By this reasoning any language is math. Here you might say "but not all language is rational"... to which I'll say "not all math is correct". I can say 1+1=pineapple... is that math or not?
You conflating math with language and thus equating all languages to each other.
My point, sir... is that there is a distinction between MATH as a scholastic subject taught in a university and LOGIC as a philosophical pursuit as taught in university or simply practiced in the school of hard knocks of life.
My point is self evident.. You have a specific programming language that looks more like math than the others in its syntax? Okay. Good for you. That doesn't mean people coding Java programs are better at it if they mastered some field of higher mathematics or not.
The point of the article and my comment upon it is that programming and mathematics are cousins in the same philosophical school but neither one is subordinate to the other. They are related but different.
I also liked the barrage of toothless AC peasants cackling below you attempting to tag me with rotten produce.
The white listing system works and has worked for many years and there are many applications of it that are known to work quite well.
They're paradoxically easier to set up than blacklisting systems because they're a great deal more simple. All you do is make it so the computer can run LESS than it was designed to run and you set LESS to EQUAL what you want it to run. The other things that COULD run on the system before... simply can't.
I love that you think this is hard to do... think of the way a black listing anti virus system works. It looks for known bad code and then intercepts it. That's how it works.
A white listing system does the opposite. It intercepts EVERYTHING and prevents ANYTHING what so ever from running assuming that anything and everything is a virus... EXCEPT things specifically defined to it as NOT a virus.
Its the same system only instead of trying to guess every virus and malware possible... I just define whatever is currently running as GOOD and if anything is added to the system then it is ASSUMED to be bad unless otherwise stated.
Its a very simple system and I operate white lists pervasively on many systems using several of the most popular techniques for implementing them.
This is fundamental IT security. That you're ignorant of it is not surprising or embarrassing for you. You don't know what you're talking about. I do. I am an expert. You're an AC shit head.
Math is a symbolic subset of LOGIC. Math must BE logical but not all things which are logical are also math. That said, anything which is logical should representable as math but just because something isn't represented as math does not make it illogical.
Coding is not math. If you showed C to a mathematician he wouldn't know how to read it unless he also knew C.
What is important in coding is LOGIC. Highly logical/rational people do well at coding. People that are good at math are generally also good at logic. However, I've known quite a few math whizzes that were actually pretty bad at logic outside of traditional symbolic mathematics. Why? They were bad at defining variables, operators, etc. They couldn't convert the situation into math. And because they couldn't do that, they couldn't leverage their facility with math to solve the problem.
And that goes both ways. There are some very very logical people... highly highly rational... that are utter shit at higher math.
Take a lot of business leaders that do very well year after year. They make BILLIONS by understanding complex systems and relationships and choosing the optimal solution repeatedly so that they make boatloads of money for themselves, their investors, and their companies.
But do you think these guys are sharper with the math than your average math graduate student? Generally not. Put those two people head to head though in the business world and that veteran business mind is going to prison rape the math graduate when it comes to results.
Being good at math is not the same thing as being good at logic IN GENERAL. And being good at logic does not make one good at complex mathematics.
You have a white list of acceptable code and instructions and those are the only ones permitted...
Or you're basically daring the hackers that you're smarter than they are and you have thought of and dealt with any conceivable exploit they could think of or find.
And guess what... you are not smarter than they are... individually man for man... maybe... collectively? Not even remotely.
And it gets better because not only are you not smarter than them but you're also not aware of every exploit they're going to use.
Which means your blacklisting of naughty bits of code will accomplish fuck all.
You stop this by WHITE LISTing good code and good instructions. And yes yes... the thing that makes some things good or bad is the context... but that is implicit in the concept of white listing isn't it, chum? So there you go.
You white list.
Now is the home user douchebag going to white list properly? of fucking course not. Fuck him. He's on his fucking own. Sell him some of your blacklist snake oil. But for the SECURE environments... I'm talking about corporate and government systems that you don't want to be a giant fucking shit show... You whitelist or go fuck yourself.
In the next incarnation of the universe assuming any such thing happens... I would suggest you adopt less instantly self destructive arguments least you will sadly go through something of a ground hog day repetition of the same thing until you finally get it right.
We can see from the pebble its actually that pretty high res screen that is draining your battery.
The processing is mostly offloaded on the smartphone and the bluetooth etc is pretty energy efficient. Its the screen. Put one of those e-ink displays on it and I betcha it lasts for a week on a single charge.
