God damn it Google. Then gravity disconnects it about once a month.

That's my fiber jack. No, seriously.

What appears to be the issue?

Something a little duct tape couldn't fix?

what the fuck am i supposed to be looking at

>>56521146
>american housing

>>56521679
>not owning your own house and an acre of land and a gun to protect them all

>>56522076
>only one gun to protect an acre of land

>>56522129
No, I have a .308 rifle for my yard, my living room shotgun (to impress/intimidate guests), my bedroom handgun for the boogeyman, a rifle in the closet for wild game, and a subcompact pistol I carry on me when I go out.
I also have a big-bore black powder rifle that I use as a conversation piece. Also works for intimidation.

>>56522177
Typical dumbness country boy.

>>56522177
I'm gonna move to America after uni

>>56522191
At least I can legally own them without paying taxes and fees out my ass, unlike your faggot European countries.

>>56522202
Buy a pistol and work your way up. AFTER your citizenship, of course.

>>56522202
Good luck getting past the wall, fucko.

WTF IS THE NEON BLUE THING?????????????

>>56522222
>At least I can legally own them without paying taxes and fees out my ass, unlike your faggot European countries.
Not what I was talking about, not European.
>muh shotgun
You should be using a self loading rifle. Shotguns basically serve no purpose.

>>56522222
>22222
THOSE QUINTS HAVE BEEN CHECKED

>>56522276
What do you think my yard rifle is? A BB gun?
>Shotguns basically serve no purpose
I can tell you're either nogunz or a rangekiddie.
Try shooting a flock of birds with your whimpy target pistol and tell me how it feels to go hungry after hunting.

>>56522222
Checked.

>>56522330
>What do you think my yard rifle is?
Some bolt action fudd gun from 1955?
>Try shooting a flock of birds with your whimpy target pistol and tell me how it feels to go hungry after hunting.
>I can tell you're either nogunz or a rangekiddie.
Lol ok boss.
Literally the only thing you can use it for. What's stopping you from shooting them when they're on the ground, anyway?

>>56522191
Fucing this!!! Are you one of those retarts from the pol sub whose going to vote for donald drumpf too?

>>56522481
I'm part of the majority that sides with Hillary. Trump voters should have their firearms taken away for mental illness and lacking the mental capacity to responsibly use firearms. All those pricks I see shooting at local fauna and rocks that weathered centuries of mid-Atlantic storms are Trump voters. They should know better, but like all Trump voters, they lack any kind of respect or self-humility. They lack the ability to appreciate the land and the things that inhabit them solely because they have a sense of entitlement that Trump's diatribe and mannerism caters to.

Hillary is the only realistic choice for President in this race and I think the public will vote based on that rather than sick memes featuring a five year old meme frog.

File: injustice.png (137KB, 570x380px)

137KB, 570x380px

>>56522553
I'm not even a faggot, but I would rage buttfuck you, with the tip of my Colt M4.

>>56522595
Back to /pol/ with you, kiddo.
>>>/pol/

>>56522553
Both of them are equally horrible. They both support furthering the surveillance state, and implementing state mandated backdoors in encryption. Also, Trump isn't nearly as pro gun as a lot of his supporters seem to think he is.

>>56522481
Also, fuck you for thinking I'm a frog-worshipping alt-right memester just because I exercise my right to bear arms. I hope you die of AIDS compounded by the Zika virus, you hipster city prick.

>>56522652
Hillary isn't as bad as people think she is. She is the only actual Presidential candidate running in this race, the other is just a (failed) reality TV show star who forgot that reality TV doesn't mean reality. Her email issues aren't actually a problem like so many on the cuntservative claim it is, even the FBI knows this and refused to ask the AG to press charges. The Clinton Foundation is an actual charity organization *SHOCK* and its donors are no more nefarious than those who serve on the boards of many of Trump's shell companies/tax shelters.
I don't mind a surveillance state as long as it reduces attacks from terrorists, criminals, and the fringe-right lone gunmen who inevitably stains us legal gunowners as paranoid loonies whose only choice of clothing is tin-foil hats and cargo pants from the 80's. And you don't really need the sort of encryption meant to deter nation-states, just the ones that normal "hackers" and criminals can't crack within a reasonable amount of time. You're more likely to lose your personal information from your own actions, ironically enough, so encryption is completely unnecessary unless you're involved with illegal activities.

>>56521146
>botnet fiber
you asked for it

>>56522757
I'm not trusting any high ranking politician who thought running a Power Mac G4 email server for top-secret communication with foreign leaders was a good idea. Also get the fuck out shillary.

>>56522829
It was a fucking mistake. People make mistakes all the fucking time, you cocksucker. You're making a mistake right now by not voting for her over Trump. She is your only choice in this election, what more reasons do you need?

>>56522846
Yeah, mistakes make a lot of people unqualified to run the country. Also, I'm not voting from Trump, friend. I always vote 3rd party because I'm not a mindless shill.

you goddamn retards are talking politics and all i wanna know is what's in the picture

File: american_housing.webm (381KB, 245x180px) Image search: [Google]

381KB, 245x180px

>>56521146

>>56522757
But a surveillance state does not help at all with terrorism. The NSA has not come up with any evidence that they have stopped a SINGLE terrorist attack. All that it does is give whoever is in power more ways to violate the rights of citizens.

>encryption is completely unnecessary unless you're involved with illegal activities

Saying that you don't need privacy because you have nothing to hide is just as absurd as saying that you don't need freedom of speech because you have nothing to hide. Just because you don't feel that you need an essential human right does not mean that everyone feels that way.

