TaN: Since social media is, for all intents and purposes, a public media, it (should be) implied that if you use it, you are tacitly giving up your right to privacy. In this light, any and all information and materials that appear in social media is deemed public property except in cases where the materials posted were not done initially in one’s own social media account.
In cases where materials posted in social media were originally posted in a(nother) particular person’s own social media account, then reposting by others cannot be liable for any misconduct or violations of privacy or for any other ethical or criminal accountability. In other words, for as long as (re)posting materials where they were originally posted by whoever is (mentioned or shown) in them, then it is fair game and others who repost them cannot (or no longer) be held responsible — morally, legally, or otherwise.
Posting in social media cannot be considered private because it is public by nature and use, unless there is some kind of feature or mechanism by which the social media account owner has the option of making it public or keeping it private or sharing it only within a select circle of people.
Now hacking is a totally different story. This is intentional invasion and violation of privacy and must be dealt with severely and with absolute prejudice. Hacking is a deliberate act and shows there is malicious intent on the part of the hacker, regardless of whether the hacked materials are made public or not.
As a last word in privacy and other related issues in social media, it is one’s own lookout for whatever one posts in cyberspace and, because of this unforgiving and ruthless character of cyberspace, specifically social media, children who have not yet mastered discretion and fully comprehend the ramifications of each act (and post) in cyberspace should not be permitted access. The problem is implementation — i.e., how to keep children who should be on the web off the web. I am sorry but I still have no answer to this problem.
TaN: In today’s (July 6) banner headline in the hardcopy The Philippine STAR — titled “Duterte to troops in terror war: Take no prisoners” by a Christina Mendez — it is a humongous mistake for Mr Duterte and worse for media. Even if the media does not blurt it out for all to see and read, the word will, sooner or later, get out to the terrorists and this will make rescue and recovery of hostages next to impossible.
This is not to mention that it will strengthen the resolve of the terrorists since they have nothing to gain by surrendering — making them turn into martyrs for Allah. This will make the job of the military all the more difficult.
It may likewise make the relatives of the terrorists lose hope of ever seeing their kin alive again — unless they escape and become fugitives (outside of the country).
Media’s publication of the order will only intensify the conflict and make it drag on longer. This is a duplication of what happened at the Luneta hostage (or Rizal Park hostage-taking) crisis of Hong Kong tourists way back in August 23, 2010.
TaN: Since every time Mr Duterte is criticized, especially when coming from a foreigner, he simply just cannot resist responding. And this is his weakness. This behavior pattern makes him predictable. It will be easy to illicit a response from him and manipulate the course of events that follow — i.e., if everything is thought out of carefully and well ahead of time, with considerations for variations and unexpected twists and turns.
Man is a creature of habit and when that habit has been identified and isolated, the “victim target” becomes easy prey. S/he can be summarily and arbitrarily manipulated into doing something to achieve one’s desired agenda.
Actually, there are either just to many good people in the world who would not take advantage of this weakness of Mr Duterte or he is simply not worth the bother or both. But I may be wrong because I am almost certain that there are groups of people out there who would and are already putting things into action — e.g., those into eugenics where, through this means, there is the insidious scheme to depopulate the global population into a more “manageable size” — which is what is happening with the bloody campaign of Mr Duterte against whatever he deems to be “bad” for his country by killing all who he sees unfit to continue breathing and all through his brand of “due process”.
Finally, I really and sincerely hope that Mr Duterte will see through the efforts of these manipulators to influence his decisions — by pushing his buttons — and “change his spots”, especially for the innocent victims of his favorite and brutal style to rid his country of misfits and sociopaths.
TaN: Seeing today’s (July 4) front page photograph — with the caption “Boxing icon Manny Pacquiao, a reserve Army lieutenant colonel, receives military honors upon his return to General Santos City from Australia, yesterday” — made me realize, though neither immoral nor unethical but nevertheless something is not all right, that non-combatants (i.e., those with little or neither experience nor training in combat and battlefield conditions) or professional non-soldiers in the military enjoy high ranks but have not earned their rank the proper way.
Though most of the cases, it is irrelevant, especially when not in combat or battlefield conditions, this will definitely pose risks and dangers when they are thrust into battlefield conditions. Professionals, say in the Judge Advocate or other non-combat positions, usually have some kind of wisdom when they come into combat situations but I seriously doubt if Mr Pacquiao will be able to fulfill and carry out the duties and responsibilities when the time comes that he has do really take command of a regiment or a battalion (which is the troop unit size that colonels and lieutenant colonels command).
Mr Pacquiao did not earn his rank. He rose from the ranks because he became famous and wealthy. And do not tell me boxing and sparring can provide the kind of experience and training that is vital in battlefield conditions.
The practice of awarding ranks to people who do not deserve it should stop. [The position of commander-in-chief for the chief executive is different because s/he is not required to be in actual field combat even during times of conflict. It is more of a position rather than a rank — where a rank means that the person, when the time comes, will have to be in the front lines performing actual and active combat duties.]
TaN: During breakfast today (July 5), it dawned on me that since this is a temporal world, there is really no such thing as unlimited — only limited. The concept of temporal already implies that there is a limit (to everything) or it is limited. This is because (1) it is precisely a temporal world that unlimited cannot be possible and (2) due to the law or principle that: “Only those that have no beginning have no end” and we all agree that everything, this universe or multiverse or whatever they are calling everything nowadays, had a beginning — whether you believe in science and the Big Bang theory (when everything started with a teeny tiny infinitesimal dot exploded and began it all) or believe in creation (when God created everything, as written in Genesis of the Holy Scriptures) — it must have an end and everything in it must have the same property as well. It does not make sense that something finite can contain something or has a component that is infinite.
Just because our meager minds, regardless of how brilliant we believe ourselves to be (what with all the technological advancements and scientific knowledge and all those great minds, past and present), cannot grasp the immensity of the totality of everything does not mean it is unlimited. It is precisely that…we simply just cannot fathom it all (but we must have a term for what we cannot fathom so we named it “infinity” and not for any other reason, especially not for something that has no end).
And with this argument, I correct myself in earlier TaNs that there is infinity in the finite and vice versa — where I argued that within the two finite values of 1 and 2 are an infinite quantity of fractions.