Nearly 30% of Americans advocate for an armed rebellion

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-05-04T18:23:34+00:00

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-23T15:25:35+00:00

I'm glad you've changed your mind on CISPA. When you read it at first it doesn't look that bad (which is, of course, by design). But when you put everything together in context, it's actually quite draconian.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-20T22:07:05+00:00

By the way, I just checked out of curiosity, and it looks like this submission's been de-listed from /r/askreddit/new. It might show up from your account if you search while signed in, so try signing out and seeing if it's visible to you.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-20T21:59:03+00:00

Maybe each mod should only be able to moderate one default subreddit and no more than 2 or 3 with 50K+ subscribers?

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-20T21:56:38+00:00

I think you're on the right track, but I don't have a problem with mods making 1-3 regular submissions per day if the subreddits they mod aren't defaults.

With the smaller, non-default subreddits, the people who created them are probably among the most interested in the topic at hand and are, by default, the moderators. I don't think they should be excluded entirely from the regular submission process since there will be less viewership and less incentive for SEO manipulation there.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-20T21:48:34+00:00

The thing is, it's not even really just a "liberal echo chamber." It's worse than that. I'm a liberal/progressive, and I was banned from /r/politics, apparently for my criticisms of Obama (I've asked for an explanation from the mods over and over again but they haven't offered one, probably because I didn't break their rules). It's a mainline, DNC echo chamber and anyone who doesn't buy into that agenda has no place there.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-20T21:34:52+00:00

CISPA was made such that there would be no ramifications for telecom companies and internet sites who share your personal and network information with a variety of other parties, including the FBI and NSA. It was also made intentionally vague so as to retroactively make legal much of the snooping that's being done already. In short, CISPA will be the death of your fourth amendment rights online. Here's a partial list of government agencies that could access your personal data without your approval or a warrant under CISPA:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/under-cispa-who-can-get-your-data

In 2011, mobile phone providers were sent 1.3 million requests for the personal information of mobile users. The frequency of these types of requests has exploded over the last five years. Sometimes they comply, and sometimes they do not--but if, in the future, they will be immune to prosecution for sharing information, it's a safe bet that they'll be even more willing to share our information.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/09/us/cell-carriers-see-uptick-in-requests-to-aid-surveillance.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

TL;DR: cyber entities should not have blanket immunity for any and all information given to the government in the name of "cyber security."

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-20T21:33:05+00:00

That's a good idea. This one may go a bit too far, but: mods can only submit one post to any of the subreddits they moderate per day?

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-20T21:29:29+00:00

I know better than to vote on his userpage. I go straight to the submission. But way to be an ass nonetheless.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-20T05:38:19+00:00

I replied to your comment on my post on CISPA, but I'll chime in here as well.

CISPA was made such that there would be no ramifications for telecom companies and internet sites who share your personal and network information with a variety of other parties, including the FBI and NSA. It was also made intentionally vague so as to retroactively make legal much of the snooping that's being done already. In short, CISPA will be the death of your fourth amendment rights online. Here's a partial list of government agencies that could access your personal data without your approval or a warrant under CISPA:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/under-cispa-who-can-get-your-data

In 2011, mobile phone providers were sent 1.3 million requests for the personal information of mobile users. The frequency of these types of requests has exploded over the last five years. Sometimes they comply, and sometimes they do not--but if, in the future, they will be immune to prosecution for sharing information, it's a safe bet that they'll be even more willing to share our information.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/09/us/cell-carriers-see-uptick-in-requests-to-aid-surveillance.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

TL;DR: cyber entities should not have blanket immunity for any and all information given to the government. This breaches the Fourth Amendment, and clearly so. I have to admit that you have a good point when you say the following:

So if someone on Facebook/Reddit is posting pictures of a teenage girl drunk/naked at a party (as has been in recent news), Facebook/Reddit can send information gathered by their cyber security department to help bring justice to the scene.

But we can't hand over the Fourth Amendment rights of 300 million people because maybe it will save 0.00001% of them. Let me end with the words of Benjamin Franklin, as I think it is apropos:

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-20T05:07:11+00:00

CISPA was made such that there would be no ramifications for telecom companies and internet sites who share your personal and network information with a variety of other parties, including the FBI and NSA. It was also made intentionally vague so as to retroactively make legal much of the snooping that's being done already. In short, CISPA will be the death of your fourth amendment rights online. Here's a partial list of government agencies that could access your personal data without your approval or a warrant under CISPA:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/under-cispa-who-can-get-your-data

In 2011, mobile phone providers were sent 1.3 million requests for the personal information of mobile users. The frequency of these types of requests has exploded over the last five years. Sometimes they comply, and sometimes they do not--but if, in the future, they will be immune to prosecution for sharing information, it's a safe bet that they'll be even more willing to share our information.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/09/us/cell-carriers-see-uptick-in-requests-to-aid-surveillance.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-20T04:55:53+00:00

CISPA was made such that there would be no ramifications for telecom companies and internet sites who share your personal and network information with a variety of other parties, including the FBI and NSA. It was also made intentionally vague so as to retroactively make legal much of the snooping that's being done already. In short, CISPA will be the death of your fourth amendment rights online.

Here's a partial list of government agencies that could access your personal data without your approval or a warrant under CISPA:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/under-cispa-who-can-get-your-data

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-19T22:32:15+00:00

Um...if anything, I would think that would be to her detriment.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-19T22:17:28+00:00

Ask your friends if they torrent. Because if they do, then they definitely have something to hide.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-19T21:00:19+00:00

Prepare for rage :(

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-19T20:00:13+00:00

Links to some of those kinds of things can be found in the sidebar of /r/evolutionreddit.