>>56522846
You obviously have never handled top-secret material. That is NOT a mistake its a criminal act that would have landed any non-former first lady in jail for YEARS.

File: 1463358771056.gif (387KB, 269x270px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 269x270px

>>56521146
>piping the botnet directly into your home
do people actually do this?

>>56522926
This. Shits basically on the level of treason.

>>56522911
>The NSA has not come up with any evidence that they have stopped a SINGLE terrorist attack
Do you work with the NSA? No? Then you don't know what you're talking about. And stopping terrorism before it even happens is just one of many vital functions the surveillance program offers.
Again, if you don't know, then shut it. Keep sucking Snowden's dick.
>Just because you don't feel that you need an essential human right does not mean that everyone feels that way.
Encryption is NOT a human right. Name me one time an encryption prevented the government from obtaining evidence to prosecute you. There are always other ways to undermine it. Encryption does nothing but bog down the legal system with unnecessary delays brought about by uncooperative people.
>>56522926
>You obviously have never handled top-secret material
And clearly you have. It's not illegal and you won't land in jail if whatever classified material you handled was inappropriately stored without intentionally compromising your own security to allow the information to leak. There needs to be intent. Yes, you will get your clearance revoked and be unable to apply for a new clearance at any level, but no you do not go to jail for negligent handling of classified material without the intent to cause harm. Even the Director of the FBI stated this multiple times.

>>56522885
That's a Google fiber jack 15 feet in the air and facing the wall in a basement. That means you have to climb a ladder every couple weeks because the wire gets tugged by the house shifting.

>>56523011
The NSA has every reason to come up with some benefit that their programs have. If they had done something good, we would know about it. They want to justify what they are doing to the public, and prove that the benefits outweigh the harm done by the program. Proving that they have stopped any kind of attack would only help them.

Privacy is a human right, and encryption is a way of protecting that right. Also, banning encryption that the government does not have a key to is banning math, which is absurd.

>Encryption does nothing but bog down the legal system with unnecessary delays brought about by uncooperative people
So I take it that you are against the fifth amendment?

>>56523171
>If they had done something good, we would know about it.
No you wouldn't, nor are you entitled to until 20 or so years after the fact. The NSA and other letter agencies do not need to let the public know how successful their programs are because the people they are targeting will adjust their tactics and they'll have to start all over again from scratch. Just because you hypothetically stopped a terror cell from purchasing materials for explosives and arrested the entire ring does not mean that they have to let the public know that it was their surveillance program that led to the arrest and conviction.
It's like your plumbing system, it's hauling shit away but where and how it does it is not important as long as you don't see (or smell) it.

>Privacy is a human right
Privacy is not a human right, it is a privilege. Privacy can and will be taken from you when warranted, no matter if you're a citizen, a resident, or other. Besides, you gave up your rights to privacy in this very site by using Google's Captcha service to post on this site. Funny how you mongs keep going on about muh privacy on a website that sells your information and posted contents to commercial outlets with your consent.
.Also, banning encryption that the government does not have a key to is banning math, which is absurd
No, banning encryption is banning the use of specific algorithms to hide or prevent the contents of a digital media from being accessed by law enforcement agencies. It is NOT banning math, you oversimplifying little Trumplet.

>>56522675
common filth radio? I love you.

>>56523262
>oversimplifying little Trumplet
I hate trump and hillary.

>Privacy is not a human right, it is a privilege

https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2006/05/the_eternal_value_of.html

>No you wouldn't, nor are you entitled to until 20 or so years after the fact. The NSA and other letter agencies do not need to let the public know how successful their programs are because the people they are targeting will adjust their tactics and they'll have to start all over again from scratch. Just because you hypothetically stopped a terror cell from purchasing materials for explosives and arrested the entire ring does not mean that they have to let the public know that it was their surveillance program that led to the arrest and conviction.

http://fas.org/irp/eprint/psp.pdf

>>56523369
Ah, so you're a commie Bernout cuck. Probably a literal cuck too. Quit being such a sore loser and don't waste your vote on that phony Johnson or the crackpot Stein. Hillary or bust. You know that as well as I do that voting for anyone other than Hillary is allowing Trump into the White House.

>>56523431
I don't like bernie either. Johnson is probably the closest, but I don't agree with everything he says.

I do not think that it would be ethical for me to vote for Trump or Hillary. They are both past the point where I can consider one of them the lesser of two evils.

>>56523573
Hillary is clearly the lesser evil. She is not the unpredictable, racist crackpot that's out to remove immigrants from American society. Despite the whole email debacle, she has proven herself time and time again as a capable leader and a level-headed champion of the people, even if she makes money off of large corporations on the side. I'd trust them more than I'd trust a man who refused to disavow a KKK grand wizard, got into an argument with a sitting President of a foreign country, and has suspicious ties with a foreign country whose sole foreign policy is to fuck over the United States by any means.
I fail to see how Hillary is any worse than Trump.

>>56522757
>She is the only actual Presidential candidate running in this race, the other is just a (failed) reality TV show star who forgot that reality TV doesn't mean reality.
What is this supposed to mean? You do know a president doesn't have to be a career piece of shit politician, right? No elected official has to be. This mentality gets on my fucking nerves.

>>56524239
Well ha has no experience in any governing capacity. Not even a school board.

>>56524413
Which matters because?

>>56523645
Jesus CTR, go away. Don't you have fraudulent tax returns to file anyway?