Coffeehouse Thread

11 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

George Orwell, Meet 2006

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    phreaks

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12734870/

    Just another example of our liberties and privacy corroding away into a lost memory of unspoken forgotteness.

    Let's not forget the video cameras on every corner, unauthorized CORI checks for prom dates, teh FBI's 'Carnivore' system, etc.



    In other news, Germany and France have a go at rewritting the History of WW II.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2163885,00.html

    http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1993865,00.html

  • User profile image
    Manip

    The UK has had cameras on every corner now for about three years... And do you know who monitors them? ... Nobody...

    Here is a question ... If you are walking down the street you are, by definition, out in public, correct? ... Thus if you're out in public anything you do can not be considered "private" anyway? Right? Thus how do cameras that film public areas infringe on your privacy?


  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    H4L0PR1CK wrote:


    I can't really see why they need to do that, they could just subponea the phone companies into handing over telephone bills, like they do over here.

    H4L0PR1CK wrote:

    Let's not forget the video cameras on every corner


    Aparently the UK has more CCTV cameras per sq. mile than any other place on earth. But we're fine with that since the cameras aren't linked together.

  • User profile image
    phreaks

    Manip wrote:
    The UK has had cameras on every corner now for about three years... And do you know who monitors them? ... Nobody...

    Here is a question ... If you are walking down the street you are, by definition, out in public, correct? ... Thus if you're out in public anything you do can not be considered "private" anyway? Right? Thus how do cameras that film public areas infringe on your privacy?


    In America there is legistlation being stipulated that would focus camera's on people entranceways to their homes, offices and businesses (stores,bars,restaraunts), effectively giving the governement an over-intrusive ability to track where anyone has been over their entire history when used with some sort of identifying software such as facial recognition.

    Either way, it's a bad idea, at least here.

    As Ben Franklin said, "“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

    And of course my favorite founding father, Jefferson:
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."

    and

    "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

  • User profile image
    Massif

    H4L0PR1CK wrote:
    In other news, Germany and France have a go at rewritting the History of WW II.
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2163885,00.html
    http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1993865,00.html


    Sorry, where did it say that? The article I read was that France and Germany had written a history book.

    Apparantly it is pro-Europe and doesn't pretend the light shines out of America's (I need to watch my language). Gasp! French are pro-Europe! Don't trust Americans! Shock horror!

    So... What's your point again?Oh, and the book is History - post WW2.

  • User profile image
    Ang3lFir3

    totally agree with H4L0PR1CK on this one... even though the Brits are already living with CCTV and its fine with them.... remember this is America.... we like to overdo things and push the boundaries of ethical behavior at every possible turn (breaking ethical behavior seems to be even more fun for our government).....

    MSNBC ARTICLE wrote:

    .... but that the program “does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations.”

    Yeah.. thaz a totally different program that has been going on for even longer.

  • User profile image
    phreaks

    Massif wrote:
    
    H4L0PR1CK wrote: In other news, Germany and France have a go at rewritting the History of WW II.
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2163885,00.html
    http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1993865,00.html


    Sorry, where did it say that? The article I read was that France and Germany had written a history book.

    Apparantly it is pro-Europe and doesn't pretend the light shines out of America's (I need to watch my language). Gasp! French are pro-Europe! Don't trust Americans! Shock horror!

    So... What's your point again?Oh, and the book is History - post WW2.


    Right, that is what they mean when they say, "The big lesson is that nothing is written in stone," said French Education Minister Gilles de Robien. "The antagonisms which we thought had been carved into marble are not eternal, and it's possible to write new pages in the books of the peoples." 

    In other words, don't like it, jus rewrite it.

    Also, "The Franco-German textbook, which is published today, was ordered in 2003 by President Chirac of France and Gerhard Schröder, then the German Chancellor. They wanted to strengthen ties by eliminating differences in the perception of history"

    By eliminating 'differences' one side had to change it's history since they were not in harmony with each others representations.

  • User profile image
    IRenderable

    H4L0PR1CK wrote:
    Massif wrote:
    H4L0PR1CK wrote: In other news, Germany and France have a go at rewritting the History of WW II.
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2163885,00.html
    http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1993865,00.html


    Sorry, where did it say that? The article I read was that France and Germany had written a history book.

    Apparantly it is pro-Europe and doesn't pretend the light shines out of America's (I need to watch my language). Gasp! French are pro-Europe! Don't trust Americans! Shock horror!

    So... What's your point again?Oh, and the book is History - post WW2.


    Right, that is what they mean when they say, "The big lesson is that nothing is written in stone," said French Education Minister Gilles de Robien. "The antagonisms which we thought had been carved into marble are not eternal, and it's possible to write new pages in the books of the peoples." 

    In other words, don't like it, jus rewrite it.

