sfzombie13

wow. i feel for you dude. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

and why do you think we're not there today? maybe because they are expensive? tough shit. the reason it's expensive is the subsidies are in the wrong places. too much money getting thrown at oil companies. if they would tax them properly and use the resulting money to go into a r&d fund, we would be oil free soon. they're talking about new 2d materials making solar panels cheaper, all kinds of new stuff going on. just needs some more development. hell, if i ever get the time and money at the same time i'll build a prototype of my new vehicle and patent it. it will totally release the world from oil dependency. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

now, it sounds to me like you believe this study and that you support fracking. am i right? if so, you are already too far down the rabbit hole for me or anyone else to help you. have you any idea of the scale of geological time? it works in millenia, not years. and it doesn't really matter what the specific gravity of these chemical (which no one can even name here) is, geology will ensure that they continue to rise. when they rise to the water table, whoever is left around at the time depending on water is well and truly fucked. and they will probably attribute it to natural causes, since we will be long gone and fracking will be forgotten. and that is the "safe" assumption. it could happen in a hundred years or less, in which case our grandchildren will be the ones who are fucked. i prefer to stay on the safe side of things, you know, not dumping chemicals into the earth. there are too many alternatives right now to fossil fuels. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/07/the-only-utah-isp-and-one-of-the-few-nationwide-standing-up-for-user-privacy/ “My view of patriotism is that you question your government,” he added. “You question law enforcement. You question everyone who may be trying to peer into your life. I believe that the 4th Amendment makes that very clear. It should be questioned and it should be balanced against a court asking the same questions. I have a history in my family. My mother was in Denmark when the Nazis overran it in a couple of days. She always had distaste for authority and people telling her what she needed to do. That's not my vision of freedom in the US, that somebody can peer into our communications or save all of our communications for later.” thread title says it all. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

he's no traitor, and the more i learn, the more i respect him. he's also no thief, nor is he a liar. he had access to the phone conversations of lots of americans who were not under investigation for anything, and there was damn sure no legally authorize warrant for said information. and i also do believe that i never once accused anyone of doing anything illegal, just unconstitutional. now, if you are ok with the govt holding onto your phone conversations for years, and trusting that they won't listen to them, then i cannot form a valid argument for that. i however, value the constitution that i swore to protect and defend. i also consider it my duty to have done the same thing that he did had i found the govt wiping their collective asses with it. terrorists be damned, it is not ok to just do what you want. i would much rather have an attack every single day than have a police state as a country. and just for the record, a traitor has the intention of harming the country, aka manning (albeit unwittingly, in my opinion). snowden was a true whistleblower, and judging from the shit coming out because of him, it apppears he was a very effective one. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

this statement is the reason i would stand behind this guy and throw manning to the wolves. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

according to some articles i have read on arstechnica and a couple of others from facebook posts, it looks like we may be getting a look at some secrets after all. a judge allowed that 5 year old case to go on by throwing out the govt objection due to state secrets. and another that said how it used to be a lot broader, and it took a year for the ig to get clearance to look at it. and some of the first articles that came out said they kept the data for 5 years and only listened to the contents when authorized, implying they could listen to any of it at any time. and as for not affecting you or day to day life, all you have to do is look back to the old quote (i can't remember it exactly) about the guy that didn't say anything when they came and took all this stuff, then there was nobody left. i firmly support full and complete equality to every legal citizen of the us, and the only way to even start to achieve this is by following the constitution. there are times i concede it is necessary to maintain state secrets, just not in all cases with no oversight or balances. and it looks as if the courts are starting to agree with me and millions of other americans. one can only hope, we have been losing our liberties for some time. and i found a comment on another thread, "a whistleblower exposes malfeasance, a traitor attempts to undermine his country" _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

you are just straight wrong on the first part of this, it is unconstitutional, it just will never go to the scotus to find this out, due to "national security". and as for the fisa, it does not allow for the wholesale recording of telephone records of us citizens without cause. of course, there is no way to know that, seeing as how all the cases that went before the fisc are classified and will not be released. i cannot believe that there are any citizens who think that it is ok for the govt to do this. it just amazes me. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

now, the last time i checked, the 4th amendment prohibited illegal search and seizure. and i have also heard that the govt is not supposed to be allowed to record your telephone calls (if you're a citizen of the us) without a court order. but i may be wrong about this, i have not researched it, nor am i a lawyer. and we all know that just being able to read is not the way the law works. i wholeheartedly agree that the patriot act should be repealed, however, until that happens, i am behind this guy 100%. manning is an entirely different story. he should have gathered specific evidence of what he considered to be crimes. then if he were not comfortable with his chain of command (and i don't blame him for not being comfortable), then he should have went to a reputable news source and remained anonymous. they can still do that you know. i am truly sorry that you feel like the govt is following the constitution, or that you may feel that it is ok for them to do this to us. the whole purpose of the oversight and checks and balances designed into the constitution is so that we can prevent shit like this. i don't assume to have any privacy on a phone call which is basically just a radio, nor do i assume any privacy on something i send over the internet. if i were planning on doing something i shouldn't be, i would scramble my phone calls and encrypt my email. but that doesn't mean i am not outraged at the operation of this unconstitutional practice which cannot be struck down by the courts because it is too secret to have looked at by real oversight. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

the one i took said that i would protect and defend the constitution of the united states of america. if the govt is not abiding by the constitution, then they should be stopped. if the only way to stop them is to publicize it, then so be it. and i am sincerely glad that i don't have to make the decision as to whether or not i have to. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

but it's so much easier tying it into what you want when you ignore things like that... _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

