quote:

ORIGINAL: mixielicous

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You do not get it popeye, if you have no problem with being uncivilized then fine, but just do not claim to be superior to the very people you are torturing.. you are not! That is just the reality of it. It is like justifying adultery because your spouse cheated... I mean we can all come up with excuses for our lack of integrity. My point is own what you do, take responsibility for it... call a spade a spade! Torturing is evil and wrong by my moral compass, and I am not going to give a free pass to torture one person because another person got tortured... it is wrong, plain and simple.

Now people can rationalize their behavior anyway they like, but it still is what it is.. no amount of projection will change what it is.

julia, do you watch the show 24? i know it is fictional, but i feel [LOL] acurately will serve as an example. So in this season, there has been a nuke set off on US soil, the russian consolate at the russian embassay knows where the remaining nukes are. they are asked for civilly, but nothing. then jack [god he is annoying] goes back to the embassay because well, there are three more nukes out there, the russian knows where they are, and is lying about it. and guess what, after cutting a finger off, he fessed up.

now i know this is theoretical, but can you honestly say in the face of 4 nuclear bombs, would your standards for human rights still be so high, or would you let this happen for the greater good of the country? it is something to think about

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250



Mix, "24?" Boy, that guy can ACT, huh? lol
Man, they must have had a "nationwide search" to cast that part!

actually the show irritates me beyond belief [altho i wont deny the talent] but i watch it with the house anyways. i like looking into the future . did you know you dont have to pay attention to the dialouge? the music will let you know whats going on. lol.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mixielicous

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You do not get it popeye, if you have no problem with being uncivilized then fine, but just do not claim to be superior to the very people you are torturing.. you are not! That is just the reality of it. It is like justifying adultery because your spouse cheated... I mean we can all come up with excuses for our lack of integrity. My point is own what you do, take responsibility for it... call a spade a spade! Torturing is evil and wrong by my moral compass, and I am not going to give a free pass to torture one person because another person got tortured... it is wrong, plain and simple.

Now people can rationalize their behavior anyway they like, but it still is what it is.. no amount of projection will change what it is.

julia, do you watch the show 24? i know it is fictional, but i feel [LOL] acurately will serve as an example. So in this season, there has been a nuke set off on US soil, the russian consolate at the russian embassay knows where the remaining nukes are. they are asked for civilly, but nothing. then jack [god he is annoying] goes back to the embassay because well, there are three more nukes out there, the russian knows where they are, and is lying about it. and guess what, after cutting a finger off, he fessed up.

now i know this is theoretical, but can you honestly say in the face of 4 nuclear bombs, would your standards for human rights still be so high, or would you let this happen for the greater good of the country? it is something to think about

quote:


Rubberhose (our rubber-hose proof filing system) addresses most of these
technical issues, but I'd like to just comment on the best strategy
game-theory wise, for the person wielding the rubber-hose.

In Rubberhose the number of encrypted aspects (deniable "virtual"
partitions) defaults to 16 (although is theoretically unlimited). As
soon as you have over 4 pass-phrases, the excuse "I can't recall"
or "there's nothing else there" starts to sound highly plauseable.

Ordinarily best strategy for the rubber-hose wielder is to keep on
beating keys out of (let us say, Alice) indefinitely till there are no
keys left. However, and importantly, in Rubberhose, *Alice* can never
prove that she has handed over the last key. As Alice hands over more
and more keys, her attackers can make observations like "the keys
Alice has divulged correspond to 85% of the bits". However at no point
can her attackers prove that the remaining 15% don't simply pertain to
unallocated space, and at no point can Alice, even if she wants to,
divulge keys to 100% of the bits, in order to bring the un-divulged
portion down to 0%. An obvious point to make here is that
fraction-of-total-data divulged is essentially meaningless, and both
parties know it - the launch code aspect may only take up .01% of the
total bit-space.

What I find interesting, is how this constraint on Alice's behaviour
actually protects her from revealing her own keys, because each party,
at the outset can make the following observations:

Rubber-hose-squad: We will never be able to show that Alice has
revealed the last of her keys. Further, even if
Alice has co-operated fully and has revealed all of
her keys, she will not be able to prove it.
Therefor, we must assume that at every stage that
Alice has kept secret information from us, and
continue to beat her, even though she may have
revealed the last of her keys. But the whole time
we will feel uneasy about this because Alice may
have co-operated fully. Alice will have realised this
though, and so presumably it's going to be very hard
to get keys out of her at all.


Alice: (Having realised the above) I can never prove that I
have revealed the last of my keys. In the end I'm
bound for continued beating, even if I can buy
brief respites by coughing up keys from time to
time. Therefor, it would be foolish to divulge my
most sensitive keys, because (a) I'll be that much
closer to the stage where I have nothing left to
divulge at all (it's interesting to note that this
seemingly illogical, yet entirely valid argument of
Alice's can protect the most sensitive of Alice's
keys the "whole way though", like a form
mathematical induction), and (b) the taste of truly
secret information will only serve to make my
aggressors come to the view that there is even
higher quality information yet to come, re-doubling
their beating efforts to get at it, even if I have
revealed all. Therefor, my best strategy would be
to (a) reveal no keys at all or (b) depending on
the nature of the aggressors, and the psychology of
the situation, very slowly reveal my "duress" and
other low-sensitivity keys.