As to dumping all my shit on some sort of charging mat. I still need to leave it on that mat while it charges. Not a fan. Yes I have to sleep and stuff but I frequently need to be out and about using my hardware for well beyond its battery life. And that necessitates me using mobile charging by having a little battery I plug into my phone and charge it WHILE I USE IT.... Happens all the time. I have a backpack which is my male purse effectively... and in there is a battery pack. and when I need my phone or whatever to not shit and die on me while I'm doing things. I throw my phone in the bag with battery and it tops the phone up while it is in there.
Here is the REAL wearing able device that every smartphone should actually have...
STEREO BLUETOOTH HEADPHONES!!!!:D
I've been using them for years and years. It means I can throw my cellphone in my bag and if someone calls me... I press a button on the headset and boom... "harrow there?" And it has the virtue of not making me look like an idiot which is what the earpiece bluetooth sets do. You look like a pretentious idiot with a one ear model. Because you're signaling to the world that you're so important that people are calling you constantly to talk to you and so you just need to have this thing on your ear at all times. Even if that is actually true... you look like a jackass.
HOWEVER... if you have the stereo bluetooth headset you possibly are listening to music or whatever. No pretense. Just a guy walking around enjoying life.
And that is what I use. And it means I put my stupid phone in the stupid bag with the giant stupid battery and I don't have to worry about it ever running out of power because I can have all the radios on my phone operating all day long on that battery and it won't even drain half of it. Its genius.
So why do I need the fucking watch again? To tell me the time? This implies that there are not clocks around me at all times telling me the time. My computer that I'm staring at right now is telling me the time. My microwave tells me the time. The damn clock on the wall tick tick ticks the time. I don't need anything to tell me the time because I already have a zillion things telling me the fucking time.
And if I didn't... I'd still have my smartphone which would tell me the time in about 5 seconds which is how long it take me to look at it in my backpack.
So... what is this smart watch doing for me?
Because I'm seeing two things and two things only.
1. Its a toy. WEE toys!:D FUN.
2. Its a status symbol to tell everyone how fucking amazing I am because I bought a smart watch. Which to me, sounds like a bug cited as a feature. I mean... you might as well put the fucking mono bluetooth ear piece back in... And here you might say "but there are good status symbols and bad ones"... Yes... BMW good... Doctor's stethoscope good... giant diamond ring good... secret service escorts where ever you go good... notice something here? All the "good" status symbols actually cost something in money or accomplishment. The gold iwatch or whatever it is called that costs 10,000 dollars is a status symbol sort of... I can't almost understand that one. But the cheaper watches? Ehm... that's like saying an xbox is a status symbol. It isn't an impressive one. You can't have cheap status symbols. And yes... if it costs less than months or ideally years of income of a high income individual then it isn't much of a status symbol. Unless you're a broke hipster and keep throwing shit on yourself from a thrift store and pretend that you're wearing it ironically and not because you're actually that poor.
*shoots idiot in the face with a nice white canvas back drop*
Hmmm... Yeah... I like that tooth lodged in the right corner. I think this is a winner.
*sprays some sealant on the splatter covered canvas and hangs it up on a wall*
I call it "how this argument ends".
Life is meaningless so your death is meaningless and the manner in which you were killed was also meaningless thus any moral, ethical, or legal judgment of it is also meaningless.
You've just negated all thought thus negating yourself.
I'm not saying you can't write a law down on a piece of paper.
I'm not saying you can't order police to do X in condition Y.
What I am saying is that whatever you do with the civic authorities, you can't stop the process because it isn't going to happen in places where you're going to be able to stop it.
Your regulatory framework presupposes that the police will exist at choke points in the process that allows them to monitor and control the situation.
What I am telling you is that the new paradigm will BYPASS your choke points.
You're like a person saying you can stop smuggling by putting people at border check points when the smuggling is happening through teleportation or some other means that simply doesn't go anywhere near your check points.
I'm not saying you can't putt little booths next to roads and have men with guns come out and inspect cars and people that pass through those checkpoints.
I'm saying that the whole the whole thing will happen no where near your check points and so whether you have them or not will be irrelevant.
I'm not talking about perfect compliance as the standard here. I'm saying your regime will fail COMPLETELY.
I can walk out of this room right now and get as much heroine and cocaine as I want. I can do those drugs while 10 prostitutes lick every exposed bit of skin on my body.
The only thing stopping me is my personal disinterest in spending my evening that way.
