Sdrawkcab

Norway is pretty damn great, see: OK it's a Micheal Moore clip, so you have to take some of what he says with a pinch of salt. Still, shows how much better it could be if you had a government who actually acts in the interests of the people.

We really aren't, not even close. List of countries by Human Development Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The UN ranks all countries on a Human Development Index based on several different factors which all affect quality of life. According to them, we are 26th on that list. Spend 5 minutes researching social welfare in places like Sweden and Denmark and you'll see how awful ours is by comparison. If we don't do something soon, we're going to end up like the USA.

Amen to that.

Mate that is a channel 5 show which has been designed to cause controversy and hype in order to boost ratings. They're just trying to make a quick buck off the back of this news "story". It's like getting your opinions about people who live in Essex by watching TOWIE. Sorry, I was being pretty hyperbolic here. It was just the way you said "far far too many" which irked me somewhat. This is something I have a problem with too. If you want people to work, you should pay them a fair wage for the time they worked. Anything less (like our current Workfair scheme) is basically slave labour and should be illegal. If you want to attack the benefits system, here's a major problem with it: It takes 6 weeks to process a benefits application. This means that most people on benefits are unwilling to take on temp jobs, since they could actually end up being worse off due of the amount of time they'd have to wait to get back on benefits after the temp contract is finished. According to this, at least half the jobs created since 2010 have been temporary (I'm actually pretty sure that over the last year the figure is actually higher than that, but I couldn't find any articles to back that claim up in the short time I wrote this post). The fact is, there just aren't enough permanent jobs for people at the moment. If we're going to continue down this trend of employing temps over creating permanent positions, we need to change our benefits system to make taking temporary jobs a viable option for people on benefits.

Would you rather they sleep on the street?

BRING BACK WORKHOUSES! That'll teach those uppity poors who's boss!

Because you haven't provided any. Practically everyone on here arguing against me has just said "They definitely do exist, you see them in the street all the time! There's a family over the road from me who live in a council house, I looked in their window and they had a MASSIVE TV and they all had iPads! Disgusting!" "Events I have witnessed first hand" is the definition of anecdotal evidence, and you don't win arguments with anecdotes. In your day to day life, you may have seen more of these people than most. However if you actually look at the numbers, they are a miniscule minority.

Once again this is anecdotal evidence. You are literally making a snap judgement based on how these people look. This is classism at its absolute worst, and you don't even seem to know you're doing it.

Once it goes into the pot it's not yours any more though, is it? That being said, it's not wrong to get angry about how it's being spent. In this situation, though, your anger is misguided. Benefits are the smallest of our problems, but they're made out to be the biggest because it makes a gripping news story that effectively sells papers. If you want to get angry about mis-appropriation of the tax system, get angry about things like the Vodafone tax bill (or lack of it).

Nobody actually looks at figures when they discuss this, they just reference anecdotal evidence. Look at the facts rather than spouting hyperbole please. If you read this article, you will see that the vast majority of our benefits actually go to working families, with a tiny tiny proportion going to long-term unemployed people. You are making a snap judgement based on the appearance of these people. Many of them probably do have jobs. Besides which, it's not your money. You have absolutely no right to tell them how to spend it.

No you don't. These "state reared benefits scroungers" you're all so obsessed with don't actually exist. Where do you see them? Or are you just making a snap judgement based on someones appearance? (answer: almost certainly yes) Honestly, not accepting state help isn't really a commendable action. We have some of the worst social safety nets in europe, but they still exist to help you. Choosing not to use them is foolish in the extreme, in my opinion. Edit: Especially if you're choosing not to use them because of some misguided sense of morality.

You seem to be the exception rather than the rule here. I'm not trying to say that either side is wrong, but in my experience having your own children seems to rapidly change your opinion on things like censorship and other personal liberty issues.

After reading this thread I'd be interested to know which of you have children and which don't. My guess is that the majority of those arguing against censorship don't.

That's pretty much a given, isn't it? It's always easier to let someone make your decisions for you, after all. Most people wouldn't even be aware that they were letting it happen.

When did it become OK for parents to not take responsibility for their children and instead pass the blame onto other organizations? It seems like this culture of "it's not my fault, shouldn't be allowed" has only really been around for the last few years.

I don't know about you guys, but when I have kids they aren't getting a mobile phone or a facebook account until they are at least 16.

Take responsibility for your own children instead of expecting corporations to do it for you. People are too quick to point the finger at others rather than thinking about their own responsibilities. If you don't want your children seeing this stuff on facebook, don't let them have a facebook.

