That doesn't justify needless complexity. It can allow capricious enforcement that plays on the resulting ignorance. Police play on the population's ignorance all the time. Lawyers do it to jurors, defendants, and judges. Hell, the politicians in DC love gaining the upper hand with slight reinterpretations of law. Expecting people to obey laws they have no knowledge of because they are obscure or counterintuitive is unreasonable. Also, overcomplexity can easily contribute to unenforceable law.
Tax law is a perfect example. People get screwed by the IRS regularly, and that's with a whole industry dedicated to ensuring taxpayers' tax returns cover all the bases. Its overcomplexity is what allows the loopholes the wealthy use to abuse it in the first place. This is why people want it simplified.
You can be as sanctimonious as you like, but it's completely unreasonable for people to have complete knowledge of every law that applies in every situation they are in. Let me know when you're done building strawman arguments. I never said that all complex law was oppression, just that it could be USED to oppress, and so-called 'advanced AI' would probably make this problem worse. If you want compliance with a law, then the people you expect to follow it must also understand it. What happens when law becomes humanly indecipherable and this AI is now required to determine the 'proper' ruling/punishment? Of course, you knew this was my premise already..
So, you have a complete understanding and knowledge of every law on the books? I doubt it. You're playing the odds like the rest of us. If advanced AI begins to outpace lawyers, then how can we expect average people to navigate them? Having to hire special law-people to interpret the law for us when challenged by the state (or by another private party) is bad enough.
If humans cannot understand the laws they are expected to obey, then the only reason to have such law is to enable capricious enforcement for the purpose of oppression.
There tends to be a perception amongst the windows/mac and web 3.0/mobile crowd that complex things be made simple at any cost, even if the result is only the appearance of simplicity, just to give newbs the impression they understand more than they actually do.
Well, sure, but the best fix is to remove the VM. If you want to run code on a client machine, distribute a system binary. This way we don't have to recreate modern operating system security models all over again inside the browser.`
If you have to silence criticism in order to retain power and respect (or for others to respect the legitimacy of your beliefs or ideology), you deserve neither. SJW types are no better than the reality of what they claim to fight. They've become oppressors themselves.
Having the government not arrest you for your speech never meant free from all consequences whatsoever, no matter what you say.
This is a favorite canard of those who want to retain their right to speech while taking it from others. This forms the basis for the hugbox mentality that is the backbone of today's social justice activism. I never said speech should come without consequence either, though I think that the ability to handle disagreement without resorting to mass censorship (up to purges) is needed in culture for it to remain healthy. Societies that refuse to acknowledge unpleasant truth eventually fail.
Nope. People like trump have the money to speak freely IN SPITE of SJWs. Average people increasingly cannot without being fired from jobs, kicked out of college, or falsely accused of heinous crimes.
It doesn't apply to other individuals or groups. If you stand on someone's private property (including their online property) and spout hatred toward them there is nothing in the law to keep them from kicking you out.
that's right. However, the current bone of contention is when groups lobby the government to legislate their social/political views on the rest. Once the state starts to pick sides, we've all lost.
I want 4 or 8k in a 23-24" 16:10 display, 30bit color, great black levels and viewing angles, no input lag (less than 1ms), and little to no motion blur.
The last thing I want is to pay a lot of money to see some shitty reality tv show in bitrate starved 8k instead of bitrate starved 1080i on a 50"+ screen. oh and commercials, the endless commercials...
Yeah we replaced actionscript with javascript. How is this really an improvement? We still have an insecure virtual machine facing the internet whenever the browser makes a request.
1. I can guarantee everyone's definition of asshole is different. 2. 'social pressure' is a euphemism for the same kind of 'assholery' you speak of. The only difference is that it conforms to your own personal view of what's right. 3. Women are just as likely to be sociopathic as men. The difference is that the behavior is tolerated, or even encouraged as 'empowerment.' If sarah sharp was a man, he'd've been told off in the same manner, just without all the mass attention. 4. Making politics the primary effort in communities leaves precious little resource for achieving intended goals. This is why the soviets failed btw. They refused to reward people for good work, only for good work that coincided with marxist ideals. The primary goal should be to get new members up to speed on the technical particulars and submission policies of the project asap. Leave politics out of it. They're irrelevant, but for some reason, people like you keep trying to inject your own brand of politics into everything. 5. Loss of one good submission from a quality member because he offended a cherry picked community of easily offended cowards counts against the project's success. That success is supposed to be the purpose of the community, not some pet politic.