Your laws are utterly meaningless.
You think you can ban something that can't be banned absent a regulatory system so complete that it would be politically unacceptable under any conceivable political system short of a dictatorship.
You cannot win. All you can do is lie to yourself and waste your own time and money trying to do something you will fail at before you even start.
I mean... if I have a smartphone... and I have to have one to make this thing work... why do I need/want it? its just another thing I have to recharge every day.
I have three things I have to recharge every day. Three. Not including living things which sort of need to be recharged but... lets skip over that.
But I have three every day and that's quite enough thank... actually... hmmm... no, four... four things. That's quite enough thank you.
So lets just drop the smart watch thing for now. What I'd actually like to see are some better battery charging accessories. I know there are a lot of those but I'd like to see more. One thing I want to see more of is wearable batteries that self charge by wearing them. I know they exist but I think they're expensive and don't work well and maybe look stupid. Fix these things. Make the cost reasonable for the return, make them work better, and while you're at it make me not get shunned by the rest of society so I suffer gene death simply because I don't want to have to worry about where I'm charging my whatever.
Once we have the wearing able self charging battery... I don't have to worry about charging all this shit. It just charges when I carry it/wear it.
The IT Department is like legal or accounting but is often not given that kind of status in the company. When they're not... they're asked to do impossible things, given no authority to do them and are treated like idiots by people that are bigger idiots.
The NK model is holding. I'm not saying fail as in 1000 years... I'm saying fail as in FUCKING INSTANTLY.
The drug war was lost INSTANTLY. It wasn't like they were winning for a moment. They lost as soon as it started.
And these regulatory regimes based on outmoded contextually irrelevant industrial models will fail when applied to situations and systems they cannot regulate.
Then all countries are imaginary, all law is imaginary, fiat currencies are imaginary...
And that welfare you're collecting on the basis of imaginary money and imaginary law because you crossed an imaginary line... that all collapses.
Your fucktarded position would lead immediately to total and complete anarchy. And because you're probably too stupid to realize the problem with total instant anarchy, consider that the immediate response to that will be that the people will accept the first authoritarian that stands up in the anarchy and restores order...
Which could be ANYONE and more likely than not will be someone that wants to be an authoritarian and is comfortable in that role. which means the result of your complete and total idiocy is that you'll probably spend the rest of your sad little life under a fascistic dictatorship which will also likely be very racist because being racist in such environment would stoke INGROUP/OUTGROUP loyalties thus strengthening the cohesion of the dictatorship... and they would probably not be the passive racists that just don't like X... they'd more likely be the oven and poison gas type.
Here's the problem with you... you don't think anything through. You know NOTHING of human group psychology. You know nothing of politics. You know nothing of sociology.
You basically are one of the most ignorant people I've met on this forum. And yes, even though you're cowardly hidind behind AC I know exactly who you are because no one on this site shares your opinion besides you. And I question if more than 1 in a million in this world share it either. And before you act the hero on that point, let me point out further that 1 in a million also has a quite a few astounding idiots in it.
Have all the regulation you want. Anything short of full North Korea levels of suppression will fail.
You're coming to a paradigm shift. Your social model won't survive it.
Think of the social models that existed before agriculture. Think of the social models that existed immediately after agriculture. Think of the social models that existed prior to the industrial revolution. Think of the social models that existed immediately after the industrial revolution.
You have come upon a paradigm shift. I can guess what it will do but its too complicated for me to really reason it all out in detail.
What I do know is that that status quo won't survive. It never does. Things change.
If we all own Omni Tools... anything makers... things that can make explosives, drugs, automatic weapons... you can't stop it.
The reality is that you won't even be able to recognize half of the stuff. Your system is based on regulating stake holding commercial interests. These are economic choke points. But in the new paradigm those won't exist or will be much much less prominent. And who is to say that I have to make my contraband look like anything you'd recognize? if I've got a micro factory that can make custom anything for me... then I can put a gun in an ipad. Imagine the most absurd cold war nonsense. There's no reason the average citizen couldn't be printing out that weapon. What are you going to do? X Ray everything? And even if you do... who is to say that the internal workings of the thing couldn't be made to look harmless or simply not suspicious.
And then you might say "well I could look for certain chemical residues"... sure... but who says I even need to use chemical propellents? A good deal of the cold war assassination weapons were air rifles. Quieter. And then what are you looking for... CO2?
