Distributed Not Centralized power structure ensures minimal abuse
That worked for a while in the US, but look where we ended up. The central authority will inevitably grow in power over time, until you have a centralized political structures. No one seems to have a recipe to prevent that structural failing.
Every flash update want to install Chrome and/or some Google searchbar trash. Presumably if you already use Chrome you get some different, additional malware by default.
Power and wealth aren't related, except perhaps tangentially.
They're causally related. Under capitalism, the wealthy become powerful. Under socialism, the powerful become wealthy. (Oh, sure, you can imagine "non-corrupt" versions of these, but meanwhile in the real world...).
If Google truly believed this, I could update Flash without the risk of unwanted Google software if I forget to uncheck some boxes. Heck, Google might be a lot more serious about getting Flash off the web if they weren't using it as a (worse-than) malware vector!
Wow, you sure made it clear to everyone what tribe you belong too! But did you stop to think, "do I really need to re-assert my tribal affiliation when I have nothing else to say?" Because the answer is no, no you don't.
And why do you imagine they did so? Can you not think of a government purpose that could be served by allowing someone to "VPN" into a US government server without another government being able to tell that that connection had been made?
Bah, I rather suspect you hate him because he's an outspoken conservative. Everything else is confirmation bias.
The schools have trained a generation now that "conservative == evil", and let confirmation bias do the rest. People are sure that the National Socialist party must have been right-wing, not from any study of history (where it gets into semantics, but there were lots of progressive laws early on), but because "duh, evil == conservative, any moron can therefore see the Nazis were conservative".
People actually believe that "liberals are usually right, conservatives usually wrong", in the face of the otherwise clear notion that almost all new ideas are wrong. You might make faster progress by being more accepting of new ideas, but you're necessarily going to be wrong more. But who cares about that logic stuff (logic is a tool of the patriarchy), obviously conservatives must be wrong about almost everything because "conservative == evil", and, duh, evil is wrong.
It's really remarkable what 16 years of political propaganda targeted at children and young adults can achieve. [As an aside, how many of you believe that teachers are underpaid because you learned that from a teacher growing up, and never really re-examined the idea as an adult? Maybe it's true, maybe not, but did you carry that belief into adulthood without ever realizing the conflict of interest?]
TOR seems really good at preventing mass harvesting of data by the government. Everything we've seen requires them to make a special effort to hack someone they're interested in, so maybe it's not so useful for high-profile criminal activity. But for doing things today which may be made illegal one day in the future, and your browsing history used against you, it seems to work fine.
Chat with the guy undercover - maybe he'll say something about his plans to a fellow traveler, maybe he'll get spooked and abandon his plans, either way is good. In any case, when there's a believable threat, you can watch the guy closely for a few weeks. The FBI has done this repeatedly for suspected non-Muslim domestic terrorists.
Child-proof the world, eh? I suppose you feel similarly about violent video games. Apple can do whatever, it's their walled garden, but I'm going to criticize them for reducing freedom no matter how much profit it brings them.
You have an amazingly thin-skinned idea of "new ways to threaten people" if you think a freaking emoji rises to the level of threat where censorship makes sense. And if it somehow did, how would a water pistol, or any number of other emojis, not work just as well - if we're being that thin skinned? Is it somehow different from just linking a picture of a gun?
Why create this new potential problem when you can just decide not to?
I just fail to any any problem here. I don't see any marginal harm, or ability to threaten, over what the platform already provides.
Credible threats are not free speech. We already have laws for that, and it's orthogonal to pistol emojis. I get it, you hate guns and want to censor everything you don't like. Fortunately, on both counts, we haven't quite given up all our rights yet.
All the perps gotta do is claim they are muzzies and bitch about 'civil liberties' and they can scam, kill and blow up whomever they want.
This is the actual law enforcement doctrine of the united states, look it up.
Emotionally put, but nevertheless effectively true. Remember the Orlando shooter? Someone (perhaps more than one) at his mosque called the FBI to warn them this guy was unhinged. The guy was already on a watch list. The FBI did nothing because that's the culture there now.
Arresting a Muslim before a terrorist act occurs is a career-ending move. Waiting till afterwards has no lasting negative career effect.
FFS, the Muslim community did exactly the right thing here, and the FBI dropped the ball - heck, they never seemed aware of the ball, or even the game.
I disagree strongly with your violent and ineffective proposal.
Instead, I prefer a much more effective proposal of JDAM. Predators just don't have the load capacity for this.
Predator was 15 years ago. It grew up into the MQ-9 Reaper, which can carry 4 JDAMS. One JDAM would get the job done, but remember Rule 37: "There is no overkill, there is only 'open fire' and 'time to reload'".
We're talking about new, unknown problems here. Nothing to do with known issues - though on that topic, of coure you talk about those issues, and ignore sex-selection abortion, which is the number 1 thing people screen for today.
Bringing your ID to vote is not an undue burden, any more than successfully finding your polling place or being able to wait in line, etc. There are a few legit objections to requiring an ID, since they can be hard to obtain, but that one doesn't fly.
Sure, just full on eugenics - just kill the unacceptable fetus (or, presumably, infant if that's where it's detected). Not sure why that would bother anyone. Of course, some problems won't manifest until puberty, but I think you'll get a lot less objection to offing unwanted teenagers.
Slashdot Mirror
Distributed Not Centralized power structure ensures minimal abuse
That worked for a while in the US, but look where we ended up. The central authority will inevitably grow in power over time, until you have a centralized political structures. No one seems to have a recipe to prevent that structural failing.
Every flash update want to install Chrome and/or some Google searchbar trash. Presumably if you already use Chrome you get some different, additional malware by default.
Oh, sure, you can imagine "non-corrupt" versions of these, but meanwhile in the real world ...
