I mean this came up several times in court. It's totally legal for him to order these things. It might be illegal for the generals to act on those orders. But then, because the order is legal by virtue of the officeholder issuing it then it's also illegal to refuse a lawful order. Only one set of illegal orders comes with a pardon though.
It's still one's duty to refuse an immoral order. The Allies convicted Nazis on that basis at Nuremberg, and "just following orders" was famously invalidated there.
I don't really get the antagonism with these ersatz concerns. when FB builds its own datacenters, or it's own chips & racks, or it's own algorithms absolutely no one is saying "well there's no profit motive to build a completely custom server chassis" or "oh no, theyre taking publicly available math and making it private"
They do what they've been doing. Get another law passed, that gives them what they want. Thats the best part of having a parliament, you just pass new laws
If the tool provides the switches on the cli, and the cli cannot do the task which is possible not using the cli. Then the cli is broken. That's not a difficult thought to hold in your head.
The tool defines how to use itself. If it requires using a temporary files to bypass shell limitations that it has no control over, then that's how it should be done and not a broken behavior.
"I want to use blue and red on my multicolor pen at the same time and it's not working so clearly the pen is broken might fit in your head but the pen still isn't the problem...
It's never been the case that if you put something into public, then you get to reserve your right to refuse public access. Either it's public and strangers can look at it. Or it's private and you need to implement a gate.
Ah yes, and we're back into "but my buddy told me " if you have to say that then your story just isn't worth saying or hearing and you should reconsider how impervious you are to conspiratorial thinking
The one thing they relied on "my buddy told me" for is actually not really in dispute as they say. Between CALEA, the Snowden leaks, and the earlier stuff (like the beamsplitters in Room 641A), we have known clearly based on a number of public and verifiable sources that the US government has its fingers deeply into the data streams that flow through US companies. This is a reasonable inference even absent all of this information.
Now ... I don't think any of this actually supports the parent comment's implication that Cloudflare took some anti-Venezuela action at the request of the US government, just that your criticism is kinda unfounded.
Is that really what's happening? These ships have been flagged for years now. Other states not infrequently seize them. Often times they're lauded bc it takes unrepaired, leaking ships off of the sea. BC it helps Ukraine.
But Trump does it and now it's piracy? Are you sure you're not just letting your hatred get the better of you?
No one is saying dont fight nazis. We're saying dont do nazi-things and justify it by saying im fighting nazis.
Because when you beat them, you're going to take your new nazi-powers and ideals and use them against non-nazi's. It's only ever worked that way and you convincing yourself youre the exception is the first step.
What "new nazi-powers" do you believe were asserted here?
Do you believe this is the first time that anyone has taken down a website through hacktivism, or that "the nazis" have never done anything of the sort?
What "not nazi-things" specifically do you suggest would be effective for fighting nazis?
You'll probably say "simply debate them on the merits" but that doesn't work.
And it's odd how in this argument the slippery slope is only ever a danger when people fight nazis, and never when people allow nazis to gain power and proliferate.
reply