actually, he thought it out pretty well, then it looks like he talked to some people and they helped change his mind. at first, he said he was willing to stand by his actions and take the consequences(or some shit), then you hear of him asking for asylum in different places. sounds like he started listening to assange or that dumb ass reporter. now of course this is just an opinion. and i've been thinking about it a lot lately, and i think that my oath to uphold and defend the constitution would also require me to rat out anybody who was clearly violating it so overtly. it would be like not following an unlawful order. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

or unless you're trying to create a cover story. then suddenly a lot of things make sense. i'm not saying i believe it or i don't(doesn't matter, makes no difference at all), but i do know first hand some of the fucked up things the government is capable of. and i also know from history(real history, not watered down history classes) some of the fucked up things the government has done in the past. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

i like the flag girls... _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

i've seen it lost of times, must be at least fairly common. of course, it may just mean that i was looking in that direction... _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

if this is the case as stated, then just put the check in the box that says remember me, or stay logged in, or whatever. i use firefox and hate having a browser remember passwords. everytime i open dz, i am already logged in. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

i support this guy, in his situation, who told the american people that the govt is lying to the people and basically trashing the fourth amendment. he didn't commit treason, he didn't sell anything to anyone, he didn't endanger any lives. he has politicians stepping and fetching, trying hard to paint him as a bad guy. had he used official channels, these are the same politicians he would have had to report to. and this would explain why all the major tech companies are pushing toward storing all your information in the cloud. but that's a whole other story... _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

i used to do a 50-50 raffle each week at work when i worked at a power plant. they would ask, "what's it for?" and i'd say, 50 for you, 50 for me. i usually got a nice little bonus. if i'm not mistaken, you're allowed to raffle your shit off if you want to. i was on a tv repair last week and it was a two week old, 60" plasma the guy paid 2 grand on and it got a line across the screen. they didn't want the old one back for a core, so i talked to a guy that gets parts and he gave me the rest of it that i needed, (about $220 worth, the screen cost $1300) so now i have a 60" plasma, three weeks old, with a line across it for free. and i might raffle it off! $2 a ticket, i'll sell 1000. anyone in? _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

"that is not a tough call for me. i was vehemently opposed to manning's act of treason, and am siding with snowden on this one. the only way i can say i justify it is like this: manning actually held up his hand and swore an oath, i did the same thing, and to this day i will not break it. snowden signed a piece of paper, presumably with all sorts of false ideals judging from his latest actions. history has shown that time after time the us govt has done things that they should not have done, from the beginning. have there been any indications they have stopped? snowden should have realized this before he took the job, but either way he was not obligated by an oath to keep such secrets. and he also used discretion in what he released, not trying to harm anyone, just trying to enlighten the american people. in my eyes, when the govt is going against the constitution, my oath requires that i do something about it. i swore to protect and defent the constitution. not the govt, nor the contemptible(all of them) politicians. " this was pasted from another post, and yes, i still believe in what he did, based on the above reasons. it's all about the intent. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

haven't heard anything about this on the news, anyone else? more proof that if you're high enough in rank, you can do what you want... _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

that is not a tough call for me. i was vehemently opposed to manning's act of treason, and am siding with snowden on this one. the only way i can say i justify it is like this: manning actually held up his hand and swore an oath, i did the same thing, and to this day i will not break it. snowden signed a piece of paper, presumably with all sorts of false ideals judging from his latest actions. history has shown that time after time the us govt has done things that they should not have done, from the beginning. have there been any indications they have stopped? snowden should have realized this before he took the job, but either way he was not obligated by an oath to keep such secrets. and he also used discretion in what he released, not trying to harm anyone, just trying to enlighten the american people. in my eyes, when the govt is going against the constitution, my oath requires that i do something about it. i swore to protect and defent the constitution. not the govt, nor the contemptible(all of them) politicians. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

shouldn't be an issue here at all, i heard a lot worse than that 30 years ago, and everybody talked that way. after hearing the reference and the way that reverend was talking about her, i i think that she was right in what she said, if it was true. if not, it was 30 years ago, ease up people. tell me who hasn't changed their minds or attitude in that time. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

i'm gonna have to think on this one. have you cleared the cache and cookies, including form data? if that doesn't work, try uninstalling and reinstalling firefox. i never use the save passwords, i can't stand that, but i'll think on it some more. let me know if that don't fix it. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

i have seen these studies as well and tend to disagree with the methodology used. i've driven in a simulator while eating, talking on a phone and high. it was a blast and measured reaction time, and even allowed weather control as well as vehicle problems. my reaction time was superb, and while it did go down while talking (i think it was like .06 seconds), i consider this acceptable risk. while i was high, my reaction time got a touch quicker, actually. i think it may have been that i was super aware of what was going on. and another thing that gets better when high(at least in with a weaponeer in the army) was shooting. i got baked and scored 40 out of 40 with all head shots. still have the printout to prove it. so while i agree with you that talking on a phone while driving can be distracting, i have actually found my limits safely, and my good driving habits far outweigh the distraction. most of the people in my class were at least a half second worse with no distractions, and some were over a second worse. as long as you have a good following distance, at least 3 seconds, you should have no problems. and for the record, 3 seconds is a lot farther at 70 than 35. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

While I cannot answer for everyone, I can say that talking on the phone is not that distracting. I will reiterate that following too closely is the second worse thing you can do, right behind driving under the influence. If you talk on the phone with a three second distance and a constant sweep of the mirrors, you're safer than most people out there. And of course you need go have enough sense to realize when you need to devote all your attention to driving. _________________________________________ Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes