Microsoft has bought Mojang, the creator of Minecraft for $2.5Billion

Sporky McForkinspoon · Nov 25, 2014

Foxi4 said:
guarantees that the Congress will not restrict what you can and cannot say - any other institution can and will. For instance, if you start using racial slurs in a restaurant, you will be kicked out of said restaurant and this is not a limitation of your freedom of speech, this is the owner of the restaurant laying down the law in his establishment. In addition, nobody restricts your freedom of expression - to the contrary, you can freely express whatever you want, including things that are incriminating you. As for the fourth, no surveillance does not a search make and no seizure takes place, so you have no point. You could argue that this violates your right for privacy, but the constitution? Nah.

You have evidently not studied much constitutional law. Wiretapping a phone constitutes a search, and requires a warrant. In theory, so does surveillance of internet activity. Even if that were not the case Roe v. Wade determined that the Constitution does grant a right to privacy. While the First Amendment does not at first glance appear to be directly related to surveillance, in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission the Supreme Court determined that anonymous speech is protected, the NSA violates that right by making it effectively impossible to speak truly anonymously on the internet.

Foxi4 · Nov 25, 2014

Sporky McForkinspoon said:
You have evidently not studied much constitutional law. Wiretapping a phone constitutes a search, and requires a warrant. In theory, so does surveillance of internet activity. Even if that were not the case Roe v. Wade determined that the Constitution does grant a right to privacy. While the First Amendment does not at first glance appear to be directly related to surveillance, in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission the Supreme Court determined that anonymous speech is protected, the NSA violates that right by making it effectively impossible to speak truly anonymously on the internet.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion. Decided simultaneously with a companion case, Doe v. Bolton, the Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that this right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests in regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting women's health.

On September 11, 2014 federal judge Black struck down Ohio’s campaign truth, issuing a decision that disallows government unfit to decide about truth in political advertising on the basis of the First Amendment's right to free speech. Such interference would according to Black's ruling remove the power to decide about truth and credibility of advertisements from the voters in favor of the government with no sufficient safeguards against political abuse.

Fifteen years later, the Supreme Court distinguished the McIntyre rule in Doe v. Reed, 130 S. Ct. 2811 (2010). In Doe, they held that the disclosure of signatures on a referendum does not violate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

It would be wise to double-check the cases you quote before saying something that's easily countered by, y'know, checking the facts. First you're quoting a case that doesn't have anything to do with the ammendment you're refering to, then you're quoting a case that has nothing to do with surveilance and in fact established a precedence where disclosing signatures, thus violating "anonymity" is actually fine.

You also maintain that wiretapping a phone is equivalent to checking internet traffic, which it is not - it's two different technologies. Chances are that in both a warrant is required for an in-depth search, but that's a per-case scenario that often doesn't apply to monitoring in order to establish where a certain file on the web originates from. If you leave a corpse in the street and there's a trail of blood leading to your house, there's reasonable suspicion that the corpse came from your house and you're likely to hear the police knocking on your door. With a battering ram.

That, and this is all besides the point anyways since this is a thread about Minecraft, so you might as well start talking about Minecraft.

Sporky McForkinspoon · Nov 25, 2014

Have you actually read the actual wording of the opinions for either of those cases?

[quote="Roe v. Wade" said:
... [The] right of privacy... is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade#Right_to_privacy

And McIntyre does protect anonymous speech. The section you quote says that when you sign your name to a petition, that is not private, because you chose to be anonymous. That is hardly the same thing as saying that no anonymous speech is protected. Cherry picking a single sentence from Wikipedia isn't very good fact checking.

war2thegrave · Nov 25, 2014

Sporky McForkinspoon said:
So your point is that I'm right that the government is illegally wiretapping every US citizen, which therefore means I'm crazy for thinking the government is spying on me?

Everything about the program is completely legal. Free and clear.

You may think of data that you create being "yours" and that is true,
but once the data is transferred from your custody, the data becomes the
property of any private entity that handles it.

Most EULA's cover this

The government can not legally tap your computer without a warrant,
but there's nothing stopping private entities from selling data that they
own to the government.

Sporky McForkinspoon · Nov 25, 2014

The two of you have said repeatedly that a warrant isn't required for anything on the internet. That is simply not true.

