation. It is unlikely that you have ever written to a politician after reading a legislation like this to defend the remaining democracy. I have, so perhaps the best thing you can do is move to north korea or some other military dictatorship to cheer them on, or just STFU and let the rest of us spend our time ensuring the rule of law applies to all in democracies. After all, that is the point of a democracy.
Whatever.
What a mature reaction on your part, GTFU.
The exact same "police state" rhetoric arguments was wheeled out when fingerprinting was indroduced, then DNA matching, then CCTV.
Yes, and ste
Re: (Score:2)
"What a mature reaction on your part, GTFU."
It simply matched the intellectual level of your argument.
"Yes, and step by step it incrementally becomes more of a police state until someone steps in, uses those powers and it becomes a dictatorship. "
Oh really? So Stalin and hitler got to power by evesdropping on emails and phone calls did they? You've got a lot to learn about politics my friend and by the sounds of things , life in general.
"You are the domestic enemy we are warned about."
Oh look, out comes the
Re: (Score:2)
"What a mature reaction on your part, GTFU."
It simply matched the intellectual level of your argument.
I believe this is where I say, whatever.
Oh really? So Stalin and hitler got to power by evesdropping on emails and phone calls did they?
No, they got that way by appealing to the naivety of people such as yourself with simplistic nationalism. Wrapped yourself in a flag lately? Do you think you're a patriot?
You've got a lot to learn about politics my friend and by the sounds of things , life in general.
In other words, you've never read a single line of a proposed bill, even for your own country, you don't understand how laws are made and enacted and you have never written a single letter to a politician about anything. Your not in
Re: (Score:2)
Take your own advice sonny and grow up. You're obviously just another know it all student arsewipe with lots of words and nothing to say and who thinks rude insults somehow make a killer point. They don't, they just make you sound like an 18 year old idiot. Which you probably are.
Re: (Score:2)
You're obviously just another know it all student arsewipe with lots of words and nothing to say and who thinks rude insults somehow make a killer point.
You started the conversation by being rude, I made a point about AFF because it was a component of the legislation in a way to make it personal to you and it looks like it worked.
I threw you a rope and offered you an opportunity to state your case about the legislation being discussed or simply not reply so you could maintain your dignity. You chose neither. If you want to blame someone for making you look like a coward, and a fool, blame yourself.
They don't, they just make you sound like an 18 year old idiot. Which you probably are.
This reveals the core of your reasoning. You make judgement
Re: (Score:2)
Congratulations on proving my point.
Hope you don't mind - but I'm going to mail your post URL to some mates so they can have a good laugh :o)
Re: (Score:2)
Congratulations on proving my point.
Hope you don't mind - but I'm going to mail your post URL to some mates so they can have a good laugh :o)
Go right ahead, it will confirm to them you really are full of shit. Actually tell as many people as you can, that you know personally, so they know you how much of a dickhead you can be.
Feel free to humiliate yourself further.
Re: (Score:2)
GTFU!
Give The Fuck Up?
No I would rather continue the political battle to defeat measures like this
The difference, at least in the US, is with the stuff at my work that belongs to my employer, I do not have any expectation of privacy when using it while with my private e-mail (to some degree), private phone, and private communications sent in a sealed envelope I do have an expectation of privacy. At the same time nations are moving towards more of the soft tyranny the one that does it for your own good. Now tak
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and
officially requesting ISPs to maintain a "black box" that records information, at the ISP level, which do you prefer?
Re: (Score:2)
This "they fought for freedom" thing... you know, when e.g. Americans volunteered to "fight for freedom" in WW2, a hundred thousand of their fellow citizens were in concentration camps simply on account of their ethnicity, and it wasn't exactly secret knowledge - and popular sentiment was largely in favor of that. So it was part of the "freedom" that they fought for. Somehow, I don't think that they would have been outraged by the Patriot Act.
(Note, I'm not saying that it's a good thing - but don't seek mor
Wrong title (Score:1)
It has not become law and will not for a while. The current text has passed the lower chamber (Assemblée Nationale). Now it will have to go through the upper chamber (Sénat), which will modify it. After a group of 10 representatives and 10 senators will meet to try to find a common ground. After the lower chamber will vote again. Then there will be challenges to the Conseil Constitutionnel (including by people who have voted the law) to strike down some provisions of the law (and it is so outrageo
Problem, Reaction, Solution... (Score:4, Insightful)
First they create the problem, then they generate the reaction, they they offer the ready made 'solution'
Perfect use of Hegelian Principle...
Re: (Score:2)
look, i think this law sucks, but you are paranoid schizophrenic if you think the authorities generated the attack, and generated the outrage
1.violent religious wackjobs are real
2. panicky hysterical mob fear is real
3. overreaching overcontrolling bureaucrats are real
no one designed all those steps, they all actually happened organically, 1, 2, 3
this is all a tragedy of human nature, not some plot by a cabal
and thus we have organic natural step 4: "HERP DERP it's all a secret plot!" says the paranoid nutcas
Re: (Score:3)
You hardly need to be mentally ill to reach this conclusion. Sure, it's not like there's a grand master plan nailed to a wall somewhere. But to conclude governments helped create this situation all you need to do is read about the background of the attackers [theguardian.com]. Their radicalisation started due to the US invasion of Iraq. When the attackers tried to go to Iraq to fight against the occupation they were arrested and thrown in prison, where they met a radical Islamist.
No war? Probably the chain of events that led
Re: (Score:2)
i stopped reading there
no, you really do
to not see how all of the elements in play here are organic is to not understand human nature, and to see instead vast dark conspiracies is, indeed, mental illness
Re: (Score:2)
there is no intelligent viewpoint to debate
if you see dark conspiracies where simple human nature obviously dominates, you're a fucking nutcase
not a baseless insult. an objective determination
to think the highly highly improbable is more likely than the spankingly obvious and inevitable is just dumb, and unhinged
violent religious nuts exist. violent religious nuts do what they do
panicky mobs exist. panicky mobs do what they do
overreaching bureaucrats exist. overreaching bureaucrats do what they do
this is al
Re: (Score:2)
if you see dark conspiracies where basic human foibles are at work, you are stupid, and you are paranoid. objectively true
LMFTFY (Score:2)
Despite of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, the French legislature has voted 438 to 86 in favor of the "Intelligence Service Bill"
They hate us for our freedom (Score:1)
When George Bush said that the terrorists "hate us for our freedom" I had not been expecting that he'd suggest we try giving up our freedoms and see if we're any safer. But I'm not surprised now that the same has happened in France.
Re: (Score:3)
One of times when Bush said something so stupid that it was actually true.
No-one hates freedom, obviously, but a lot of people hate Americans for their attitude that freedoms are theirs and no-one else's.
First it has to go thru consitutional council (Score:2)
Maybe this is what solidarity feels like (Score:2)
As a USAian, I am crying for 65 million people of France for what has just been done to them by those solemnly charged with protecting and serving those people's interest. I know what it's like.
Technically possible ? (Score:2)
Leaving aside all the political questions, I doubt blackboxes are _technically_ possible. The summary said "communications from customers", so that means upstream traffic. With cloud sync data (especially of photos/vids), that's _a_lot_ of data:
Say uplink is 10 MB/d per user. Over 40M users that is a manageable 400 TB/d, but these laws typically have retention periods, 6 mo being the shortest. That takes 73,000 TB which even over a few dozen ISP sites is a major undertaking. Metadata is ~1% so might
Re: (Score:2)
The requirements are dynamic. If this doesn't work, they'll morph it into something that does work. This is a process without end.
Web hosting != ISP (Score:2)
Surveillance is not safety. Why? I'll tell you (Score:3, Interesting)
Reactionary was the word we used to describe this sort of behavior.
A man doesn't need anything but his hands, feet, eyes, and a gun to kill blasphemers. Surveillance is irrelevant. They're making the same damned mistake we did, confusing power and the all-seeing eye with safety. They'll use this to round up Muslims, same as the US does. Innocence or guilt is irrelevant. They'll go into holes for life or get blown up real good.
The questions remains: who will protect us from the people spying on us? The people behind the spy eyes will change over time. The may even become the people who want to shoot you for blasphemy. Ever think of that? In Saudi Arabia, the all-seeing eye will be on the lookout for women driving cars. In North Korea, they'll be looking out for anyone they damned well want to kill. In South America, for anyone challenging the wealthy's control. In America, straight up they're looking for anyone who dares challenge corporate power - no more draconian surveillance was used here than when Occupy managed to gain some attention. The US managed an unprecedented surveillance and pre-crime arrest sweep during Occupy, showing what secret surveillance was really good for: control of the status quo,.
Oh well, freedom was nice while it lasted.
Oh, wonderful... (Score:2)
Two gunmen joined by MPs in destroying la libert&# (Score:2)
This is what the attackers want. They want to erode the freedoms of Western secular societies. The Charlie Hebdo attackers have won.
Re: (Score:2)