My favorite open source communities are joyous playgrounds and rich in female contributors. I'm hesitant to post them here because/. has its share of miscreants, but get in touch if you want some follow-up. Thanks for keeping this problem at the fore.
How convenient. If they're such healthy communities, they should benefit from more attention.
Women don't have to start segregated women's projects, though there are plenty of feminists who support said hugboxes for women (of course men in men dominated communities are considered sexist pigs just for being there, never mind for actually wanting such things). You just have to show some evidence of this mass hatred of women in these communities. I wish you luck. The high profile examples all point to butthurt and fallacy. Lack of equal outcome is not necessarily due to some kind of patriarchal conspiracy. If you think it is, it's on you to prove it.
Sure, but only if the regulatory law is sane to begin with. Also, accusers should have to present evidence. No guilty until proven innocent style witchhunts.
I wonder. Trump could end up being the enema washington needs, or he could be the one who stitches the current players together into a cohesive tyranny we'll all regret. No one likes enemas, but sometimes they're necessary when the plumbing isn't working right. This is a good example of why we have term limits.
In summary, bureaucracy lives to serve itself. This is probably 'the' primary argument for minimal government. Like the rest of the government, if the NSA has shown any restraint, it was out of self interested maneuvering, not the interests of others.
These people who routinely advocate for mass surveillance of the rest of us are outraged at being surveilled themselves? The arrogance and/or cognitive dissonance required must be astronomical.
Slashdot Mirror
That doesn't justify needless complexity. It can allow capricious enforcement that plays on the resulting ignorance. Police play on the population's ignorance all the time. Lawyers do it to jurors, defendants, and judges. Hell, the politicians in DC love gaining the upper hand with slight reinterpretations of law. Expecting people to obey laws they have no knowledge of because they are obscure or counterintuitive is unreasonable. Also, overcomplexity can easily contribute to unenforceable law.
Tax law is a perfect example. People get screwed by the IRS regularly, and that's with a whole industry dedicated to ensuring taxpayers' tax returns cover all the bases. Its overcomplexity is what allows the loopholes the wealthy use to abuse it in the first place. This is why people want it simplified.
You can be as sanctimonious as you like, but it's completely unreasonable for people to have complete knowledge of every law that applies in every situation they are in. Let me know when you're done building strawman arguments. I never said that all complex law was oppression, just that it could be USED to oppress, and so-called 'advanced AI' would probably make this problem worse. If you want compliance with a law, then the people you expect to follow it must also understand it. What happens when law becomes humanly indecipherable and this AI is now required to determine the 'proper' ruling/punishment? Of course, you knew this was my premise already..
I used google for you and found this. It covers the issue broadly.
http://www.heritage.org/resear...
Actually, it's the left that clamors for more gun laws and healthcare regulation.
So, you have a complete understanding and knowledge of every law on the books? I doubt it. You're playing the odds like the rest of us. If advanced AI begins to outpace lawyers, then how can we expect average people to navigate them? Having to hire special law-people to interpret the law for us when challenged by the state (or by another private party) is bad enough.
If humans cannot understand the laws they are expected to obey, then the only reason to have such law is to enable capricious enforcement for the purpose of oppression.
Woe to all who need any sort of common procedure.
They want to do with surgeons what they already did to IT workers.
There tends to be a perception amongst the windows/mac and web 3.0/mobile crowd that complex things be made simple at any cost, even if the result is only the appearance of simplicity, just to give newbs the impression they understand more than they actually do.
Well, sure, but the best fix is to remove the VM. If you want to run code on a client machine, distribute a system binary. This way we don't have to recreate modern operating system security models all over again inside the browser.`
If you have to silence criticism in order to retain power and respect (or for others to respect the legitimacy of your beliefs or ideology), you deserve neither. SJW types are no better than the reality of what they claim to fight. They've become oppressors themselves.
Having the government not arrest you for your speech never meant free from all consequences whatsoever, no matter what you say.
