Well, we do have the right to say what we want and how we feel... so we don't do anything about it (unless general pol, religion, and other rules that i begrudgingly agree to)
you've said some pretty stupid things but you don't see us crucifying you. Sure we all have been foolish, I'm not singling you out in this, but just relax mah dood
People are human, humans are stupid. Don't get so triggered when someone thinks something different because chances are you say things equally as retarded.
I'm fairly certain more than infowars called him a kid, and why does his age justify blackmail?
Well if kids are being exploited and endangered, why wouldn't action be taken? Though it would be better to get the cops sure, but if you live in an area like i do, we don't have many active duty officers and to stop something like that we do have people on call that are ex-military and other public servants. Is it the least sketchy thing in the world? No... but do i defend pedophiles and in most cases killers? Absolutely not, death and violence isn't fun, but freedom isn't free, and the innocent must be protected, so death is inevitable and plays an important part in our civil liberties and the safety of our children.
Unless your a gutless coward you goes to Japan yearly to sleep with 12 year olds, then maybe you would think that's acceptable to do nothing. though i doubt anyone in this thread behaves this way
so much potential, so much justice, so much liberty. you sound like a progressive, or you just don't live in the USA, either way, I see more "shit" in other countries than i do in the USA, we are doing just fine
Why is everyone on this thread talking past each other?
Can we agree that the main core item regarding doxing/id theft that needs to get fixed is how SSN's are handled and used? It's a huge step towards mitigating and managing the consequences of identity theft first and foremost and then the US seriously and I'm looking at you american citizens and business owners need to implement some data privacy compliance regulation that limits the amount of information certain service providers are allowed to store about you and how they get to handle it, as well as rigorously enforce it.
With the amount of third party data leakage everywhere doxing and ID theft is only going to get worse.
There are people out there right now who are applying to high data access (clearance) jobs with the intent of exfiltrating and abusing said data. Heck I'd guarantee you there are criminal elements who have people working front of desk/ customer support jobs and abusing said customer data.
I want you guys to "crucify" me when I am wrong. It is better than not being corrected. I am talking about having zero capability to see when something is wrong, as a handful of members here seem to victim of.
Like now, I know I am wrong to attempt to discuss this. I can stop. I see more harm in not hashing this out. I will continue to aggressively attack levels of avoidable stupidity on display. I treat it as misinformation. Ignoring it means someone else might believe it.
No, I don't say things equally as retarded. This is why I confront this shit. I consider myself quite dumb, objectively. If I can discern fact, from possible fact... most should be able to as well.
Take the derailment on another thread: Someone posts TYT is "establishment. This is a derailing comment. Serves no purpose to that thread. I politely ask how this user considers TYT establishment. Another user interjects to claim that TYT is supported by Al Jazeera and therefore is establishment. I think, hmm... I check the source he cited and there is no mention of financial support from Al Jazeera and affiliates. He assures me that it is the case. I ask for any such evidence. He has none. I politely thank him for taking the effort.
He might have been right, but he could not provide evidence. TYT's partnership with Al Jazeera's affiliate, AJ+, could have seen TYT paying to access Al Jazeera's resources, not the other way around. We don't know. He still believes this. Although I took the effort to be polite, he called me retarded, dense, and probably some other names. He accused me of apologizing for TYT... WTF? I simply wanted to know if the claim was true. I did not defend TYT in any capacity, I simply followed the evidence.
What I am saying is that there is a faint and consistent consensus here on the forums: that stupidity cannot be challenged. Some of us may believe that it is okay to challenge a claim, if done correctly... but in practice, the less than credible users won't concede to being proven wrong.
Prove me wrong, and I will apologize for being mistaken and even thank you for correcting me.
I never said age justifies blackmail in any capacity. I was addressing the misinformation that a "kid" (15 year old is the bad rumor) was blackmailed. The user was attempting to draw sympathy based on a lie. There is no evidence that CNN blackmailed anyone. CNN's response was suspicious, yet blackmail is a still a reach. So there are millions of idiots now running around claiming CNN blackmailed someone, without real evidence.
I hope you are just being facetious, this is not something I really want to respond to. Misinformation, similar to the current CNN blackmail instance, was spread on outlets like Infowars, Breitbart, reddit, etc... There was no child sex ring. That did not stop someone from grabbing an AR and going to the pizza shop to stop it.