    Also, "The Franco-German textbook, which is published today, was ordered in 2003 by President Chirac of France and Gerhard Schröder, then the German Chancellor. They wanted to strengthen ties by eliminating differences in the perception of history"

    By eliminating 'differences' one side had to change it's history since they were not in harmony with each others representations.


    And our history books leave things out too to make the founding fathers look better as well as many other things.

  • User profile image
    phreaks

    IRenderable wrote:
    
    H4L0PR1CK wrote:
    Massif wrote:
    H4L0PR1CK wrote: In other news, Germany and France have a go at rewritting the History of WW II.
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2163885,00.html
    http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1993865,00.html


    Sorry, where did it say that? The article I read was that France and Germany had written a history book.

    Apparantly it is pro-Europe and doesn't pretend the light shines out of America's (I need to watch my language). Gasp! French are pro-Europe! Don't trust Americans! Shock horror!

    So... What's your point again?Oh, and the book is History - post WW2.


    Right, that is what they mean when they say, "The big lesson is that nothing is written in stone," said French Education Minister Gilles de Robien. "The antagonisms which we thought had been carved into marble are not eternal, and it's possible to write new pages in the books of the peoples." 

    In other words, don't like it, jus rewrite it.

    Also, "The Franco-German textbook, which is published today, was ordered in 2003 by President Chirac of France and Gerhard Schröder, then the German Chancellor. They wanted to strengthen ties by eliminating differences in the perception of history"

    By eliminating 'differences' one side had to change it's history since they were not in harmony with each others representations.


    And our history books leave things out too to make the founding fathers look better as well as many other things.


    1) such as...(that's a pretty broad statement to make with no context)?
    2) There is a difference between omissions and rewritting. BTW when was the last time our understanding of the history of any given conflict was 'perspectively changed' under the direction of our government?
    3)Either way I don't really care I guess, well I do to an extent, but nothing to lose sleep over; I just find it amazing that people can change history if they don't like it.

    I have always thought of history as a factual snapshot of an event / timeline, not something that is (mostly) left to interpretation that can be 'updated' with social trends.

    I agree that all history books shine a slanted pro-(Insert you nation here) light on the facts, but a 'compromise'? I dunno, just seems odd to me.

    EDIT:
    The US books are slanted against the Native Americans, but they always have been and everyone knows the truth, there is no coverup conspiracy, which is what I am concluding is the intent of this effort by France and Germany, or am I just being too much of a stickler?

  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

    H4L0PR1CK wrote:
    
    Manip wrote: The UK has had cameras on every corner now for about three years... And do you know who monitors them? ... Nobody...

    Here is a question ... If you are walking down the street you are, by definition, out in public, correct? ... Thus if you're out in public anything you do can not be considered "private" anyway? Right? Thus how do cameras that film public areas infringe on your privacy?


    In America there is legistlation being stipulated that would focus camera's on people entranceways to their homes,

    You'll have to provide examples of this.  I've never heard of it and I'm willing to bet that in these cases, the 'homes' were above a business.
    H4L0PR1CK wrote:
    
    offices and businesses (stores,bars,restaraunts),

    All of which are public places.  Would you complain if they posted police officers?  Or perhaps undercover monitors?  It's not like they peer in through your bedroom window at night to catch you flogging the bishop Smiley
    H4L0PR1CK wrote:
    
    effectively giving the governement an over-intrusive ability to track where anyone has been over their entire history when used with some sort of identifying software such as facial recognition.

    You have to right to privacy in the public sector.  In fact, which law grants any of us the right to privacy?  Don't get me wrong, I wish there was one, but even so, public places would not be protected, by definition.
    H4L0PR1CK wrote:
    
    Either way, it's a bad idea, at least here.

    As Ben Franklin said, "<yada, yada, yada>"


    Great quotes, and they come up quite often given that we have so many manufactured 'boogeymen' to worry about that our freedoms are questioned in response.

    If you scream "the sky is falling" every time some 3rd world dicator tries to obtain uranium, all the little scaredy cats come up with new ways make themselves feel safe.  Perhaps, since the sky isn't actually falling, the "Foreigners are Evil" scaremongers could SFTU and let cooler minds prevail.

  • User profile image
    Massif

    H4L0PR1CK wrote:
    

    I have always thought of history as a factual snapshot of an event / timeline, not something that is (mostly) left to interpretation that can be 'updated' with social trends.



    Well, you were always wrong I'm afraid - "History is written by the victors." - or words to that effect.

    In fact, I was taught that history was nearly always an interpretation - and as such biased.

    Actually there are three kinds of history if memory serves - documented contemporary evidence (physical records), contemporary reports (i.e. newspapers, they don't simply state facts, they have an opinion)
    and later reports (i.e. history books.)

    And their contents should be trusted in that order.

    But then, I had a pretty good history teacher. It's just a shame I can't remember anything he taught me; beyond where the good pubs were.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.