This is a favorite canard of those who want to retain their right to speech while taking it from others. This forms the basis for the hugbox mentality that is the backbone of today's social justice activism. I never said speech should come without consequence either, though I think that the ability to handle disagreement without resorting to mass censorship (up to purges) is needed in culture for it to remain healthy. Societies that refuse to acknowledge unpleasant truth eventually fail.
Nope. People like trump have the money to speak freely IN SPITE of SJWs. Average people increasingly cannot without being fired from jobs, kicked out of college, or falsely accused of heinous crimes.
It doesn't apply to other individuals or groups. If you stand on someone's private property (including their online property) and spout hatred toward them there is nothing in the law to keep them from kicking you out.
that's right. However, the current bone of contention is when groups lobby the government to legislate their social/political views on the rest. Once the state starts to pick sides, we've all lost.
Because 16 bits is enough. It has blast processing.
I want 4 or 8k in a 23-24" 16:10 display, 30bit color, great black levels and viewing angles, no input lag (less than 1ms), and little to no motion blur.
The last thing I want is to pay a lot of money to see some shitty reality tv show in bitrate starved 8k instead of bitrate starved 1080i on a 50"+ screen. oh and commercials, the endless commercials...
Yeah we replaced actionscript with javascript. How is this really an improvement? We still have an insecure virtual machine facing the internet whenever the browser makes a request.
1. I can guarantee everyone's definition of asshole is different.
2. 'social pressure' is a euphemism for the same kind of 'assholery' you speak of. The only difference is that it conforms to your own personal view of what's right.
3. Women are just as likely to be sociopathic as men. The difference is that the behavior is tolerated, or even encouraged as 'empowerment.' If sarah sharp was a man, he'd've been told off in the same manner, just without all the mass attention.
4. Making politics the primary effort in communities leaves precious little resource for achieving intended goals. This is why the soviets failed btw. They refused to reward people for good work, only for good work that coincided with marxist ideals. The primary goal should be to get new members up to speed on the technical particulars and submission policies of the project asap. Leave politics out of it. They're irrelevant, but for some reason, people like you keep trying to inject your own brand of politics into everything.
5. Loss of one good submission from a quality member because he offended a cherry picked community of easily offended cowards counts against the project's success. That success is supposed to be the purpose of the community, not some pet politic.
My favorite open source communities are joyous playgrounds and rich in female contributors. I'm hesitant to post them here because /. has its share of miscreants, but get in touch if you want some follow-up. Thanks for keeping this problem at the fore.
How convenient. If they're such healthy communities, they should benefit from more attention.
Stating that a person is incompetent and backing it with evidence is not a personal attack.
Women don't have to start segregated women's projects, though there are plenty of feminists who support said hugboxes for women (of course men in men dominated communities are considered sexist pigs just for being there, never mind for actually wanting such things). You just have to show some evidence of this mass hatred of women in these communities. I wish you luck. The high profile examples all point to butthurt and fallacy. Lack of equal outcome is not necessarily due to some kind of patriarchal conspiracy. If you think it is, it's on you to prove it.
It would be interesting for us if you defined a few terms in your own words. These definitions are needed to truly understand your lingual intent.
1. misogyny
2. harassment (sexual or otherwise)
3. equality
4. opportunity
5. diversity
There might be others, but these are a good start.
Sure, but only if the regulatory law is sane to begin with. Also, accusers should have to present evidence. No guilty until proven innocent style witchhunts.
I wonder. Trump could end up being the enema washington needs, or he could be the one who stitches the current players together into a cohesive tyranny we'll all regret. No one likes enemas, but sometimes they're necessary when the plumbing isn't working right. This is a good example of why we have term limits.
I'm not sure what to do for this coming election.
In summary, bureaucracy lives to serve itself. This is probably 'the' primary argument for minimal government. Like the rest of the government, if the NSA has shown any restraint, it was out of self interested maneuvering, not the interests of others.
No I don't. You need to reread what I said to him slowly and carefully. Then you'd realize I was discussing it with him.
These people who routinely advocate for mass surveillance of the rest of us are outraged at being surveilled themselves? The arrogance and/or cognitive dissonance required must be astronomical.