"i'm letting you off with a warning"

[Voltage Spike]

You may think the reason you get pulled over is "bullshit", but it is a violation covered under the vehicle code.

Was it really, though? "Soft" regulations that are left entirely to the discretion of the enforcer are an easy avenue of abuse. If Deviant Ollam is "guilty", then how was he to know that before he got in his car?

(Of course, you could always argue that we don't have soft violations, and that there is merely a narrow band of gray where the officer must make a judgement and a citizen can easily avoid such judgements.)

[TheCotMan]

"then where would one opt to discuss politics with the people of this community?"

Heh-heh. I do not have all of the answers, and many of the answers I do have seem to not always be correct, but they are all right! ;-)

a large number of the people who hang out on the internet are retarted asshats.

Yes. Simplified, "most people are asshats."

Many people who are attracted to tech and hacking seem to be the sorts of folks that have strong feelings about many things. Many are also informed about reasons for their opinions. As a result, when they disagree with something, they can often provide examples of how their side is "better" or more often how the other side is "worse."

We have plenty of subjective arguements with respect to hacking. "Best OS?" and "Best Language" are two all-too-common examples.

Issues of police actions by law enforcement is really an issue of law, and in the US, that is part of poitics. Discussions of ethics and morality often dance around issues of religion. I am not saying that we should stop talking law enforcement, ethics or morality, but as these discussions move towards politics ore religion, there are risks.

we are pretty good at self-policing on these forums and that keeps out the people who can't put a sentence together with two hands and a set of instructions in multiple languages. i could go and post in other political forums... but then i would be deprived of responses from my friends here, since i doubt a mass migration to another site would be likely.

This is an interresting thing. A "good" or "bad" (depending on your view) example of politics and hacking is 2600. Techies disinterested with politics (or at least more interested in applied hacking technology than politics) move away from 2600, while people with less skill, but strong political opinions are drawn to "the fire."
As politics took a front seat in 2600, I saw the quality of "hacking" content go get worse. The population of local 2600 meetings also changed.

i've always been of the mindset that all online forums deserve a "hot topics" or "tinderbox" area. if people can't manage to behave themselves during a heated discussion, then whatever forum discipline comes down on them is their own affair...

Such areas are excellent for generating volume (and believe me, I know a lot about generating volume ]:> )
However, such forums also allow asshats to participate more easily.

iit just sweeps discord under the rug and leaves everyone with the vaugely stuffy and uncomfortable air of faux-civility that is common at a work-related party or a church group meeting... where everyone knows the people with whom they agree and disagree, but no one says anything for fear of causing a scene.

Excellent points.

i would love to hear input from anyone else with opinions about the return of the "politics and religion" forum area.

I still view myself as "new" here. My experience with the politics and religion was from lurking through the posts to see what was there. It was "before my time." For such a decision on re-activating it, I would rather go with what the rest of the mods with more experience than me would suggest.

this is possibly going to sound like an overly-harsh blanket statement... but geez, if a discussion in an online forum can get a person's knickers in such a twist that they would be unwilling to socialize in the same vicinity as certain people in real life, then such people are likely to be too tightly wound for an event like defcon. just my $0.02.

Something on your side is an issue of forum population. IMO, the kinds of discussions we have been having seem to be of higher quality than they were. We seem to have a larger population of people that are more mature, and the number of tards per user seems to be smaller.

One of the things that would need to be resolved is this:
DefCon is primarily about hacking. Politics and religion generate much discussion. How do we prevent DefCon from becoming another 2600 where politics or religion start to become more important than hacking?

[Quiet]

Was it really, though? "Soft" regulations that are left entirely to the discretion of the enforcer are an easy avenue of abuse. If Deviant Ollam is "guilty", then how was he to know that before he got in his car?

(Of course, you could always argue that we don't have soft violations, and that there is merely a narrow band of gray where the officer must make a judgement and a citizen can easily avoid such judgements.)

Currently, LEOs have the discretion to enforce either the Letter of the Law or the Spirit of the Law. Your attitude is often a deciding factor on which direction the LEO will go.

[Voltage Spike]

Currently, LEOs have the discretion to enforce either the Letter of the Law or the Spirit of the Law.

I think you missed my point. By "soft" regulation, I mean a regulation that must be enforced through a judgement call. If I steal something, I either took it or I didn't. If I have a bulb on my car, exactly how bright does the bulb have to be before a cop is legally unable to pull me over?

Your attitude is often a deciding factor on which direction the LEO will go.

I hope you aren't referring to my attitude at a personal level.