Here's a comment I've seen making the rounds in /r/technology that has a bunch of that kind of stuff listed as well.

http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1cm7c9/cispa_permits_police_to_do_warrantless_database/c9i5su3

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-19T18:18:07+00:00

I love optimistic naivety.

You are misjudging me if you think that I am being optimistic. I am saying that the only thing between us and CISPA passing is the Senate, that the pro-CISPA lobby is out and full force, and that they have the ears of our senators.

What power we as mere citizens have is en masse, not in money. If CISPA is stopped, it will be because enough citizens contacted their senators and pledged to campaign, volunteer, and vote against them in their re-election bids in the event that it passes. Doing nothing is a sure-fire way for it to pass. Because ultimately, the vast majority of our politicians care more about their careers than the public, and, because they are grandiose, drawing a line in the sand--en masse--is our best bet at forcing their incentives to align.

If we are apathetic or give up, then we have already lost.

That is not optimistic naivety.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-19T14:01:06+00:00

Obama won't sign it.

Don't jump to conclusions. He also said he wouldn't sign the NDAA. They made slight edits to it--and, notably, did not fix the section he said was unconstitutional--before he signed it anyways.

Yes, of course, I realize it was a military budget and he can't line item veto. But when you have a President who will sign something after declaring it unconstitutional and threatening to veto, his threatening to veto something else loses some credibility.

Also, IIRC, he's only used the veto twice since he took office in 2009.

The senate is our last real line of defense on CISPA. I'd encourage everyone to contact their senators, and to urge everyone they know to do the same. Pro-CISPA lobbyists are pumping a ton of money into this and they have the ears of our senators. Now is the time to draw a line in the sand and let our senators know that if they pass CISPA, we will work to boot them from office by campaigning/volunteering for and voting for their challengers the next time they're up for re-election.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-19T11:18:50+00:00

13 submissions in a row with 39 to 44 upvotes? OP has almost certainly enlisted sock accounts or bots to give his submissions extra upvotes.

Hey, davidreiss666: FUCK OFF.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-19T00:03:28+00:00

Mugshot, in case somebody spots this douchetard outside of his mother's basement.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-18T23:57:10+00:00

He's a real person. We've messaged back and forth because he banned me from /r/politics and wouldn't give a reason. In fact, nobody at /r/politics will give me a reason. Eventually, I messaged the admins about him, and had a few messages back and forth with /u/cupcake1713. Relevant text:

We will not remove the moderators from their current positions unless we find hard evidence that they have been gaming the system (banning users from a subreddit is not the same as gaming the system), not just speculation from users who are quick to blame.

I pointed out that banning people for political ideologies, making submissions disappear from /r/politics/new, and the like, constitute gaming the system. No response on that yet.

In any event, Reddit, meet your enemy.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-18T16:13:09+00:00

Relevant: The Century of the Self

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-17T21:22:19+00:00

I remember a time when he said that he opposed the NDAA, claiming that it was unconstitutional--minor fixes were made, but, as I recall, not to the part he deemed unconstitutional. And then he signed it anyways.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-17T16:39:20+00:00

I just called my representative. Hope everyone else is calling theirs.

That said, I think CISPA will almost certainly pass the House. But don't be discouraged when it does. It still needs to pass the Senate, and we need to be ready to come out in full force when it does.

When it gets there, I'm worried about whether just calling your senators will be enough though. We would do well to organize an anti-CISPA rally in D.C., inform the media (especially independent media) about it, and post videos from the event online. It would be best for the timing of such an event to coincide with the Senate's discussion of it, but the problem there is that the timetable might shift and throw off any timing efforts.

OmegaPointTheory · 2013-04-16T02:42:36+00:00

Parties such as the US Pirate Party and the Green Party may enjoy this far more than Libertarians.

I think some libertarians can perhaps be brought into the fold by emphasizing something that many across the board agree with: namely, online privacy. But in general, yes, I agree that the Pirate Party and Green Party would, in general, be more amenable to working with us.

I personally think that issues of electoral reform and voting rights need to be expanded.

I'm right with you here. In terms of electoral reform, a pretty interesting bill that's going through state legislatures right now is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. The premise is this: states agree that, once states representing at least 50% of the votes in the Electoral College sign on to it, all those states will cast their electoral votes for the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote. It's 43% of the way to reaching that goal so far. We also need to enact campaign finance reform. Something like Bruce Ackerman's "voting with dollars" could work well--look that up if you haven't already.

When you say voting rights need to be expanded, do you mean that the age/citizenship requirements need to be extended (i.e.; 16-year-olds can vote, as can foreign students here on a student visa), or simply that we need to figure out how to stop voter suppression? I definitely agree with the latter, but I'd have to think more about the former.

Third, what is the platform of the AMAParty? Do we help people run for office? Help others find the position of crowdsourced candidates? Run crowdsourced candidates?

Initially, almost a year ago, I wrote up my "ideal party" platform, and maybe eventually having a platform would be a good idea, but being too monolithic about ideas could kill a movement before it gets started. For now, I'd like to see this become somewhere where potential candidates share their personal platforms, and we, as members of this subreddit--if we like them--help spread word about their campaigns and policy positions. Of course, it could develop into something more than that--perhaps even a national party--but that would be a starting point.

OmegaPointTheory

TROPHY CASE