Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

besson3c · Nov 19, 2005, 02:40 PM

Richard Stallman, the founder of the free/GNU software movement, had a little incident with UN security. Pretty amusing story:

http://perens.sourcelabs.com

Who do you side with?

If you want to tackle the much broader question here: where do our civil liberties begin and end?

besson3c · Nov 19, 2005, 04:53 PM

I know that compared to the other threads here, this thread requires a little more mental effort, so let me lubricate by jumping in with the first response to my own question:

I side with Stallman. I side with civil liberties. I think some spying when necessary via covert means may be okay in the name of security, but I object to a policy that just slaps an RFID tag on everybody and assumes that everybody has some potential to be a danger.

I wish there was a way for laws to be more sensible and based on common sense rather than a sweeping policy that must be applied to everybody. What I mean is, I wish there was a way to say "okay, Richard Stallman *probably* isn't going to show up with bombs attached to him" based on common sense, and cut him a little slack.

I'm not even talking about racial profiling here, just common sense. I wish there was a way to enforce rules based on common sense that was completely fair and just. Just thinking outloud here, and babbling, I guess...

Does anybody think that Stallman acted like a jerk in his non-compliance?

ghporter · Nov 19, 2005, 05:00 PM

In most locales and most situations, I agree with Richard 100%. There is no reson for anyone to know where I am at any particular time of any particular day, whether I'm at school, at the store, or on the highway. However, we're not talking about somebody walking around in the local grocery or driving from point to point; we're talking about the UN here. And in that case, there is a flip side to knowing where everyone is: you know where the people who have to be protected and/or evacuated are, so you can do that more effectively...

Kevin · Nov 19, 2005, 05:09 PM

besson shouldn't this really be put in the political forum? Maybe?

ghporter · Nov 19, 2005, 05:14 PM

I don't think it's political...not yet anyway. It's about technology: RFID. And it's about how that technology is used or misused.

andreas_g4 · Nov 19, 2005, 05:19 PM

Sounds like an interesting read, but the website looks like that to me…

http://axiom.gmxhome.de/wtf.png

besson3c · Nov 19, 2005, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

besson shouldn't this really be put in the political forum? Maybe?

It seems on the border.

Why does everybody love to classify other people's threads like this? Seems so petty to me. No offense Kevin, you are one of many.

besson3c · Nov 19, 2005, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

In most locales and most situations, I agree with Richard 100%. There is no reson for anyone to know where I am at any particular time of any particular day, whether I'm at school, at the store, or on the highway. However, we're not talking about somebody walking around in the local grocery or driving from point to point; we're talking about the UN here. And in that case, there is a flip side to knowing where everyone is: you know where the people who have to be protected and/or evacuated are, so you can do that more effectively...

Maybe Stallman thought it sets a precedent? I mean, in the name of security it would be nice if every event was controlled this way: sporting events, political conventions, or pretty much any event where there is a large or influential and powerful population present. Where is the line drawn?

I don't know, I ask the questions, I don't answer them... =)

Kevin · Nov 19, 2005, 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

It seems on the border.

I agree, that is why I said "maybe" But USUALLY these do turn into hateful political rants.

Why does everybody love to classify other people's threads like this?

Some people stay out of the PL for a reason. They don't want to deal with the hatefulness that goes on in there in this part of the forum.

Seems so petty to me. No offense Kevin, you are one of many.

Pettiness is the reason the PL was made in the first place. Too many anti-Bush zealots making petty posts about every damn thing the man did. So they moved those posts out of here.

It got to the point where anything political being spoke of, turned into a anti-Bush zealot rant. Or any reason to put blame etc.

That is why Political based and religious based "rants" or posts go into the PL.

Rolling Bones · Nov 19, 2005, 06:04 PM

Tinfoil hats are political?

By the way what tinfoil hats are the best? I would assume they really mean aluminum or must they be tin? And do they have to be hand made? Can you buy ready made ones that are guaranteed?

Inquiring minds need to know.

Kevin · Nov 19, 2005, 06:06 PM

I once had a Snoopy Red Baron hat when I was 5.

