411–420 of 534 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>No. If such a system could work in any meaningful way, it would be already in place. I'm reminded of the EMH joke about the economist walking by a 100 dollar bill on the street, assuming that it must be fake because if it were real, someone already would have picked it up.
What is EMH? Sounds like a crypto convention to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regardless of what form of government is currently ruling a given country, ultimately the people within it are responsible for the actions taken by the government, not the government itself. As for your other point, I agree, free balanced independent journalism, whistleblower, leaks, etc - play a clear role in insuring public stays informed. That said, in my opinion, if 90% percent of a population was against somethi…
I can be against something but not believe it is worth fighting to the death for. My town implemented a new tax that is highly unlikely to accomplish its stated goals. I’m not going to overthrow the government over $300 a year. It’s the thousands of little paper cuts that build up over time but that can go on for an entire lifetime without ever reaching a breaking point.
While understand the death from thousands of little paper cuts issue, generally speaking, even when face with notable conflict, most people rarely independently take responsibility for insuring they aware of what’s going on and attempt to have an impact on the situation.
We certainly need decentralized systems that cannot be controlled by EU, US, or any government/entity. Privacy is a human right. We probably all know that they will show reasons like "fighting terrorism", "preventing national threats" or "hunting down child pornography" etc, whereas the real motivation is to control people's freedom of speech and communication even though they will 100% deny it. Anyone who is really…
I've always wondered behind the rationale on privacy being a human right. What if it wasn't? What if instead we were enforcing transparency? Force everything to be public, starting from the government down to the local coffee shop. All transactions, all communications, everything. Make privacy a crime for everybody, including the government and the military. Just as a thought exercise, it would be a remarkably differ…
The best way to deal with this is non-compliance and there need to be technical solutions to deny such attempts. One major factor that works against users is central authentication. Schemes like oauth2 might bring convenience and security in many cases, but will endanger net freedom overall. Google just added age restriction on blogger. Result is that you need to provide Google with ID information to access some cont…
Your statement makes it look like OAuth2 is inherently endangering net freedom.
This isn't true.
If OAuth2 was used ...
- for authentication (versus authorization) only AND
- AND by a select few providers (e.g. Google, Github, Facebook, Twitter) solely AND
- AND NO other privacy-protecting authentication methods (e.g. classic username-password credentials) are available
... THEN your statement has reasonable truth.
I think people are afraid to stand up for there right to privacy, because they feel unpatriotic or that it may make them look like a criminal with something to hide.
I do belive with proper due process and warranting the government should be able to carry out covert surveillance of those suspected of MAJOR terrorism only. But who draws that line? And how do you trust them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't think you'd see anything close to this level of resistance if victory would mean an authoritarian Ukraine rather than a democratic Ukraine. Ah, well: I do. I think this has extraordinarily little to do with any "political system", of which Ukraine and Russia were both quite similar. One Nation invaded another, and in such moments people's nationalism is trigged. One defends' "one's own nation" regardless .…
I don't think your reading lines up with history. Putin was clearly content to allow Ukraine a large degree of sovereignty and autonomy as long as they remained under an authoritarian system. If nationalism was the only driver, why overthrow Yanukovych, thereby spitting in Putin's face and risking domination by another country? What wasn't tolerable to Putin was a bourgeoning democracy on Russia's doorstep with simil…
The offense to russia was first to turn to the west, and hence as Russia sees it, a counter-empire; and the secondly, the suprise and outrage, to believe that it's a Nation.
Both are incomprehensible to Russia -- it has nothing to do with how "authoritarian" anything is.
These are the concerns of intellectuals in op-eds
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EU Parliament has nothing to do with this proposal. It's proposed by the EU Commission, and such things have been struck down by the Parliament before. Also: Britain hardly has any leg to stand on regarding privacy (which is something the EU usually has a focus on[0]). Did you forget the Snoopers Charter[1]? That isn't a proposal. That's law. [0]: https://gdpr.eu [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Power…
> It's proposed by the EU Commission, and such things have been struck down by the Parliament before. Like article 13?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no example, especially if you’re limiting to significant global powers.
What if we don’t limit to significant global powers and look at all countries on earth?
https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy
As for my specific response, the existence of a non-global power example to me is irrelevant, since it’s unlikely to change the course of humanity. If you have an example, specific counter point, request for clarification, etc — happy to attempt to respond.
This comment by me within this thread might also expand on the topic you’re asking about:
The best way to deal with this is non-compliance and there need to be technical solutions to deny such attempts. One major factor that works against users is central authentication. Schemes like oauth2 might bring convenience and security in many cases, but will endanger net freedom overall. Google just added age restriction on blogger. Result is that you need to provide Google with ID information to access some cont…
Apple and Google will do what the EU tells them to do in the end.
Apple, Google, and Facebook are the 5th, 6th, and 7th largest lobbyists in the EU.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Understand. For clarity though, I don’t mean literal predictability, I mean relative predictability from the individual’s perspective, which for some actual means life being predictability unpredictable; to some degree, I am, in part because I value the chance to improvise, but anyone that knows me would say that’s predictable. As for population migration, statistics I had heard before, was roughly half of world’s po…
I am absolutely willing to buy the rationale based on personal anecdata, but wouldn't it also mean that the other half of the world's population does ( as in, it is basically a coin toss as to whether or move or not)? I might be conflating some word meanings here so please correct me as needed.