News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. Parent comment

Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by jellicle on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @10:30AM (#6725770)
Even better, what if the government was closing in a child pornographer with chemical weapons and a nuke, and the leak allowed him to rape more children while nuking a nunnery and poisoning an orphanage?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by timje1 on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @10:41AM (#6725864)
You forgot ...thus lowering house prices in a wide area. Now the electorate are on your side!
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by scott_karana on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @01:58PM (#6727485)
Wouldn't that only make the buyers happy, and the sellers upset? ;)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by eru on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @08:36PM (#6729967)
You'd expect so. But the buyers are looking for a greater fool to flip the real estate to at a higher price later.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by alwaysdoit on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @02:36PM (#6727821)
This is possibly a reasonable argument for keeping things confidential temporarily. It's not a justification for keeping information confidential indefinitely.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by stelonix on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @10:36AM (#6725817)
Is this some kind of humor? The odds of such a thing happening are close to nil.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by swombat on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @10:39AM (#6725844)
It could happen. Even worse, it could happen on the anniversary of 9/11.

(disclaimer: that's a joke)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by iand on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @10:39AM (#6725847)
Yes, it parodies the usual scaremongering responses given in response to leaking/whistleblowing: pedophilia, terrorists, dirty bombs etc.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by Moral_ on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @10:56AM (#6725982)
I can't tell if you're really dense, or being sarcastic...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by CalRobert on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @11:14AM (#6726136)
My god, it would be 911 times 2,356.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by fixermark on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @12:25PM (#6726715)
Yes, the dreaded 2,146,316, as foretold by Nostradamus.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by conradfr on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @11:03AM (#6726057)
You forgot drugs, drugs are bad.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by njharman on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @11:59AM (#6726500)
Nah, not anymore, doesn't scare the sheeple like it use to.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by betterunix on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @09:21PM (#6730123)
Only if you ignore today's bogeymen:

* Methamphetamine

* "Bath salts" (i.e. MDPV)

* Synthetic cannibinoids

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by jplarson on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @06:28PM (#6729410)
> Child pornographer with chemical weapons and a nuke

Do even approximations to such boogieman figures even exist?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by maaku on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @08:29PM (#6729937)
Kim Jong Il?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement by jafaku on Wednesday November 13, 2013 @10:33AM (#6725793)
Think of the children!
[ Parent | on HN ]