First those aren't technological problems - they are social and political problems.
Still problems.
Second - there are technologies around that easily circumvent all of those things and there always will be.
And those are? Because considering those are the current fights we, socially, are engaged in, I argue that if circumvention were as easy as you claim, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Also, Black Hat/DefCon wouldn't exist.
Government moves at a snails pace when compared to technological changes.
Much technological innovation is applied militarily before it's applied civilly, so I call straight up BS on that statement. Nuclear power was used to kill before it was used to harness energy for use on the electrical grid.
This will be a fantastic technological evolution for the likes of Warren Buffett and Donald Trump.
For the rest of us... if they can jack up the cost of necessary medication like EpiPens by orders of magnitude, for no reason other than "profit," how accessible do you honestly think gene editing will be for you and yours?
But if I can open up a catalog and choose the best designer genes... damn right I'd buy every 'upgrade' I could.
And thus, a subtle and unconscious admission that the benefits of such technology will likely be cost-prohibitive for the vast majority of the human population.
Democracy is certainly not the best system. However its still a pretty good system. The best system probably involves some dice rolling.
I'm a fan of the Constitutional Republic myself.
Consider where one candidate gets 60% and another gets 40%. The best system is almost certainly not one that gives 100% of the outcome to the 60%'r, but its still clearly better than giving 0% of the outcome to the 60%'r.
How about when both candidates combined receive less than 50% of the total vote, including voters who abstain?
FWIW, in the last US Presidential election, 51% didn't vote at all, and of those who did, 6% voted third party; that means neither D nor R candidate actually received anything close to half the total vote.
My parents took me and showed me our gun (we only had one early on)....I shot it with them, learned how to chamber a round, how to shoot, how to SAFELY handle a fire arm.
Just because a person is atheist doesn't mean they'really incapable of seeing religion as "the enemy." In fact, I see atheists make that very comment almost daily right here on Slashdot - that religion is at fault for most of our social ills, and should be done away with.
Slashdot Mirror
Who is exactly neutral?
Give me a neutral source.
On anything.
Regarding political standpoint?
The laws of physics.
Now, getting humans to report on the laws of physics without bias? There you might have a breakdown.
You can make a functional water filter out of sand and charcoal.
Next strawman.
Generally, in the US, when a person is arrested, they're charged with something.
So what has he been charged with? Anything? Or is this yet another 'parallel construction' situation?
First those aren't technological problems - they are social and political problems.
Still problems.
Second - there are technologies around that easily circumvent all of those things and there always will be.
And those are? Because considering those are the current fights we, socially, are engaged in, I argue that if circumvention were as easy as you claim, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Also, Black Hat/DefCon wouldn't exist.
Government moves at a snails pace when compared to technological changes.
Much technological innovation is applied militarily before it's applied civilly, so I call straight up BS on that statement. Nuclear power was used to kill before it was used to harness energy for use on the electrical grid.
This will be a fantastic technological evolution for the likes of Warren Buffett and Donald Trump.
For the rest of us... if they can jack up the cost of necessary medication like EpiPens by orders of magnitude, for no reason other than "profit," how accessible do you honestly think gene editing will be for you and yours?
But if I can open up a catalog and choose the best designer genes... damn right I'd buy every 'upgrade' I could.
And thus, a subtle and unconscious admission that the benefits of such technology will likely be cost-prohibitive for the vast majority of the human population.
However, it's true that while new technology solves problems, it also creates new ones.
So what? We will deal with the problems when the happen like we always do.
Right, because we, as a society, are doing such a great job of dealing with technological issues now...
How's net neutrality/ISPs farming our data for profit/ Gov'ts illegally spying on us going these days, anyway?
So now, the music labels will find a loophole that allows them to use other people's IP without permission or payment.
Then, inevitably, someone else will use this same strategy against them,
And that whole house of cards, built on a sandbar, could come tumbling down.
About half of them were executive orders
You mean like those same illegal and unconstitutional executive orders Obama had done that Republicans were having apoplectic seizures over?
To be fair, I believe a fair amount of them have been reversing Obama's Executive Orders. Seems a legit use of the tool.
As I always say, "When your guy does it, it's great. When the other guy does it, it's a travesty."
Yea, still waiting for the person who will diminish the power of the office myself...
Democracy is certainly not the best system. However its still a pretty good system. The best system probably involves some dice rolling.
I'm a fan of the Constitutional Republic myself.
Consider where one candidate gets 60% and another gets 40%. The best system is almost certainly not one that gives 100% of the outcome to the 60%'r, but its still clearly better than giving 0% of the outcome to the 60%'r.
How about when both candidates combined receive less than 50% of the total vote, including voters who abstain?
FWIW, in the last US Presidential election, 51% didn't vote at all, and of those who did, 6% voted third party; that means neither D nor R candidate actually received anything close to half the total vote.
From TFS (emphasis mine):
The hope is that creating a unique and bipartisan team...
Sounds about right - Left/Right wing protectionism, probably focused on keeping third parties from receiving fair and/or equal representation.
Right - then it's not paranoia, it's preparation
Is it paranoid to have multiple fire extinguishers throughout the home, ready to go?
Better to have it and not need it...
Detroit, Chicago, LA, St Louis, Kansas City, Atlanta, Miami, New Orleans.....
My parents took me and showed me our gun (we only had one early on)....I shot it with them, learned how to chamber a round, how to shoot, how to SAFELY handle a fire arm.
THIS.
The key to safety is knowledge, not fear.
But man..."smart" guns IMHO are NOT a good thing to have.
To the contrary, smart guns are a good thing to have, and the fact that they can be hacked is almost irrelevant.
The primary useful thing about smart guns is that they prevent your toddler from finding your gun and killing you, themselves, or each other.
The fact that I, like many adult, gun-owning Americans, have no children, makes this point moot.
Also, pretty sure the "more likely to be killed with your own gun" myth has been debunked, or at least, proven inaccurate.
I see your redundancy and raise you a US carrier group.
XD
H1-B visas maybe?
So, two cruise missiles, then.
Potentially it can help profile people from their voices.
I can see no possible nefarious uses of such a technology...
natch.
the people would be the government (at least in a democracy).
No, that would be a republic.
Democracy is "two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner." Especially in the US, where democracy exists to elect representatives.
Just because a person is atheist doesn't mean they'really incapable of seeing religion as "the enemy." In fact, I see atheists make that very comment almost daily right here on Slashdot - that religion is at fault for most of our social ills, and should be done away with.
Israeli doctrine allows for unprovoked attacks on neighboring countries.
Did you know that criminals can use their brains to come up with crimes! The public should be lobotomized so criminality will be impossible!
Watching any corporate media outlet is more effective than a lobotomy.
FTFY
Not to mention, imagine the calamity criminals could cause if they used ROADS.
Better shut down all the public streets and highways, you know, just to "be safe."