It was aqua colored, and had a cool google face mask.

Chicks dug it.

besson3c · Nov 19, 2005, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

Pettiness is the reason the PL was made in the first place. Too many anti-Bush zealots making petty posts about every damn thing the man did. So they moved those posts out of here.

It got to the point where anything political being spoke of, turned into a anti-Bush zealot rant. Or any reason to put blame etc.

That is why Political based and religious based "rants" or posts go into the PL.

Wow... that is some pretty mind-numbing spin you put on this. The political lounge was made because the Left is just out-of-control, and the Right conducts in nothing but civil discourse.

It would be so much easier if we all agreed with the Right. Perhaps the ideal would be if we all agreed with you, but one step at a time, eh?

Kevin · Nov 19, 2005, 06:15 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Wow... that is some pretty mind-numbing spin you put on this. The political lounge was made because the Left is just out-of-control, and the Right conducts in nothing but civil discourse.

Wow talk about spin.

Not once did I mention that the Right conducted itself in a civil discourse.

There has ALWAYS been political discussion in here.

The PL was made because of the AMOUNT OF POLITICAL posts that was littering the lounge.

The MAJORITY of these posts were started by the anti-Bush zealots.

They were persistent and jaded. Kept posting thread after thread after thread about how they hated Bush, and how evil he was. The PL's debut, and Bush's election happened around the same time.

Both sides were no angels. I never claimed either side was. But it wasn't the Right starting the redundant threads that caused the PL to be created.

It would be so much easier if we all agreed with the Right. Perhaps the ideal would be if we all agreed with you, but one step at a time, eh?

You took what I said, and spun it besson.

You're not fun anymore.

besson3c · Nov 19, 2005, 06:20 PM

I'm sorry for not knowing the history of the PL's creation. I wasn't paying attention around then. Therefore, I cannot argue whether there is bias in your observation that most hateful posts were created by the Left.

Just so you know though, I wasn't trying to intentionally spin your post. It just sounded like you were placing the blame on the Left just because you disagreed with what they are saying.

This seems like a very common occurrence around here, on both political sides.

Kevin · Nov 19, 2005, 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

I'm sorry for not knowing the history of the PL's creation. I wasn't paying attention around then. Therefore, I cannot argue whether there is bias in your observation that most hateful posts were created by the Left.

I never said the most hateful posts were created by any certain group. Why do you always read into things that simply are not there? I said they created the MOST political threads. More than usual. So much so people started complaining.

Just so you know though, I wasn't trying to intentionally spin your post. It just sounded like you were placing the blame on the Left just because you disagreed with what they are saying.

This seems like a very common occurrence around here, on both political sides.

Oh no problem then.

Both sides argued just as much as the other during this time. Both sides acted the same way. It's just the bush haters were flooding the forums with anti-Bush and religious threads to the extent it was ruining it for the people that didn't wish to participate or deal with such silliness.

It then poured out into the rest of the threads not about politics. It was just annoying.

gradient · Nov 19, 2005, 06:36 PM

I side with Stallman 100%.

Maybe there should be a new forum created for threads that go so far off-topic that they are completely unclassifiable.

gradient · Nov 19, 2005, 06:40 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

This seems like a very common occurrence around here, on both political sides.

[RANT]On a compeletely political sidenote..... I find it terribly amusing and altogether disconcerting how the general spin in the United States is that there are only two political sides. It's a shame because neither side can be said to truly reprepresent the interests of the people.[/RANT]

besson3c · Nov 19, 2005, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

I never said the most hateful posts were created by any certain group. Why do you always read into things that simply are not there? I said they created the MOST political threads. More than usual. So much so people started complaining.

Oh no problem then.

Both sides argued just as much as the other during this time. Both sides acted the same way. It's just the bush haters were flooding the forums with anti-Bush and religious threads to the extent it was ruining it for the people that didn't wish to participate or deal with such silliness.

It then poured out into the rest of the threads not about politics. It was just annoying.

This sounds like a great MacNN blooper!