whatever Eric.... I've spent the time I can spend on this.

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Eric Roberts
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I never said you don’t have to worry about it...talk about reading
> comprehension.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dana [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 7:35 PM
> To: cf-community
> Subject: Re: With CISPA on the horizon, use WUALA for cloud storage
>
>
>> unless you specify *US intelligence* and even then, I'll say for a
>> third and final time, it is not true as a blanket statement, not as a
> matter of law.
>> Not yet.  *wrong...go ask AT&T and several other providers about
>> it...they seemed to think giving away customer data without a fight
>> was the right thing to do*
>
> see above. Re-read carefully with particular attention to the words "as a
> matter of law".
>
>> c) we're talking about routine data-handling procedures, not what
>> happens if someone "wants your data." *does it really matter?  You
>> think they are sniffing packets like a coke addict?*
>
> Yes, Eric, it really matters. You're still conflating extraordinary measures
> legalized after then fact with making something standard operating
> procedure.
>
>> d) if we follow your logic such as it is, we would all refrain from
>> posting here lest the feds go all Megaupload on us. That would be
>> ridiculous nor are you following that course of action yourself. The
>> fact is, they are not interested in my attempt to get some dude in
>> Illinois to think about what he is saying. Therefore the tradeoff of
>> posting here is worth it. I see enough interesting news and amusing
>> sarcasm to make it worth subscribing.  *I have nothing posted here
>> that I would want public...so I have nothing to hide here...nice try,
>> but wrong again*
>
> can't discern the argument here; incoherent.
>
>> The
>> situation is plenty bad but if you start making apocalyptic baseless
>> statements you just discredit the people who are trying to make
>> specific and well-researched points about actual proposed changes to
>> actual existing laws.  *you do remember the saying about assuming,
>> right Dana?*
>
> I don't have to assume when you put your ignorance on display like this.
>
>> read the links in the thread, just stfu, ok? *what makes you think
>> they are not just mining for data...all of the laws we have about
>> wiretaps and other data taps have already been violated by the Bush
>> administration...who knows what Obama has done...so feel free to go
>> fuck yourself*
>
> I am not making any statements about what they are *doing*. I am saying that
> it's specious to opine in a discussion about making data mining legal that
> they are probably already breaking the law. At least the law is there for
> them to break, Eric.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/us/01nsa.html
> (I think the administration appealed)
>
>  We all know about warrantless wiretaps. Saying there's no point in worrying
> about it because they may be breaking the law is not an argument I can
> respect.
>
> But you know, feel free to pull your own plug because they might be
> listening, and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.
>
>>
>> I should probably just filter you out too like I do with the other
>> people on the list who don't like to think, sigh.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Eric Roberts
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> If you knew it was in response to the Swiss location, then why did
>>> you try to falsely make it about the laws?  It was a statement of
> reality.
>>> To say that something is more secure because it is in location X is
>>> not being very realistic.  If a government wants to get your data.
>>> They will get it. The statement made about the Swiss company was that
>>> it was safe...  Even without laws like CISPA, it is still not safe if
>>> you want to keep information from the prying eyes of government.  To
>>> say that this is a platitude only shows ignorance of the reality of
>>> things.  Yes it is true today and it is only going to get easier as
>>> time goes on.  The governments of the world could care less about or
>>> freedoms and our security.  The US Constitution is quickly becoming
>>> worth less than the paper it was written on as our government and
>>> other so called democracies in the world create more and more
>>> draconian laws that limit our freedoms in the sake of the war on
>>> terror or
>> other bullshit security issues.  And no...the tradeoff is not worth it.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Dana [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 1:12 PM
>>> To: cf-community
>>> Subject: Re: With CISPA on the horizon, use WUALA for cloud storage
>>>
>>>
>>> do you project much Eric? I'll say it one more time before writing
>>> you off as terminally stupid and superficial. I *know* you are taking
>>> issue with the Swiss cloud service. My point is that you're doing it
>>> for all the wrong reasons. You're saying they can get your stuff
>>> anyway if they want it. Yes, but under the status quo it's usually
>>> too much trouble unless they have a reason to do that. Geez. At least
>>> in theory, European privacy law would apply also, although it's
>>> anyone's guess how that would interact with US jurisdiction over .com
> domains.
>>>
>>> The really interesting thing is that "not stored in the US" is
>>> becoming a sales point even for people who, as the infamous phrase
>>> goes, have nothing to hide. Because we are headed in the direction of
>>> routine surveillance where no reason will be needed.