The CIA during the Cold War had an assassination pistol that fired a 3 MM ice bullet that contained a drop of shell fish derived neuro toxin. You could shoot someone with this this thing a crowded room. No one would even hear the shot go off. The toxin causes anyone hit with it to have a fatal heart attack. The body could be examined and the wound would look like scab or a pin prick. The bullet melted into water. The neuro toxin breaks down almost immediately. It is a functionally undetectable assassination weapon that the US has had in its inventory since at least the 1960s.
You're thinking in industrial terms. You're thinking about how you'll regulate blue collar people in the industrial era. That's not the context.
What you're talking about is akin to banning marijuana. Its a plant. Any idiot can grow it in some soil. Its illegal throughout most of the first world and its impossible to control throughout the first world.
Now imagine instead of some drug that a teenager can grow in some soil... you're dealing with microwave sized factories that can produce... just about anything.
Your regulation paradigm won't survive that.
What is my solution? Regulate people... not technology. Its a radical change in policy but the alternative is anarchy. The old paradigm is non-functional in this setting. Totally pointless waste of time.
Regulating people... knowing who is who and where they are and what they're like... Data mining and profiling... using expert systems to estimate the chances of X person doing Y crime.
Short of that... you're going to be subjected to constant terrorist attacks, mass shootings, drug outbreaks, bombings... whatever. And the tools used to do all that stuff are just going to get better. Better electronics, better sensors... we are already seeing drones being used in crimes... mostly smuggling as of now but there's no reason a drone couldn't buzz a stadium and disperse anthrax or something over 30,000 people.
Very well, then using your only rules where I can apply the most hyperbolic interpretation of what you say... apparently you believe the government has absolute authority to do anything what so ever... up and including raping you death because Rule 34 subsection A paragraph 2 of the Rape Idiots That Think The Government Should Have Absolute Authority Act of 2015.
Now we see if you have the integrity to admit you made a dumb argument and moderate your position so we can engage the issue in a constrictive way... or if you're a whiny shithead that will dig his little heels in pathetically even though you've got nothing to get a grip on... and I push you into into the abyss of self contradiction.
I'm not in any of these places. And even if I were, they're restricting advertising or the export of embargoed technology...
I can still call whomever a cocktoddler. Or advocate for insane ideologies. Or tell everyone about that thing that happened that is super embarrassing to certain powerful people.
Show me the censorship imposed by the US government on the internet at large?
The US refusing to allow certain technology to be easily moved out of the US into embargoed countries is hardly of relevance here.
If I post something critical of the US government on face book whilst living in Iran or North Korea is facebook going to be required to take it down as per US government rules?
Quote it. I just scanned the TOS and there was nothing in there except this:
"" Other
If you are a resident of or have your principal place of business in the US or Canada, this Statement is an agreement between you and Facebook, Inc. Otherwise, this Statement is an agreement between you and Facebook Ireland Limited. References to âoeus,â âoewe,â and âoeourâ mean either Facebook, Inc. or Facebook Ireland Limited, as appropriate. ""
Facebook has appeared to have incorporated and legally shielded themselves from international harassment by routing international complaints through their Irish subsidiary which means you'll be suing them in Irish court or something. Have fun with that.
Over other things... arguably... but hacking? No. pardon snowden and don't engage in that sort of behavior for a decade and you MIGHT get some credibility there. But what value is it to the US to sanction anyway?
We probably get more out of hacking than the sanctions anyway.
I have a hard time seeing pornography as freedom of speech given that the intention is to provide fapping material.
That said, the US doesn't prevent facebook from posting porn. That is facebook's own policy. And I'm okay with that. My issue is when the censorship is imposed by a government.
Its not the same thing on two counts either one of which invalidates the argument.
Slashdot Mirror
By this reasoning any language is math. Here you might say "but not all language is rational"... to which I'll say "not all math is correct". I can say 1+1=pineapple... is that math or not?
You conflating math with language and thus equating all languages to each other.
My point, sir... is that there is a distinction between MATH as a scholastic subject taught in a university and LOGIC as a philosophical pursuit as taught in university or simply practiced in the school of hard knocks of life.
My point is self evident.. You have a specific programming language that looks more like math than the others in its syntax? Okay. Good for you. That doesn't mean people coding Java programs are better at it if they mastered some field of higher mathematics or not.
The point of the article and my comment upon it is that programming and mathematics are cousins in the same philosophical school but neither one is subordinate to the other. They are related but different.
How are you introducing the malware into the system? Specifically.