Welcome To Night Vale is very very very good and nothing like a "traditional" podcast. It's supposed to be a community radio show that is broadcast in the fictional town of Night Vale, which is basically permanently in an episode of the Twilight Zone. I can't reccomend it enough - stick it on when you're driving at night and you'll see what I mean.

Really? Imgur is a cesspit too, imo. Especially when it comes to gender equality/sexism, imgur is a horrific mysoginist hole. I used to read Reddit a lot too, until I realised it was utterly utterly utterly terrible. The Karma system is supposed to encourage discussion and discourse, but actually encourages a groupthink/hivemind behaviour where any dissenting opinion is quickly downvoted into oblivion regardless of the quality of the comment. That being said, some of the specialist music subreddits are alright (like /r/breakcore or /r/postrock) but I would stay way way clear of the rest of the site. Why would you want to be a part of a site with awful forums like /r/beatingwomen and /r/jailbait? Oh yeah, and as with all aggregation/news websites, stay the hell out of the comments. Idiot SJWs and MRAs abound, and wading through their stupidity is just not worth your time.

Here is Dread Pirate Roberts' LinkedIn if you're interested. Also the authorities almost certainly already know about the Hidden Wiki, it's been around for years. When I visited it, it only linked to questionable websites but didn't actually contain any illegal content itself (as far as I saw, I didn't exactly spend a long time clicking around). Has that changed now or something? This would not work for TOR hidden services, as your connection would come from a new address each time it accesses the site. There's no really easy way to link an individual user on a website to a physical machine using "normal" connection information, since TOR purposefully obfuscates it. To identify individual people you have to do things like use Firefox exploits to trick the user into revealing their non-TOR IP address (as the FBI did recently after taking down freedom hosting).

It was really really well designed. The site admin just made the mistake of asking bitcointalk.com for help with designing a website which sounded suspiciously like SR using an account which was registered to his personal gmail address (literally [email protected]). As with all things on the internet like this, the weak link in the security chain was the human at the top.

Unfortuantely they can't do this, as they shouldn't have any of their customer addresses anywhere. SR let vendors view the address of the buyer once, after which time it was deleted from their servers forever. The idea was that the vendor would only click "show me the address" when they had everything packaged up, write the address on the package, and then close the window so that no record was kept. Obviously there's no guarantee that they did this, of course, but as your success as a vendor on SR largely depended on your reputation rating, it would be in their interest to follow the rules as closely as possible.

Hidden Wiki? As far as I know, Anonymous actually have a campaign where they constantly edit the Hidden Wiki so that all the links to CP boards redirect to the FBI website. But yeah, there's some pretty awful stuff on TOR. Same as pretty much any other "anonymous" network though, and it doesn't mean we should do away with them altogether. My understanding, by the way, is that one does not go looking for .onion websites. If you need to access one, you will know the URL already. That's kind of the point of them. It was like Ebay/Amazon but for drug trafficking pretty much. I saw a few rootkits/0-days for sale there early on but that was about it. Prostution/human trafficking wasn't allowed on there, nor was the sale of guns or CP. In fact, it was suprisingly strict about the sort of illegal content that was allowed for sale, pretty much limiting it to drugs and fake ID only. I never bought anything from there and I'm glad I didn't, since even people who only bought legal stuff from there have been busted by the FBI in the time since the site went down. After hearing about it back in 2011, I ended up doing a lot of research into how it worked because I couldn't believe people were able to so brazenly violate the law. It was really a very clever implementation of TOR/bitcoin, which I guess is why it was able to operate so successfully for so long. The reputation system for vendors was actually really effective at keeping scammers out of the site, and the login system used two-factor authentication to stop people from setting up fake SR websites to steal accounts. I don't think it was quite as big as the media likes to make out, though - there were around 150,000 users total in the end. Edit: For some good ol' schadenfreude, the SR forums are still up on the .onion address they were using before the marketplace went down. If you take a look at them, you can see terrified vendors making posts like this:

I read this this morning on Reddit and it's got me thinking a bit more about this case. If what he's saying about AES-256 in the post I linked is true (and from my understanding of encryption, it is), then the whole edward-snowden-prism-wikileaks-miranda thing is being blown WAY out of proportion in true Guardian style. This then leads to heavy handed responses from the gov/police because they feel they can't be seen to be weak in the public eye, even though they may be well aware of what the actual situation is. Honestly, I am a filthy lefty and so normally like reading the guardian. Stuff like this makes me despair though, it's just Daily Mail quality journalism spun from the left rather than the right.

Is this really the situation now? Ahahahaha. When I was in Goonswarm we were famous for having no money and no resources, but winning wars anyway simply due to having loads of members. We didn't even have our own capital fleet for a long time. When did that change?!