Alice certainly isn't in for a very nice time of it (although she
she's far more likely to protect her data).

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Dude, Edit. Learn the joy of carriage returns.

Paragraphs are your friend.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Perhaps if you read a little more history and a little less tv you might have a better understanding of why this is going on.
thompson

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights SUPERCEDS the Geneva Conventions.

And they say what the US is doing is Just Wrong.

The Geneva Conventions are obsolete. It was designed to establish the rules of war between two nations and two armies. You rarely see that kind of warfare these days. These days you see a lot of terrorism, insurgents, and guirilla warfare. And these combatants don't give a flying f--- what the Geneva Conventions say. They dress as civilians. They hide behind civilians. They target civilians. But who gets the blame when a civilian is killed in the line of fire? The United States.

 

Wow...that sounds a lot like the american revolution.
thompson

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou

So, I take it all the geneva convention believers, would never take action into their own hands if they were personally wronged. I mean it is the same thing, a set of behaviours that are outlawed against your aggresor.

So, someone hacks your brothers head off with a sword, and laughs. Naw, I'm sure everyone here will treat them respectfully. Feed them 3 squares a day, and treat them fairly. Or someone blows your best friend to pieces. Sure, I'm sure everyone here is going to let him have his koran, and spew forth things like "I'm glad I killed your friend".

LOL, yeah, okay, I mean we all live under the law of the US, as much as the soldiers live under the dictates of the geneva convention.

So, I hope for the sake of hypocrisy, no one admonishing breaking the GC would walk outside the boundaries of imposed law.

It's a good treaty in theory, unfortunately people tend to start doing "uncivilized" things when their buddies legs get blown off.

Do you know what the rule of law is and why it is so important in a civilized society? If you go around taking the law into your own hands then you are no better than a criminal.

quote:

Well, I guess, I'm no better than a criminal then, in your view. Though one difference between me and what I perceive as a criminal, I never instigate an attack, ever

quote:

I personally think most people talk out of their ass though. Am I to believe, a man rapes your um, and you have a gun, you wouldn't blow his head off

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights SUPERCEDS the Geneva Conventions.

And they say what the US is doing is Just Wrong.

The Geneva Conventions are obsolete. It was designed to establish the rules of war between two nations and two armies. You rarely see that kind of warfare these days. These days you see a lot of terrorism, insurgents, and guirilla warfare. And these combatants don't give a flying f--- what the Geneva Conventions say. They dress as civilians. They hide behind civilians. They target civilians. But who gets the blame when a civilian is killed in the line of fire? The United States.

 

Wow...that sounds a lot like the american revolution.
thompson

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

Well, I guess, I'm no better than a criminal then, in your view. Though one difference between me and what I perceive as a criminal, I never instigate an attack, ever

So there is this guy from China that invades the USA, and he is cruising around with weapons in your backyard, has he instigated you to attack him?

quote:

I personally think most people talk out of their ass though. Am I to believe, a man rapes your um, and you have a gun, you wouldn't blow his head off

I will defend my child if someone is attacking him, with a gun if necessary. I will defend my country if it is under attack, but no, I am not going to go hunt someone down and shoot them.. we have a justice system for that. The vast majority of people that have children that are victimized do not take the law into their own hands, why? We live under the rule of law. We are civilized.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mixielicous

as my friend, Colbert puts it, at least if there was a draft, people would finally get off their lazy asses and protest the war! [paraphrased, of course]

where is the outrage to this empire? the violation of civil liberties left and right, the violation of rights, and choice? Where are the people opposed to the facist road this country is taking??


Damn you generation X, you lazy stoned assholes. our parents in their hay day would have never let this happen, but their getting old. Why arent the young kids standing up and protesting?

why is protesting suddenly viewed as useless and ineffective?

i am ashamed of my peers and their laziness.

quote:

Well, the guy with the missiles, LOL, hasn't attacked me, but if he's running around saying he's going to attack me in 24 hours with those missiles, yeah, I'd blow his head off.

Is that wrong? The answer really depends on the context of the missile waving. Better question please, or more clarification needed.

quote:

Well, all I got to say about the question I posed if the guy is in front of me that did that to my UM, and I knew he did it. Well, yeah, he'd be lucky if all I did was kill him quickly. More than likely, it would be torture, then death

quote:

And to address why we are probably never going to see eye to eye on this, is becuase you seem to believe "we" as a country, and "you" as an individual hold the moral high ground(at least you keep repeating it).

quote:

I don't believe that, I believe people are people, for the most part, and react in a predictable manner based on their environment. What does that mean, well, it means I take juliaoceania and plop her in a war zone for 5 years, she's either going to die, quickly, or begin justifying killing for no cause. Because the whole war over there has no cause. And most don't, outside of financial interests.  

quote:

So, we disagree:), I still like you. LOL