Its like talking to some moron that thinks his imaginary friends are supporting evidence.
Shall I click "post anonymously" here to make it look like I'm a third party when really I'm just agreeing with myself?
You're fooling no one but yourself with this pathetic display.
No it isn't. If I turned in a sheet of lamda calculus code in response to a test question on a math exam, I would get a ZERO.
That is a math professor judging that my response is not a valid response.
That you can have MATH in coding is not the same thing as saying that coding is math.
their are many companies that offer white listing solutions...
Here was one I found with a single google search:
http://www.kaspersky.com/partn...
I also liked the barrage of toothless AC peasants cackling below you attempting to tag me with rotten produce.
The white listing system works and has worked for many years and there are many applications of it that are known to work quite well.
They're paradoxically easier to set up than blacklisting systems because they're a great deal more simple. All you do is make it so the computer can run LESS than it was designed to run and you set LESS to EQUAL what you want it to run. The other things that COULD run on the system before... simply can't.
I love that you think this is hard to do... think of the way a black listing anti virus system works. It looks for known bad code and then intercepts it. That's how it works.
A white listing system does the opposite. It intercepts EVERYTHING and prevents ANYTHING what so ever from running assuming that anything and everything is a virus... EXCEPT things specifically defined to it as NOT a virus.
Its the same system only instead of trying to guess every virus and malware possible... I just define whatever is currently running as GOOD and if anything is added to the system then it is ASSUMED to be bad unless otherwise stated.
Its a very simple system and I operate white lists pervasively on many systems using several of the most popular techniques for implementing them.
This is fundamental IT security. That you're ignorant of it is not surprising or embarrassing for you. You don't know what you're talking about. I do. I am an expert. You're an AC shit head.
*wink*
Math is a symbolic subset of LOGIC. Math must BE logical but not all things which are logical are also math. That said, anything which is logical should representable as math but just because something isn't represented as math does not make it illogical.
Coding is not math. If you showed C to a mathematician he wouldn't know how to read it unless he also knew C.
What is important in coding is LOGIC. Highly logical/rational people do well at coding. People that are good at math are generally also good at logic. However, I've known quite a few math whizzes that were actually pretty bad at logic outside of traditional symbolic mathematics. Why? They were bad at defining variables, operators, etc. They couldn't convert the situation into math. And because they couldn't do that, they couldn't leverage their facility with math to solve the problem.
And that goes both ways. There are some very very logical people... highly highly rational... that are utter shit at higher math.
Take a lot of business leaders that do very well year after year. They make BILLIONS by understanding complex systems and relationships and choosing the optimal solution repeatedly so that they make boatloads of money for themselves, their investors, and their companies.
But do you think these guys are sharper with the math than your average math graduate student? Generally not. Put those two people head to head though in the business world and that veteran business mind is going to prison rape the math graduate when it comes to results.
Being good at math is not the same thing as being good at logic IN GENERAL. And being good at logic does not make one good at complex mathematics.
You have a white list of acceptable code and instructions and those are the only ones permitted...
Or you're basically daring the hackers that you're smarter than they are and you have thought of and dealt with any conceivable exploit they could think of or find.
And guess what... you are not smarter than they are... individually man for man... maybe... collectively? Not even remotely.
And it gets better because not only are you not smarter than them but you're also not aware of every exploit they're going to use.
Which means your blacklisting of naughty bits of code will accomplish fuck all.
You stop this by WHITE LISTing good code and good instructions. And yes yes... the thing that makes some things good or bad is the context... but that is implicit in the concept of white listing isn't it, chum? So there you go.
You white list.
Now is the home user douchebag going to white list properly? of fucking course not. Fuck him. He's on his fucking own. Sell him some of your blacklist snake oil. But for the SECURE environments... I'm talking about corporate and government systems that you don't want to be a giant fucking shit show... You whitelist or go fuck yourself.
Its that simple.
No no... White list... or:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
*shhhh*
Preserved splatters on canvas have no further rebuttals.
You're done. You rhetorically killed yourself roughly in this manner:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
In the next incarnation of the universe assuming any such thing happens... I would suggest you adopt less instantly self destructive arguments least you will sadly go through something of a ground hog day repetition of the same thing until you finally get it right.
We can see from the pebble its actually that pretty high res screen that is draining your battery.
The processing is mostly offloaded on the smartphone and the bluetooth etc is pretty energy efficient. Its the screen. Put one of those e-ink displays on it and I betcha it lasts for a week on a single charge.