Power and wealth aren't related, except perhaps tangentially.
They're causally related. Under capitalism, the wealthy become powerful. Under socialism, the powerful become wealthy. (Oh, sure, you can imagine "non-corrupt" versions of these, but meanwhile in the real world ...).
If Google truly believed this, I could update Flash without the risk of unwanted Google software if I forget to uncheck some boxes. Heck, Google might be a lot more serious about getting Flash off the web if they weren't using it as a (worse-than) malware vector!
Wow, you sure made it clear to everyone what tribe you belong too! But did you stop to think, "do I really need to re-assert my tribal affiliation when I have nothing else to say?" Because the answer is no, no you don't.
No you dope your government created TOR!
And why do you imagine they did so? Can you not think of a government purpose that could be served by allowing someone to "VPN" into a US government server without another government being able to tell that that connection had been made?
Wow, you really responded just to post "conservative == evil"?
Bah, I rather suspect you hate him because he's an outspoken conservative. Everything else is confirmation bias.
The schools have trained a generation now that "conservative == evil", and let confirmation bias do the rest. People are sure that the National Socialist party must have been right-wing, not from any study of history (where it gets into semantics, but there were lots of progressive laws early on), but because "duh, evil == conservative, any moron can therefore see the Nazis were conservative".
People actually believe that "liberals are usually right, conservatives usually wrong", in the face of the otherwise clear notion that almost all new ideas are wrong. You might make faster progress by being more accepting of new ideas, but you're necessarily going to be wrong more. But who cares about that logic stuff (logic is a tool of the patriarchy), obviously conservatives must be wrong about almost everything because "conservative == evil", and, duh, evil is wrong.
It's really remarkable what 16 years of political propaganda targeted at children and young adults can achieve. [As an aside, how many of you believe that teachers are underpaid because you learned that from a teacher growing up, and never really re-examined the idea as an adult? Maybe it's true, maybe not, but did you carry that belief into adulthood without ever realizing the conflict of interest?]
TOR seems really good at preventing mass harvesting of data by the government. Everything we've seen requires them to make a special effort to hack someone they're interested in, so maybe it's not so useful for high-profile criminal activity. But for doing things today which may be made illegal one day in the future, and your browsing history used against you, it seems to work fine.
All of them? Or has Apple reached the point yet where their phones have no ports left at all?
Chat with the guy undercover - maybe he'll say something about his plans to a fellow traveler, maybe he'll get spooked and abandon his plans, either way is good. In any case, when there's a believable threat, you can watch the guy closely for a few weeks. The FBI has done this repeatedly for suspected non-Muslim domestic terrorists.
You can't imagine ways to threaten people with gun emojis?
Quite the reverse - if you already have eleventy ways to threaten someone, maybe let's not get so worked up over way eleventy-one.
Child-proof the world, eh? I suppose you feel similarly about violent video games. Apple can do whatever, it's their walled garden, but I'm going to criticize them for reducing freedom no matter how much profit it brings them.
You have an amazingly thin-skinned idea of "new ways to threaten people" if you think a freaking emoji rises to the level of threat where censorship makes sense. And if it somehow did, how would a water pistol, or any number of other emojis, not work just as well - if we're being that thin skinned? Is it somehow different from just linking a picture of a gun?
Why create this new potential problem when you can just decide not to?
I just fail to any any problem here. I don't see any marginal harm, or ability to threaten, over what the platform already provides.
Credible threats are not free speech. We already have laws for that, and it's orthogonal to pistol emojis. I get it, you hate guns and want to censor everything you don't like. Fortunately, on both counts, we haven't quite given up all our rights yet.
Any anyway, where's Klingon?
No one can shoot you through the internet. Free speech, on the other hand, if a fundamental right that is quite important on the internet.
what about overseas ones where the us gov can't touch them.
We still have aircraft carriers. We still have nuclear subs. We can touch them with finality.
It's not just underfunding.
All the perps gotta do is claim they are muzzies and bitch about 'civil liberties' and they can scam, kill and blow up whomever they want.
This is the actual law enforcement doctrine of the united states, look it up.
Emotionally put, but nevertheless effectively true. Remember the Orlando shooter? Someone (perhaps more than one) at his mosque called the FBI to warn them this guy was unhinged. The guy was already on a watch list. The FBI did nothing because that's the culture there now.
Arresting a Muslim before a terrorist act occurs is a career-ending move. Waiting till afterwards has no lasting negative career effect.
FFS, the Muslim community did exactly the right thing here, and the FBI dropped the ball - heck, they never seemed aware of the ball, or even the game.
I disagree strongly with your violent and ineffective proposal.
Instead, I prefer a much more effective proposal of JDAM. Predators just don't have the load capacity for this.
Predator was 15 years ago. It grew up into the MQ-9 Reaper, which can carry 4 JDAMS. One JDAM would get the job done, but remember Rule 37: "There is no overkill, there is only 'open fire' and 'time to reload'".
We're talking about new, unknown problems here. Nothing to do with known issues - though on that topic, of coure you talk about those issues, and ignore sex-selection abortion, which is the number 1 thing people screen for today.
Oh, I think Putin would do it just to mess with Hillary and the US establishment (not that I'd find that bad, mind you, except on principle).
Bringing your ID to vote is not an undue burden, any more than successfully finding your polling place or being able to wait in line, etc. There are a few legit objections to requiring an ID, since they can be hard to obtain, but that one doesn't fly.
Sure, just full on eugenics - just kill the unacceptable fetus (or, presumably, infant if that's where it's detected). Not sure why that would bother anyone. Of course, some problems won't manifest until puberty, but I think you'll get a lot less objection to offing unwanted teenagers.