[Thorn]

yeah, and that's what we in a free society call intrusion upon civil liberties. if i'm not clearly and blatantly doing anything wrong, i don't really care if an officer wants to "just check me out." he can go jump in a lake, because without justifiable probable cause he's not entitled to detain and search me. technically, in the situation you describe, the officer doesn't even have reasonable suspicion to make a brief terry stop... so he or she just pulls a reason out of their ass. it's funny, but a guy once told me this was a free country.

well color me tickled pink that fabrication of evidence is taught at police academies in order to facilitate detaining, questioning, and potentially searching law-abiding citizens whenever the notion strikes an officer to do so. i realize that keeping a watchful eye out for suspicious behavior is part of an officer's routine... but brief and custodial detaining of indivudals shouldn't be done on phony pretense... be up front about reasons and evidence and just do the job within the law, that's my feeling on the matter. i'm not a cop, however, and therefore i'm not speaking from a position of total authority on the subject.

thanks for the advice, but i'll run my life and you run yours. and, as was said above, there's nothing to fix since the whole matter was bogus... a dim bulb? please, i wouldn't even need a public defender to throw that one out of court. it's not worth my time, money, and effort to go to the store, buy a new bulb, take the light housing apart, and replace what is a perfectly functional light... i've got better things to do with my time than fritter with made-up tasks that a cop pulled out of thin air as a pretense to snoop around the vehicle of someone driving late at night.

Vehicle stop techniques based on defective equipment aren't "fabrication of evidence" nor are they a "phony pretense." Such defective equipment stops are very useful for further investigation. They are legal, and have been upheld in multiple courts as valid. The reasoning is that brief intrusion to the freedom of the citizen is held in balance to the requirements of the police to do their jobs in detecting crime. By the way, you might be surprized at the shear number of DWI arrests that are made through broken or burnt out taillights and license plate bulbs.

I think you missed my point. By "soft" regulation, I mean a regulation that must be enforced through a judgement call. If I steal something, I either took it or I didn't. If I have a bulb on my car, exactly how bright does the bulb have to be before a cop is legally unable to pull me over?

Many vehicle regulations are worded to the effect that the "plate must be illuminated to be seen at X feet in darkness".

[sys-error]

This is an interresting thing. A "good" or "bad" (depending on your view) example of politics and hacking is 2600. Techies disinterested with politics (or at least more interested in applied hacking technology than politics) move away from 2600, while people with less skill, but strong political opinions are drawn to "the fire."
As politics took a front seat in 2600, I saw the quality of "hacking" content go get worse. The population of local 2600 meetings also changed.

Speaking of the change in content/quality of 2600, what else is available to those more interested in applied hacking technology, and less in politics? This would be good for me to look into, because I have also thought that the quality and quantity of information sent through 2600 has drastically declined over the years.

This might also be useful for other lurkers to find more information in the genre, without having to put up with the political views of a few.

[TheCotMan]

Speaking of the change in content/quality of 2600, what else is available to those more interested in applied hacking technology, and less in politics? This would be good for me to look into, because I have also thought that the quality and quantity of information sent through 2600 has drastically declined over the years.

This might also be useful for other lurkers to find more information in the genre, without having to put up with the political views of a few.

For such things, I've found mailing lists still seem to be fair. Full Disclosure feels a lot like Bugtraq did 7 years ago. There is discussion, and occasionally flaming, but there is good information on what people have been able to do to make square pegs fit in round holes.

Specialized groups (specific OS like LUGs, MUG, PCUG, etc., and crypto like cipherpunks) seem to me to be great places to see how people are taking existing technology and "hacking" it to do what they want. Another example could be the netstumbler forums-- again specialization. DSL Reports has had a number of wireless and firmware hackers as members discussing changes, and then there are other groups like seattlewireless and nocat (and similar groups) who have worked to try to shrink the size of applications to make hot-spot sharing something that can exist on very small devices for really cheap.

There are plenty of technical spaces like http://arstechnica.com/index.ars which has interesting articles, and people who discuss them, but IMO is not as much about hacking as it is about support, estimation of future direction, and understanding technology I would not doubt the existence of hackers in such a forums, but the discussions do not seem to be about hacking technology as I see it.

With "hacking" having a different meaning to different people, I'm sure others may disagree with the above, but they can offer places they think hacking technology is discussed.