As to dumping all my shit on some sort of charging mat. I still need to leave it on that mat while it charges. Not a fan. Yes I have to sleep and stuff but I frequently need to be out and about using my hardware for well beyond its battery life. And that necessitates me using mobile charging by having a little battery I plug into my phone and charge it WHILE I USE IT.... Happens all the time. I have a backpack which is my male purse effectively... and in there is a battery pack. and when I need my phone or whatever to not shit and die on me while I'm doing things. I throw my phone in the bag with battery and it tops the phone up while it is in there.
Here is the REAL wearing able device that every smartphone should actually have...
STEREO BLUETOOTH HEADPHONES!!!! :D
I've been using them for years and years. It means I can throw my cellphone in my bag and if someone calls me... I press a button on the headset and boom... "harrow there?" And it has the virtue of not making me look like an idiot which is what the earpiece bluetooth sets do. You look like a pretentious idiot with a one ear model. Because you're signaling to the world that you're so important that people are calling you constantly to talk to you and so you just need to have this thing on your ear at all times. Even if that is actually true... you look like a jackass.
HOWEVER... if you have the stereo bluetooth headset you possibly are listening to music or whatever. No pretense. Just a guy walking around enjoying life.
And that is what I use. And it means I put my stupid phone in the stupid bag with the giant stupid battery and I don't have to worry about it ever running out of power because I can have all the radios on my phone operating all day long on that battery and it won't even drain half of it. Its genius.
So why do I need the fucking watch again? To tell me the time? This implies that there are not clocks around me at all times telling me the time. My computer that I'm staring at right now is telling me the time. My microwave tells me the time. The damn clock on the wall tick tick ticks the time. I don't need anything to tell me the time because I already have a zillion things telling me the fucking time.
And if I didn't... I'd still have my smartphone which would tell me the time in about 5 seconds which is how long it take me to look at it in my backpack.
So... what is this smart watch doing for me?
Because I'm seeing two things and two things only.
1. Its a toy. WEE toys! :D FUN.
2. Its a status symbol to tell everyone how fucking amazing I am because I bought a smart watch. Which to me, sounds like a bug cited as a feature. I mean... you might as well put the fucking mono bluetooth ear piece back in... And here you might say "but there are good status symbols and bad ones"... Yes... BMW good... Doctor's stethoscope good... giant diamond ring good... secret service escorts where ever you go good... notice something here? All the "good" status symbols actually cost something in money or accomplishment. The gold iwatch or whatever it is called that costs 10,000 dollars is a status symbol sort of... I can't almost understand that one. But the cheaper watches? Ehm... that's like saying an xbox is a status symbol. It isn't an impressive one. You can't have cheap status symbols. And yes... if it costs less than months or ideally years of income of a high income individual then it isn't much of a status symbol. Unless you're a broke hipster and keep throwing shit on yourself from a thrift store and pretend that you're wearing it ironically and not because you're actually that poor.
Where am I going with all this? I don't see the
*shoots idiot in the face with a nice white canvas back drop*
Hmmm... Yeah... I like that tooth lodged in the right corner. I think this is a winner.
*sprays some sealant on the splatter covered canvas and hangs it up on a wall*
I call it "how this argument ends".
Life is meaningless so your death is meaningless and the manner in which you were killed was also meaningless thus any moral, ethical, or legal judgment of it is also meaningless.
You've just negated all thought thus negating yourself.
End of discussion.
You've missed my point.
I'm not saying you can't write a law down on a piece of paper.
I'm not saying you can't order police to do X in condition Y.
What I am saying is that whatever you do with the civic authorities, you can't stop the process because it isn't going to happen in places where you're going to be able to stop it.
Your regulatory framework presupposes that the police will exist at choke points in the process that allows them to monitor and control the situation.
What I am telling you is that the new paradigm will BYPASS your choke points.
You're like a person saying you can stop smuggling by putting people at border check points when the smuggling is happening through teleportation or some other means that simply doesn't go anywhere near your check points.
I'm not saying you can't putt little booths next to roads and have men with guns come out and inspect cars and people that pass through those checkpoints.
I'm saying that the whole the whole thing will happen no where near your check points and so whether you have them or not will be irrelevant.
I'm not talking about perfect compliance as the standard here. I'm saying your regime will fail COMPLETELY.