Cornell University Legal Information Institute said:
Because of their similarity to searches and seizures, the Fourth Amendment Warrant Clause applies to electronic surveillance as well. Obtaining a warrant for electronic surveillance requires showing probable cause, describing in particularity the conversation to be intercepted, providing a specific time period for the interception of the communications device, and noticing the property owner unless law enforcement can show exigent circumstances.

Two general categories of electronic communication surveillance exist. Wire communications refer to the transfer of the human voice from one point to another via use of a wire, cable, or similar device. When law enforcement "taps" a wire, they use some mechanical or electrical device that gives them outside access to the vocal transfer, thus disclosing the contents of the conversation. Electronic communications refer to the transfer of information, data, or sounds from one location to another over a device designed for electronic transmissions. This type of communication includes email or information uploaded from a private computer to the internet.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/electronic_surveillance

Saying things that are blatantly untrue weakens your argument somewhat.

Foxi4 · Nov 25, 2014

Sporky McForkinspoon said:
Have you actually read the actual wording of the opinions for either of those cases?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade#Right_to_privacy

And McIntyre does protect anonymous speech. The section you quote says that when you sign your name to a petition, that is not private, because you chose to be anonymous. That is hardly the same thing as saying that no anonymous speech is protected. Cherry picking a single sentence from Wikipedia isn't very good fact checking.

You can anonymously discuss things in the privacy of your home and I can guarantee that nobody in the NSA has a remote desktop set up to your computer.

You seem to misunderstand what I'm saying when I say that this in no way relates to what you're talking about, so I'll give you a different example. If you take a photo of yourself nude and post it on your fridge, that's fine - it just makes you a weirdo. If you put the same photo on a notice board in town, that's indecent exposure. Treat the Internet in the same way - your computer is your private space - the Internet however is not, it's a public space. Two very different spaces with very different legal constraints.

If you post something illegal on the web, don't be surprised if it's backtraced to you because the file passes through a number of servers before it reaches its destination, leaving a trace of nodes leading directly to your doorstep. The NSA doesn't have to check your computer to know that the file originates from it - they already know that by the time they ask for a warrant to tap you directly, they just don't have physical evidence. They'll only seize the computer as evidence to verify it in court, should a case be held against you. A massive backlog of nodes leading directly to you provided legally by your IPS is probable cause enough.

In other words, they deal with monitoring web activity, not monitoring you specifically, you're not THAT important. They will only go to such extreme lengths if they have enough evidence to suspect you of something. The workforce required to monitor each individual user of the web would be enormous, unimaginable and far beyond the resources of the government.

war2thegrave · Nov 25, 2014

Sporky McForkinspoon said:
The two of you have said repeatedly that a warrant isn't required for anything on the internet. That is simply not true.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/electronic_surveillance

Saying things that are blatantly untrue weakens your argument somewhat.

Once you transmit "your" data to another private entity (such as an ISP), you have
relinquished ownership of the data to the entity and they are free to do whatever they like with it.
(this would be covered in the TOS that you agree to simply by using the service)

Foxi4 · Nov 25, 2014

We should end this off-topic discussion on a somber note - the American law regarding these issues is archaic and crap, it was not created with the digital revolution in mind and it lags behind our civilization by a couple centuries because people keep clinging to the Constitution which has to be re-written to account for groundbreaking inventions such as the Internet, things that changed our perception of reality forever. Our chat is about as prolific as applying laws that used to refer to vinyl records in regards to P2P file distribution - it's just not the same thing and does not translate. The law will not be clear in such instances until it's amended to a point where issues of our day-to-day life don't have to be represented by a 200+ year old document which in no way reflects the current state of matters.

If everyone stated their point, we should head back to the discussion at hand, which is Minecraft.

Sporky McForkinspoon · Nov 25, 2014

war2thegrave said:
Once you transmit "your" data to another private entity (such as an ISP), you have
relinquished ownership of the data to the entity and they are free to do whatever they like with it.
(this would be covered in the TOS that you agree to simply by using the service)

That is not the case. When you speak on a phone, or send an email, have a conversation on Skype, or even send a physical letter (in that case, literally giving your letter to the government), the courts have consistently ruled that one has a reasonable expectation of privacy. In all such cases a warrant is required, one requiring evidence and a reasonable suspicion that a crime has occurred. The US government is not buying data from Skype and other services, they are being ordered to hand it over or face fines and jail for refusing.