[Deviant Ollam]

Vehicle stop techniques based on defective equipment aren't "fabrication of evidence" nor are they a "phony pretense." Such defective equipment stops are very useful for further investigation.

i believe i was misinterpreted. i am not saying that legitimate damage or improper function of a vehicle isn't sufficient reason to make a stop. i am asserting that, in my own opinion (and i hope that during our interactions in the past i've come across as a person who is technologically-capable enough to speak with legitimacy about electronics on a vehicle) my rear lights are working fine. they are functional and iluminate my plate properly. if the lights were "out" that would be one thing... but how often does a bulb end up "dim" unless it came that way from the factory? i've never known a bulb to dim over time and the only obstruction of my plates in the past that i can think of has been dirt.

i'm not questioning that an officer has the right to stop me if there's an actual problem... i'm saying that when i got home and walked around the back of the truck i saw a fully-illuminated plate and became upset over what i felt was a very iffy reason for the legitimacy of the stop.

i recognize and appreciate that much of a police officer's work can't revolve around bright-line rules. the sublety and distinct characteristics of each situation requires that law enforcement personnel utilize their experience and make judgment calls in the gray areas to the best of their ability. i was (and to some degree still am) feeling a combination of agitation over coming across as someone who was worthy of closer inspection and disapointment over what i felt was a line (albeit not a super bright one) being crossed with respect to evidence.

By the way, you might be surprized at the shear number of DWI arrests that are made through broken or burnt out taillights and license plate bulbs.

actually, i wouldn't be. one of the most appalling things to me upon entering the "grown up" work force many years back was the unbelievable willingness of just about everyone i saw to drive while intoxicated.

maybe i was an abberation as a teenager, but i never once got behind the wheel when i was drunk. (well, one time way the hell out in a field in the middle of nowhere some of us took my bronco for some 360 spins in the mud after finishing off our beer... but i don't really count that since i wasn't on a road) i was shocked to see co-workers and bosses, many of whom came across as right-minded and responsible people, willing to drive home pretty woozy at the close of work-related get-togethers at a restaraunt or bar somewhere. the sheer number of people who drink and drive astonishes me.

does anyone know if any studies or statistical models have been done that estimate the percentage of people on the road with you at any given time who are half in the bag or totally plastered?

[Thorn]

i believe i was misinterpreted. i am not saying that legitimate damage or improper function of a vehicle isn't sufficient reason to make a stop. i am asserting that, in my own opinion (and i hope that during our interactions in the past i've come across as a person who is technologically-capable enough to speak with legitimacy about electronics on a vehicle) my rear lights are working fine. they are functional and iluminate my plate properly. if the lights were "out" that would be one thing... but how often does a bulb end up "dim" unless it came that way from the factory? i've never known a bulb to dim over time and the only obstruction of my plates in the past that i can think of has been dirt.

i'm not questioning that an officer has the right to stop me if there's an actual problem... i'm saying that when i got home and walked around the back of the truck i saw a fully-illuminated plate and became upset over what i felt was a very iffy reason for the legitimacy of the stop.

i recognize and appreciate that much of a police officer's work can't revolve around bright-line rules. the sublety and distinct characteristics of each situation requires that law enforcement personnel utilize their experience and make judgment calls in the gray areas to the best of their ability. i was (and to some degree still am) feeling a combination of agitation over coming across as someone who was worthy of closer inspection and disapointment over what i felt was a line (albeit not a super bright one) being crossed with respect to evidence.

OK, fair enough. I do think you're more than technologically capable and a reasonable guy, too. And it is not unreasonable to be upset over being apparently singled out.

As an aside, keep an eye on those plate lights. As one of the most exposed areas on a truck, they tend to corrode at the ground points. They do dim out, and come back as the sockets flex within the body. I've had it personally happen on several trucks as they've gotten older. In states where salt is used on the roads in the wintertime, it can also happen in in just a few years.

actually, i wouldn't be. one of the most appalling things to me upon entering the "grown up" work force many years back was the unbelievable willingness of just about everyone i saw to drive while intoxicated.

maybe i was an abberation as a teenager, but i never once got behind the wheel when i was drunk. (well, one time way the hell out in a field in the middle of nowhere some of us took my bronco for some 360 spins in the mud after finishing off our beer... but i don't really count that since i wasn't on a road) i was shocked to see co-workers and bosses, many of whom came across as right-minded and responsible people, willing to drive home pretty woozy at the close of work-related get-togethers at a restaraunt or bar somewhere. the sheer number of people who drink and drive astonishes me.

does anyone know if any studies or statistical models have been done that estimate the percentage of people on the road with you at any given time who are half in the bag or totally plastered?

Yes, there are such statistics. Nationally, the average used to be that 1 in 10 vehicles on the road during 0000-0400 is being operated by a legally intoxicated driver. Friday and Saturday nights tend to be slightly higher, while the middle of the week (Tues-Thurs) are slightly lower. (Caveat: These may have changed somewhat, as I haven't looked at DWI stats in about 5 years.)