I can walk out of this room right now and get as much heroine and cocaine as I want. I can do those drugs while 10 prostitutes lick every exposed bit of skin on my body.
The only thing stopping me is my personal disinterest in spending my evening that way.
Your laws are utterly meaningless.
You think you can ban something that can't be banned absent a regulatory system so complete that it would be politically unacceptable under any conceivable political system short of a dictatorship.
You cannot win. All you can do is lie to yourself and waste your own time and money trying to do something you will fail at before you even start.
I mean... if I have a smartphone... and I have to have one to make this thing work... why do I need/want it? its just another thing I have to recharge every day.
I have three things I have to recharge every day. Three. Not including living things which sort of need to be recharged but... lets skip over that.
But I have three every day and that's quite enough thank... actually... hmmm... no, four... four things. That's quite enough thank you.
So lets just drop the smart watch thing for now. What I'd actually like to see are some better battery charging accessories. I know there are a lot of those but I'd like to see more. One thing I want to see more of is wearable batteries that self charge by wearing them. I know they exist but I think they're expensive and don't work well and maybe look stupid. Fix these things. Make the cost reasonable for the return, make them work better, and while you're at it make me not get shunned by the rest of society so I suffer gene death simply because I don't want to have to worry about where I'm charging my whatever.
Once we have the wearing able self charging battery... I don't have to worry about charging all this shit. It just charges when I carry it/wear it.
The IT Department is like legal or accounting but is often not given that kind of status in the company. When they're not... they're asked to do impossible things, given no authority to do them and are treated like idiots by people that are bigger idiots.
And that creates unhappiness.
The NK model is holding. I'm not saying fail as in 1000 years... I'm saying fail as in FUCKING INSTANTLY.
The drug war was lost INSTANTLY. It wasn't like they were winning for a moment. They lost as soon as it started.
And these regulatory regimes based on outmoded contextually irrelevant industrial models will fail when applied to situations and systems they cannot regulate.
Then all countries are imaginary, all law is imaginary, fiat currencies are imaginary...
And that welfare you're collecting on the basis of imaginary money and imaginary law because you crossed an imaginary line... that all collapses.
Your fucktarded position would lead immediately to total and complete anarchy. And because you're probably too stupid to realize the problem with total instant anarchy, consider that the immediate response to that will be that the people will accept the first authoritarian that stands up in the anarchy and restores order...
Which could be ANYONE and more likely than not will be someone that wants to be an authoritarian and is comfortable in that role. which means the result of your complete and total idiocy is that you'll probably spend the rest of your sad little life under a fascistic dictatorship which will also likely be very racist because being racist in such environment would stoke INGROUP/OUTGROUP loyalties thus strengthening the cohesion of the dictatorship... and they would probably not be the passive racists that just don't like X... they'd more likely be the oven and poison gas type.
Here's the problem with you... you don't think anything through. You know NOTHING of human group psychology. You know nothing of politics. You know nothing of sociology.
You basically are one of the most ignorant people I've met on this forum. And yes, even though you're cowardly hidind behind AC I know exactly who you are because no one on this site shares your opinion besides you. And I question if more than 1 in a million in this world share it either. And before you act the hero on that point, let me point out further that 1 in a million also has a quite a few astounding idiots in it.
Have all the regulation you want. Anything short of full North Korea levels of suppression will fail.
You're coming to a paradigm shift. Your social model won't survive it.
Think of the social models that existed before agriculture.
Think of the social models that existed immediately after agriculture.
Think of the social models that existed prior to the industrial revolution.
Think of the social models that existed immediately after the industrial revolution.
You have come upon a paradigm shift. I can guess what it will do but its too complicated for me to really reason it all out in detail.
What I do know is that that status quo won't survive. It never does. Things change.
If we all own Omni Tools... anything makers... things that can make explosives, drugs, automatic weapons... you can't stop it.
The reality is that you won't even be able to recognize half of the stuff. Your system is based on regulating stake holding commercial interests. These are economic choke points. But in the new paradigm those won't exist or will be much much less prominent. And who is to say that I have to make my contraband look like anything you'd recognize? if I've got a micro factory that can make custom anything for me... then I can put a gun in an ipad. Imagine the most absurd cold war nonsense. There's no reason the average citizen couldn't be printing out that weapon. What are you going to do? X Ray everything? And even if you do... who is to say that the internal workings of the thing couldn't be made to look harmless or simply not suspicious.