>>>
>>> And "they can get your stuff anyway" is a bad argument because a)
>>> it's not true yet, at least not routinely as a matter of  law b) it
>>> surrenders on the point of whether it *should* be true -- not unless
>>> you're planning mass murder, is my take on this --- and c) since
>>> you're making the comment in a thread about privacy it conflates
>>> anti-terrorism intelligence and privacy law. Which is exactly what
>>> we're saying -- or at least I am saying -- should not be conflated.
>>> And you're so sure your unexamined opinion is correct that you keep
>>> saying it over and over again.
>>>
>>> Stop, Eric. Think. Tim and I both talk about the Constitution quite a
>>> bit but we normally don't agree this vehemently, do we? Usually he is
>>> more about the Second Amendment and I am more about the First.
>>> Consider for a minute that this issue may be something you want to
>>> think about a little. That will require that you stop emitting
>>> platitudes and listen. Yes yes cloud storage raises integrity and
>>> security concerns, but normally the tradeoff is worth it anyway. In
>>> the
>> normal course of business.
>>> The factors may weigh out differently if this passes though, which
>>> may mean that EC2 is no longer an option for some startups -- for a
> start.
>>> I'd like to think that a lot of people like Gel will move their
>>> stuff, but I suspect that way too many people will say meh, they can
>>> get the stuff anyway if they want it.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Eric Roberts
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It was in response to the statement of storing in the cloud space in
>>>> Switzerland...please read the thread first before commenting and
>>>> insulting people Dana.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Dana [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 12:35 AM
>>>> To: cf-community
>>>> Subject: Re: With CISPA on the horizon, use WUALA for cloud storage
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes. The question is why you said it.
>>>>
>>>> It has nothing to do with what I said, and if it has nothing to do
>>>> with these stupid laws, why did you say it in a thread about these
>>>> stupid laws, mmm? I figure it's just your usual fatuous and poorly
>>>> thought-out rehash of some irrelevant piece of conventional wisdom.
>>>> Next you'll be telling us not to open attachments from people we
>>>> don't
>>> know.
>>>>
>>>> Since I'm being this rude to you I'll make one attempt to explain
>>>> this to you. If some intelligence agency thinks it needs too, it can
>>>> get pretty much anything it wants to, this is true. There is a
>>>> process for doing this. A set of safeguards which is often
>>>> overlooked and is not that strong to begin with, true, but it does
>>>> exist. The fact that there is such a process does not make it ok for
>>>> internet companies to be able to do an end run around it any time they
> want.
>>>>  ,
>>>> Nobody on on this list is going to have an NSA team investigating
>>>> them anytime soon, ok? So to the extent that it a web company might
>>>> feel a bit queasy about US intelligence sifting through its
>>>> customers' data and consider hosting its information elsewhere, the
>>>> proposed law does represent a change in the status quo. You're
>>>> saying it's already down the toilet so why bother. Feel free to be
>>>> that apathetic, but don't complain if other people find it irritating.
>>>>
>>>> As for Switzerland, I suspect there are better options, but it would
>>>> at least give you European privacy law. On the other hand, that
>>>> particular service has a .com domain, which the US has claimed in
>>>> some cases gives it jurisdiction. But you don't stop going to the
>>>> doctor just because some diseases have no cure, right? Just because
>>>> the US has the resources to track terrorists if it can identify
>>>> them, does not mean we should all shrug off proposals to let
>>>> Facebook decide whether individual people need to have their
>>>> information shared with the federal government, and let the federal
>>>> government do whatever it wants with that information. And maybe if
>>>> enough people consider or discuss moving their business elsewhere it
>>>> will have an effect. Or not. I still think it's better than
>>>> shrugging and turning on the
>>> television though.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Eric Roberts
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> No...what I was saying is that it's not safe to save anything on
>>>>> the net...whether here or Switzerland or anywhere else.  It has
>>>>> nothing to do with these stupid laws.  I don’t know who's ass you
>>>>> pulled that assumption out of, but it had nothing to do with what I was
> saying.
>>>>> I think you need to clear your own ears...