Liberty, the USA?... hmm... funny. Sure, go ahead, compare yourselves to NK or something. Damn, you are free as birds. Fly birdie... fly away.
... and the final thing: Are you saying it is good conduct to promote the idea that doxxing is a good thing if those doxxed are people you don't agree with?
That is what this guy above said.
Oh, oh... one more thing...
I can be a progressive, sometimes a conservative, sometimes a lib, and sometimes other things all at once. Your sense of political leaning is generalized to the point of... stupidity. Political stance is comprised of multiple stances of many policies. Sometimes the path is not always clear, but often enough data is evident to support what path has the best chance of success.
When did you lose you common sense to the point where "progressive" took on a negative connotation?
To the mods/admins - I am aware that I am on my way to a ban for derailing topics, on a handful of topics. I know you are free to administrate your way but I want to ask something: If you don't think I can fit in here just simply ask me to leave. I will not go against the request and depart... or you can ban... your choice.
Misinformation is dangerous and as long as I see it, I feel the need to try and stop it. I would want someone to stop me if I was spreading garbage.
Wherein I make my last and final word to @stconquest
I appreciate your willingness to be proven wrong, but i know from personal experience that this sort of thing needs to be sorted out internally, introspection has been the only way that i have seen that works in this case. Just review some of the things you've said, through the eyes of someone who disagrees, and do not demonize that person, if you do, then the exercise will prove ineffective. I've done it many times, in fact, before writing this, I did that very same thing.
You do not realize it, but not tolerating other's opinions, no matter how wrong or "bigoted" they are, is so damaging. It limits their freedom to say what they think, and i shouldn't have to explain why that's a terrible thing. it's a slippery slope, one day it's hate speech isn't protected speech, then next religious freedoms go out the window, after that we get what we got with the soviets, nazi germany, china, etc. The ability to say what you think is so important. And responding to what people say is fine, tho please don't over react, and don't call for people not to tolerate it
I disagree with the concept of doxxing someone you threatens doxxing, I just stated that the internet can take care of itself. This bill will not change how the internet does things in the slightest.
I could continue, but I want to keep this thread on track, if you really think that it's ok to call for the silencing of another, you are the purest definition of why i despise progressives.
With that being said, I'm done with discussing this with you, I just ask that you take a good look at yourself, I think that is proof enough.
Also, i'm only taking the time because i think you could actually be a great asset if you just understood how backwards some of these ideas are, I wouldn't take the time if I didn't care. So before getting pissed at me, understand that while I'm kinda harsh and a bit rough, it's not because i hate you or anything like that.
summaried so others don't have to see that WOT
@anon85933304 a rather small issue with the bill the language used, I see little to no "boilerplate" language used to set things up, coercion should be defined before anything else in this bill, it's unlikely that the definition of coercion would change, but by defining coercion it allows for protections in the future against other legislation acting to change the scope and reach of charges related to coercion. It is on this alone that I would vote against it if I was in a place to do so.
While i still think it won't help much, at least it would bring a clearly defined set of rules. Though i feel that this is just a compilation of sorts, I'm pretty sure all of this is very illegal to begin with, i think the ground has already been covered and doesn't need to be retread.
And that may be needed, though i'm not a lawyer and it's not really my position to speak on that. What i do know is that some language needs to be fixed, if it wants to serve as a more definitive bill. And i think a good amount of the stuff covered is already covered by law... so yeah. That's my two cents.
Having a quick look at the conversation it seems as @catsay has mentioned that people are talking past each other.
I might suggest that taking a more careful and informed approach to people's replies is in order. A lot of speculation and suggested "facts" with not much in the way of sources in a number of cases.
Differences in opinion or thought the get out of hand quick when people add in 5 different things to the conversation. Focus down to the important topic, it'll go better.
The bill proposes $20 million in grants to provide training for state and local law enforcement, teaching them how to respond to these issues. The bill also proposes a $4 million grant to establish the National Resource Center on Cybercrimes Against Individuals.
As a victim of swatting, here's a first hand recollection of the situation: The police literally could not comprehend what was happening. Not to be an a-hole or anything, but most departments are simply not up with the times when it comes to anything internet-crime, related.
I would REALLY like to see the education plan that $20 million is going to bring.