And then you might say "well I could look for certain chemical residues"... sure... but who says I even need to use chemical propellents? A good deal of the cold war assassination weapons were air rifles. Quieter. And then what are you looking for... CO2?
The CIA during the Cold War had an assassination pistol that fired a 3 MM ice bullet that contained a drop of shell fish derived neuro toxin. You could shoot someone with this this thing a crowded room. No one would even hear the shot go off. The toxin causes anyone hit with it to have a fatal heart attack. The body could be examined and the wound would look like scab or a pin prick. The bullet melted into water. The neuro toxin breaks down almost immediately. It is a functionally undetectable assassination weapon that the US has had in its inventory since at least the 1960s.
You're thinking in industrial terms. You're thinking about how you'll regulate blue collar people in the industrial era. That's not the context.
What you're talking about is akin to banning marijuana. Its a plant. Any idiot can grow it in some soil. Its illegal throughout most of the first world and its impossible to control throughout the first world.
Now imagine instead of some drug that a teenager can grow in some soil... you're dealing with microwave sized factories that can produce... just about anything.
Your regulation paradigm won't survive that.
What is my solution? Regulate people... not technology. Its a radical change in policy but the alternative is anarchy. The old paradigm is non-functional in this setting. Totally pointless waste of time.
Regulating people... knowing who is who and where they are and what they're like... Data mining and profiling... using expert systems to estimate the chances of X person doing Y crime.
Short of that ... you're going to be subjected to constant terrorist attacks, mass shootings, drug outbreaks, bombings... whatever. And the tools used to do all that stuff are just going to get better. Better electronics, better sensors... we are already seeing drones being used in crimes... mostly smuggling as of now but there's no reason a drone couldn't buzz a stadium and disperse anthrax or something over 30,000 people.
Its coming. Its not a matter of if but when.
... Reductio ad absurdum?
Very well, then using your only rules where I can apply the most hyperbolic interpretation of what you say... apparently you believe the government has absolute authority to do anything what so ever... up and including raping you death because Rule 34 subsection A paragraph 2 of the Rape Idiots That Think The Government Should Have Absolute Authority Act of 2015.
Now we see if you have the integrity to admit you made a dumb argument and moderate your position so we can engage the issue in a constrictive way... or if you're a whiny shithead that will dig his little heels in pathetically even though you've got nothing to get a grip on... and I push you into into the abyss of self contradiction.
Your choice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Fallacies are indefensible. You can't dig your heels in.
Was anyone shocked by that one? Anyone?
Can you cite something for me? Because I'm pretty sure it is all vitamin D.
How does this censor me?
I'm not in any of these places. And even if I were, they're restricting advertising or the export of embargoed technology...
I can still call whomever a cocktoddler. Or advocate for insane ideologies. Or tell everyone about that thing that happened that is super embarrassing to certain powerful people.
Show me the censorship imposed by the US government on the internet at large?
The US refusing to allow certain technology to be easily moved out of the US into embargoed countries is hardly of relevance here.
If I post something critical of the US government on face book whilst living in Iran or North Korea is facebook going to be required to take it down as per US government rules?
Nope.
So... Access Denied.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Quote it. I just scanned the TOS and there was nothing in there except this:
""
Other
If you are a resident of or have your principal place of business in the US or Canada, this Statement is an agreement between you and Facebook, Inc. Otherwise, this Statement is an agreement between you and Facebook Ireland Limited. References to âoeus,â âoewe,â and âoeourâ mean either Facebook, Inc. or Facebook Ireland Limited, as appropriate.
""
Facebook has appeared to have incorporated and legally shielded themselves from international harassment by routing international complaints through their Irish subsidiary which means you'll be suing them in Irish court or something. Have fun with that.
Over other things... arguably... but hacking? No. pardon snowden and don't engage in that sort of behavior for a decade and you MIGHT get some credibility there. But what value is it to the US to sanction anyway?
We probably get more out of hacking than the sanctions anyway.
Poor adobe. *gives huggles to adobe*
I'm okay with registering so long as any non-felon can do it.
If the registration process becomes something that ultimately keeps it out of the hands of most people then I refuse.
Here you might say "but its dangerous"... only if the security is shit. Don't have shitty security.
I have a hard time seeing pornography as freedom of speech given that the intention is to provide fapping material.
That said, the US doesn't prevent facebook from posting porn. That is facebook's own policy. And I'm okay with that. My issue is when the censorship is imposed by a government.
Its not the same thing on two counts either one of which invalidates the argument.