Clydefrosch · Nov 25, 2014

and now? how are they ever going to get those 2.5billion back? ever? i mean... really, how?

Foxi4 · Nov 25, 2014

Clydefrosch said:
and now? how are they ever going to get those 2.5billion back? ever? i mean... really, how?

Sequels, DLC, game sales, merchandise - there's plenty of outlets.

Clydefrosch · Nov 25, 2014

2.5 billion is a lot for a game thats kinda past its hype and already on pretty much 90+% of interested peoples pc/console

Foxi4 · Nov 25, 2014

Clydefrosch said:
2.5 billion is a lot for a game thats kinda past its hype and already on pretty much 90+% of interested peoples pc/console

There's some potential for sequels though, or games that use the same mechanic. For instance, Minecraft hasn't gone into space yet. Imagine if Minecraft 2 allowed you to build rockets and fly to other, completely different worlds aside from your own and the ones you can reach through portals. There's also no vehicles aside from the minecart and machinery is rather simplistic (although some things people build defy common sense, to be fair), you could build expansions specifically tackling vehicles. Honestly, in a game like Minecraft there's infinite potential for expansion since it's really just lego blocks in digital form and you can go in any direction with this.

Guild McCommunist · Nov 25, 2014

Arras said:
I know this is an ancient post, but... try updating Skype now.

Skype hasn't updated for me in a while.

(I've also been using the Windows 8 app).

Arras · Nov 25, 2014

Guild McCommunist said:
Skype hasn't updated for me in a while.

(I've also been using the Windows 8 app).

Ah. Desktop skype got an update that basically turns it into mobile skype, complete with chat bubbles. That wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that the bubbles take up three times as much space as the old method of just putting text in a column, which means tons of wasted screen space.

Guild McCommunist · Nov 25, 2014

Arras said:
Ah. Desktop skype got an update that basically turns it into mobile skype, complete with chat bubbles. That wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that the bubbles take up three times as much space as the old method of just putting text in a column, which means tons of wasted screen space.

Gahars said that it got pretty shit, Windows 8 Skype isn't bad though, it just doesn't update quickly.

The Catboy · Nov 25, 2014

Guild McCommunist said:
Gahars said that it got pretty shit, Windows 8 Skype isn't bad though, it just doesn't update quickly.

And Linux Skype, all the single update!

Hells Malice · Nov 26, 2014

Foxi4 said:
There's some potential for sequels though, or games that use the same mechanic. For instance, Minecraft hasn't gone into space yet. Imagine if Minecraft 2 allowed you to build rockets and fly to other, completely different worlds aside from your own and the ones you can reach through portals. There's also no vehicles aside from the minecart and machinery is rather simplistic (although some things people build defy common sense, to be fair), you could build expansions specifically tackling vehicles. Honestly, in a game like Minecraft there's infinite potential for expansion since it's really just lego blocks in digital form and you can go in any direction with this.

Mods do that and much more already. There isn't much room for expansion unless mod support is removed and they kill off 90% of the fanbase in doing so.

grossaffe · Nov 27, 2014

Sporky McForkinspoon said:
That is not the case. When you speak on a phone, or send an email, have a conversation on Skype, or even send a physical letter (in that case, literally giving your letter to the government), the courts have consistently ruled that one has a reasonable expectation of privacy. In all such cases a warrant is required, one requiring evidence and a reasonable suspicion that a crime has occurred. The US government is not buying data from Skype and other services, they are being ordered to hand it over or face fines and jail for refusing.

It's actually "Probable Cause" rather than "Reasonable Suspicion". It's a higher burden placed on the state before they can acquire a warrant for a search.

Microsoft has bought Mojang, the creator of Minecraft for $2.5Billion

Well-Known Member

Endless Trash

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Endless Trash

Well-Known Member

Endless Trash

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Endless Trash

Well-Known Member

Endless Trash

(not on boat)

Well-Known Member

(not on boat)

GBAtemp Official Catboy™: Boywife

Are you a bully?

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum