Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't good encryption make any sort of wiretapping pretty much useless? Granted the government could find out that you sent packets to a given IP, but they wouldn't know what you were saying?
The trouble with this position, as any economist will tell you, is that most of the government's "products" (national defense, for example) cannot be provided to just those who are willing to pay for them. We can't have an army, and say to hostile countries "We'll fight to the death to protect our country... except for Joe's house. You can invade that if you want."
But if Person X had the ability to delete this comment, then Person X also has the ability to delete a comment along the lines of
Well, I have to disagree with Person X on this issue...
I wouldn't trust myself with this kind of power, much less Person X. Which is why we can't have a delete comment option. This "Linux Sux" sort of thing is the unfortunate downside of Freedom of Speech.
But the aim of the American legal system isn't to convict every murderer, it is to convict only those whose guilt can be proved beyond reasonable doubt. By it's very nature, this system leads to guilty people getting away with it sometimes.
In conclusion: It happens. The alternative is worse. Deal with it.
this fictional and totally unnecessary concept of Intellectual Property
Totally Unnecessary? Though I agree with your opinion that squatting is a reasonable form of investment, I have to disagree with that. If people weren't able to own and sell information (be it in the form of a book, CD, software application, etc.) then there would be a lot less information produced. Some people, of course, would still write books, play music, or slam out code, all out of the goodness of their hearts, but most of us would be too busy looking for a job that paid money, so we could afford to eat.
The fact of the matter is that people have a right to profit from their ideas. And there are only to ways to do that. Intellectual Property is one of them. The only other one is have the government subsidize all production of information. I think it should be pretty clear that that wouldn't work at all.
So, really, all we're left with is the choice between a free market, or no market at all.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. While I hate spam, flamebait, trolls, etc., I can't approve of the government having this kind of power.
Perhaps a plashcot dracksot?
Of course the pronunciation of "Linus" depends on what language you're speaking.
English: Lie nus
Finnish: Lin oos
Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't good encryption make any sort of wiretapping pretty much useless? Granted the government could find out that you sent packets to a given IP, but they wouldn't know what you were saying?
When will they port Doom?
The trouble with this position, as any economist will tell you, is that most of the government's "products" (national defense, for example) cannot be provided to just those who are willing to pay for them. We can't have an army, and say to hostile countries "We'll fight to the death to protect our country... except for Joe's house. You can invade that if you want."
And If so, why did it take so long to crack the whole code?
But if Person X had the ability to delete this comment, then Person X also has the ability to delete a comment along the lines of
Well, I have to disagree with Person X on this issue...
I wouldn't trust myself with this kind of power, much less Person X. Which is why we can't have a delete comment option. This "Linux Sux" sort of thing is the unfortunate downside of Freedom of Speech.
But the aim of the American legal system isn't to convict every murderer, it is to convict only those whose guilt can be proved beyond reasonable doubt. By it's very nature, this system leads to guilty people getting away with it sometimes.
In conclusion:
It happens.
The alternative is worse.
Deal with it.
Totally Unnecessary? Though I agree with your opinion that squatting is a reasonable form of investment, I have to disagree with that. If people weren't able to own and sell information (be it in the form of a book, CD, software application, etc.) then there would be a lot less information produced. Some people, of course, would still write books, play music, or slam out code, all out of the goodness of their hearts, but most of us would be too busy looking for a job that paid money, so we could afford to eat.
The fact of the matter is that people have a right to profit from their ideas. And there are only to ways to do that. Intellectual Property is one of them. The only other one is have the government subsidize all production of information. I think it should be pretty clear that that wouldn't work at all.
So, really, all we're left with is the choice between a free market, or no market at all.
How about the SimCity series, or the Civilization series?