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Dana [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 10:43 PM
>>>>> To: cf-community
>>>>> Subject: Re: With CISPA on the horizon, use WUALA for cloud storage
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Clean out your ears. I'm not saying anything of the kind and I
>>>>> don't have the patience tonight to help you catch up.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yon the other hand seem to be saying that because some people's
>>>>> information is obtainable by some process when necessary, it's ok
>>>>> to do away with the process for everyone's everything. Sorry if I
>>>>> am not ok with that. If it doesn't bother you, then don't let me
>>>>> stop you from getting back to tonight's episode of The Bachelor or
>>>>> whatever,
>>> shrug.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Eric Roberts
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How is it sticking your head anywhere...if anything, saying that
>>>>>> it's ok to put your info somewhere, knowing theta they can get to
>>>>>> it anyway is really sticking your head in the sand and pretending
>>>>>> that they can't.  If you want to put it out there, that is fine,
>>>>>> but realize that no what you do, if you are storing it on the
>>>>>> internet somewhere, it is not safe from government if they really
>>>>>> want to get to it.  The only way to keep it secure is to store it
>>>>>> somewhere that is not connected
>>>>> to the net.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Dana [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 7:38 PM
>>>>>> To: cf-community
>>>>>> Subject: Re: With CISPA on the horizon, use WUALA for cloud
>>>>>> storage
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ya, you're right, let's all stick our head ....::cough::
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, I still say it's an excuse for apathy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Eric Roberts
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If they want to get to your info...they will...so no...not bullshit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Dana [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 6:11 PM
>>>>>>> To: cf-community
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: With CISPA on the horizon, use WUALA for cloud
>>>>>>> storage
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> bullshit. That's just an excuse for apathy. Sorry to jump all
>>>>>>> over you but I've heard that way too much lately. First of all,
>>>>>>> the meaning of safety and security both depend on many factors.
>>>>>>> It makes a lot of difference whether we're talking about tracking
>>>>>>> cookies or terrorist activity, Anon script kiddies or freaking NSA.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's when you talk about cybersecurity as one big fungible mess
>>>>>>> that you get stupidity like this bill. Chinese government hackers
>>>>>>> fall in the category of cybersecurity, sure. Hollywood has a
>>>>>>> cybersecurity problem if their stuff is getting posted on the
>>>>>>> web, sure, but it's a different type of cybersecurity problem and
>>>>>>> some might say a licensing model problem. Similarly, I think the
>>>>>>> authors of this bill see the use of Twitter by Occupy activists
>>>>>>> as a cybersecurity problem because it involves the internet and
>>>>>>> Occupy makes them feel insecure ;P but I submit that it's not
>>>>>>> really, until you criminalize protest, so some might say that
>>>>>>> it's really a free speech problem ;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But if we throw up our hands over theis because Facebook can't
>>>>>>> seem to understand that it should abide by its own terms of
>>>>>>> service -- which is a cybersecurity problem for you and me imho
>>>>>>> -- then we may as well kiss the internet goodbye. Sure, we should
>>>>>>> all take precautions anyway. But a web service that *knows* it is
>>>>>>> being use to organize an Arab Spring has a responsibility to put
>>>>>>> some safeguards in place also, and it's the corporate
>>>>>>> responsibility part that is so shockingly lacking
>>>>>> in CISPA.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Eric Roberts
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nothing on the net is safe or secure..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 12:47 PM, LRS Scout <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, looks like they have some anti-piracy group called SAFE
>>>>>>>>> that can pull the plug on sites at will, and do all kinds of
>>> surveillance.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Eric Roberts <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Didn't the swiss also crack down on stuff like this as well?
>>>>>>>>> > Correct me
>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>> > i am wrong, bu did't they alos go after Pirate Bay?
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Vivec <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > > Wuala seems to be the most secure online backup solution.
>>>>>>>>> > > It stores
>>>>>>>>> > NOTHING
>>>>>>>>> > > in the United States and goes to great lengths to ensure
>>>>>>>>> > > that its staff have no access to any of your files. It's
>>>>>>>>> > > based in
>>>>>> Switzerland.
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > > With CISPA about to pass in the US (we can hope it won't,
>>>>>>>>> > > but so far
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> > > public outrage has been low compared to SOPA and ACTA),
>>>>>>>>> > > this is worth a look. We all need to decide how much we
>>>>>>>>> > > value our personal/business
>>>>>>>>> data,
>>>>>>>>> > > and whether we are ok with employees at these companies
>>>>>>>>> > > being able to browse what we store.
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > > http://youtu.be/43EnCOpXD4Q
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:350398
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to