If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Tech Dirt)   Look, I'm sure there's a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why Rep Mike Rogers, the primary driver for CISPA, neglected to mention the big payday his wife's former cybersecurity defense contracting company stands to receive if the Bill passes   (techdirt.com) divider line 57
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

3589 clicks; posted to Geek » on 18 Apr 2013 at 8:37 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



57 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-19 02:49:03 AM  

Feral_and_Preposterous: You know, Mike Masnick (MM), that when you use an acronym such as CISPA in an article, it is typically seen as proper form to write it out in the first instance, then use the abbreviated form thereafter. I could only remember that it was Cyber Intelligence Sharing and ________ Act. Ah, yes, Protection, I remember that now, but for about 20 seconds I had to pause, thinking, "Is it Proliferation? Promulgation?" (My memory is so full of crappy acronyms that they all just get jumbled up now.)

No, that's not your fault, MM, but consider the following from the Wiki Manual of Style:

an acronym should be written out in full the first time it is used on a page, followed by the abbreviation in parentheses, e.g. Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Common exceptions to this rule are post-nominal initials because writing them out in full would cause clutter. To save space, in "small spaces" (infoboxes, navboxes and tables), acronyms do not need to be written out in full. When not written out in full on the first use on a page, an acronym should be linked.

Thanks MM! POYSEFAJMFFTDWJODAC


Jesus christ dude, do you proofread in your sleep?
 
2013-04-19 05:47:36 AM  

whidbey: Feral_and_Preposterous: You know, Mike Masnick (MM), that when you use an acronym such as CISPA in an article, it is typically seen as proper form to write it out in the first instance, then use the abbreviated form thereafter. I could only remember that it was Cyber Intelligence Sharing and ________ Act. Ah, yes, Protection, I remember that now, but for about 20 seconds I had to pause, thinking, "Is it Proliferation? Promulgation?" (My memory is so full of crappy acronyms that they all just get jumbled up now.)

No, that's not your fault, MM, but consider the following from the Wiki Manual of Style:

an acronym should be written out in full the first time it is used on a page, followed by the abbreviation in parentheses, e.g. Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Common exceptions to this rule are post-nominal initials because writing them out in full would cause clutter. To save space, in "small spaces" (infoboxes, navboxes and tables), acronyms do not need to be written out in full. When not written out in full on the first use on a page, an acronym should be linked.

Thanks MM! POYSEFAJMFFTDWJODAC

Jesus christ dude, do you proofread in your sleep?


I don't think it even needs to sleep.
 
2013-04-19 06:03:04 AM  

TimonC346: I really rarely call my senator or house rep--I live in CA, I'm a lib, so they generally vote on these bills as I'd hoped they would. But this was too important. I actually found myself leaving an awkward message for Feinstein and Boxer.

I like it how the 2nd amendment remains sacred, none of the others seem to be held in nearly as high regard.


I personally find all of the amendments in the Bill of Rights sacred. I hold that removing the protections of one of them will lead to the rest falling. (Well, maybe the 3rd won't right away...) I also think that anyone violating the rights of anyone else should be held accountable, doubly so for those in positions of authority (politicians, police, courts, etc.). I don't think the PATRIOT Act is constitutional, I don't think this abortion of a bill is either. I also think that things should be legal up to the point that it causes physical or financial harm to another person without their consent.  Want to own a fully automatic rifle with a billion round magazine? Sure, go ahead. The second you (or someone takes it from you and) uses it on another person, not in self defense? You get your ass smacked down. Want to yell fire in a crowded theater (when there is no fire)? You just incited a panic, causing physical and financial harm. Jail time for you, buddy. Want to smoke a joint in the comfort of your home? Go right ahead, more power to you. You go out on the road in your car in that condition, screw you. Cop pulls you over and illegally searches your car because he had a 'hunch'? Cop gets fired and gos to prison for a LONG time. Politician sponsors an obviously unconstitutional bill? Removed from office and barred from public service, with some jail time.

The Constitution is the highest law of the country. You want to do something that isn't allowed, go through the amendment process to make it allowable, otherwise, keep your shiat bills to yourself.
 
2013-04-19 08:13:11 AM  

TimonC346: Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion: TimonC346: I really rarely call my senator or house rep--I live in CA, I'm a lib, so they generally vote on these bills as I'd hoped they would. But this was too important. I actually found myself leaving an awkward message for Feinstein and Boxer.

I like it how the 2nd amendment remains sacred, none of the others seem to be held in nearly as high regard.

Doesn't get involved - Surprised when his representatives act like the boss is on vacation

are you farking retarded? I rarely get involved, I DO when it matters--my point is that I wish they'd represent their constituents. Besides--if you read--they usually vote LIKE I WANT THEM TO.

Learn to read. Please. Out of context comments don't work well when my original comment is there


Yeah, I read what you wrote.  I saw that you left an awkward message for two representatives.  That was it.  If you really cared about this bill, you would have called and written ALL of them, MULTIPLE TIMES, not just the ones that "usually vote like you want them to".  Don't blame your apathy on me.  People like you are the reason we have such crappy representation.  You do the bare minimum required of you (if that) and then complain about the results.
 
2013-04-19 08:21:19 AM  
Leave Mike Rogers alone. He's just trying to provide for his family!
 
2013-04-19 10:40:39 AM  

tgambitg: TimonC346: I really rarely call my senator or house rep--I live in CA, I'm a lib, so they generally vote on these bills as I'd hoped they would. But this was too important. I actually found myself leaving an awkward message for Feinstein and Boxer.

I like it how the 2nd amendment remains sacred, none of the others seem to be held in nearly as high regard.

I personally find all of the amendments in the Bill of Rights sacred. I hold that removing the protections of one of them will lead to the rest falling. (Well, maybe the 3rd won't right away...) I also think that anyone violating the rights of anyone else should be held accountable, doubly so for those in positions of authority (politicians, police, courts, etc.). I don't think the PATRIOT Act is constitutional, I don't think this abortion of a bill is either. I also think that things should be legal up to the point that it causes physical or financial harm to another person without their consent.  Want to own a fully automatic rifle with a billion round magazine? Sure, go ahead. The second you (or someone takes it from you and) uses it on another person, not in self defense? You get your ass smacked down. Want to yell fire in a crowded theater (when there is no fire)? You just incited a panic, causing physical and financial harm. Jail time for you, buddy. Want to smoke a joint in the comfort of your home? Go right ahead, more power to you. You go out on the road in your car in that condition, screw you. Cop pulls you over and illegally searches your car because he had a 'hunch'? Cop gets fired and gos to prison for a LONG time. Politician sponsors an obviously unconstitutional bill? Removed from office and barred from public service, with some jail time.

The Constitution is the highest law of the country. You want to do something that isn't allowed, go through the amendment process to make it allowable, otherwise, keep your shiat bills to yourself.


None of the rights outlined in the constitution is beyond limit or regulation. You could not be more wrong. And the Supreme court in Washington DC V Heller acknowledged as much.
 
2013-04-19 03:10:07 PM  
Wow.  Could you stretch a non-story anymore to create hatred for something you must not have actually read.
 
Displayed 7 of 57 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report