131–140 of 190 posts
at this point, hardware vendors should just stop making these. It's always been a gimmick; it's just run it's course.
Just another reason to forgo the convenience of biometrics in favor of a password/phrase that exists only in your mind. At least for now, that's something you can't be compelled to produce. Really though, this descent into a police state is such a pathetic outcome for this country. Dangerous, scary, and tragic, but also... pathetic. This is what happens when a sizeable majority don't even participate in the electoral…
(Anybody got ready access to med school cadavers with the fingerprints intact?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The current voting system doesn't help. A national popular vote for president under IRV and proportional representation for Congress are necessary parts of the solution.
irv would be nice, but I feel like campaign finance reform would help more.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A republic, as far as I understand it, implies that a (thoughtful, responsible, .., elected) minority is afforded the delegated power to legislate, judge, and administer. Elected, yes. Thoughtful and responsible depends on your point of view. For example: there is a substantial contingent of people in the U.S. that want the country to be a Christian theocracy. (Most of these people believe that this is how things u…
> The irony is that by blaming the system instead of acknowledging that the outcomes we see are the result of democracy working exactly as intended you are actually contributing to the problem, which is that everyone retreats into their echo chamber and spends their energy vilifying anyone who doesn't agree with them instead of working constructively to figure out how all 7+ billion of us are going to get along on th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reading this from the Forbes article: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3143273/Mass-Fing... Relevant bits start at page 5 (III - LEGAL DISCUSSION). Compelling a person to provide his or her fingerprint does not implicate, let alone violate, the Fifth Amendment. "[B]oth federal and state courts have usually held that [the Fifth Amendment] offers no protection against compulsion to submit to fingerprinting."…
But my phone is mine, it contains deeply personal things that I put on there without the intention of sharing them. How is forcing me to unlock my phone anything other than forcing me to testifying against myself? If they could, they would read your mind too.
The Department of Justice is saying that a fingerprint is more like a key than a password I guess. Or alternatively that unlocking phones is search and not testimony.
The EFF seems to be primarily objecting on the grounds that a search of "all devices in the building" is too vague to be a correct warrant.
[1] http://www.uclalawreview.org/the-fifth-amendment-encryption-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reading this from the Forbes article: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3143273/Mass-Fing... Relevant bits start at page 5 (III - LEGAL DISCUSSION). Compelling a person to provide his or her fingerprint does not implicate, let alone violate, the Fifth Amendment. "[B]oth federal and state courts have usually held that [the Fifth Amendment] offers no protection against compulsion to submit to fingerprinting."…
But my phone is mine, it contains deeply personal things that I put on there without the intention of sharing them. How is forcing me to unlock my phone anything other than forcing me to testifying against myself? If they could, they would read your mind too.
The self-incrimination clause of the fifth amendment is broadly interpreted as intended to dissuade the government from attempting to coerce confessions. Forcing someone to unlock their phone with a fingerprint caries none of the moral hazard of forcing them to testify.
All of that being said, I'd love for US society to recognize that a search encompassing a bunch of people's phones is vastly more intrusive (by virtue of the volume of data collected and network effects) than a search of a building that excludes computing devices, and for us to require a correspondingly higher burden of proof.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A republic, as far as I understand it, implies that a (thoughtful, responsible, .., elected) minority is afforded the delegated power to legislate, judge, and administer. Elected, yes. Thoughtful and responsible depends on your point of view. For example: there is a substantial contingent of people in the U.S. that want the country to be a Christian theocracy. (Most of these people believe that this is how things u…
> The irony is that by blaming the system instead of acknowledging that the outcomes we see are the result of democracy working exactly as intended you are actually contributing to the problem, which is that everyone retreats into their echo chamber and spends their energy vilifying anyone who doesn't agree with them instead of working constructively to figure out how all 7+ billion of us are going to get along on th…
You wrote:
> The 'actual problem' seems to be in the selection/delegation process.
That sounds like blaming the system to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A republic, as far as I understand it, implies that a (thoughtful, responsible, .., elected) minority is afforded the delegated power to legislate, judge, and administer. Elected, yes. Thoughtful and responsible depends on your point of view. For example: there is a substantial contingent of people in the U.S. that want the country to be a Christian theocracy. (Most of these people believe that this is how things u…
Do you claim here that elections (who votes, where, how often, in what conditions, for whom, for what, etc.) aren't part of "the system"? That probably isn't your intention, but you seem to hold the parenthesized conditions blameless, offering instead some sort of caricature of a Trump voter for criticism. Incidentally, if the participation of all those apparent cretins is "democracy working exactly as intended", how…
> The 'actual problem' seems to be in the selection/delegation process.
Just another reason to forgo the convenience of biometrics in favor of a password/phrase that exists only in your mind. At least for now, that's something you can't be compelled to produce. Really though, this descent into a police state is such a pathetic outcome for this country. Dangerous, scary, and tragic, but also... pathetic. This is what happens when a sizeable majority don't even participate in the electoral…
Alternative idea:intentionally register someone else's fingerprints on your phone - so when the cops arrive and find a phone lying on the couch you can plausibly say "not mine, here try my finger on it!" ;-) (Anybody got ready access to med school cadavers with the fingerprints intact?)