Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We can still stop California's 3D printer surveillance scheme

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–208 of 208 posts

Re: We can still stop California's 3D printer surveillance scheme

#201

Post by somenameforme »

defrost wrote: post #191
somenameforme wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the connotation of a school shooting is somebody going to a school and shooting numerous students in a mostly random fashion with the intention of creating terror. That's why guns are so scary in this context - it's trivial to kill a person with a gun, a knife, a car, or a brick, but it's much easier to kill 10 people with a gun than it is with the other instruments - well except perhaps a car. But when you a…

> why is it reasonable to exclude the various incidents of non-gun homicides at Australian schools. (when " listing any homicide that occurred within the vicinity of a school") It isn't reasonable, and that is exactly why non shooting homicides are included in lists of all homicides but not included in lists of shooting homicides.

Yeah but there the issue of deception by lack of context. Wiki, so far as I can tell, has no comparable page or even information on general homicide at schools, only the gun stuff. Imagine, if somebody started listing all fatal taxi/rideshare incidents with a female driver. There would be a lot incidents, but it'd be completely misleading without the context of how that compares to incidents of all drivers, and so it would serve little purpose other than to implicitly misinform people.

So in the case of schools when there are 130k+ educational institutions in the US basically every single thing that you can imagine happens, and happens a lot. But it says absolutely nothing about the relative frequency of that event, but much more so about the fact that there are a massive amount of schools.

Re: We can still stop California's 3D printer surveillance scheme

#202

Post by mindslight »

MisterMower wrote: post #200
mindslight wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's six years later, and what happened during a public health emergency is still the most significant impingement upon personal liberty occupying your headspace? If you earnestly care about liberty, get off your simulated hobby horse and come back to reality. It's exactly this kind of disconnected nonsense that has encouraged the authoritarians to run wild.

Is he wrong though? Lots of bad precedents were set during that emergency, the consequences of which were still living with. The Overton window moved in a deeply authoritarian direction during that time period. Politicians across the spectrum have internalized that move and are restricting freedom in far more overt ways than were possible prior to that emergency. If you want to prevent future abuses, understanding ho…

I don't see "lots of bad precedents", so please elaborate on what you mean.

What I saw were a bunch of temporary measures directly supporting public health, in line with past precedents from prior generations, that were eventually ended - which is a lot better than we can say for any teeth in the ratchet of techno-authoritarianism that has been slowly advancing over the past several decades!

The main thing I saw, and it was more of a demonstration rather than a precedent, was how readily people are led to political rallying cries that go against their own stated values, common sense, and the realities of a situation. How quick people are to tear down our institutions given the right leader that plays to their immediate feelings.

To me, that is the authoritarianism we can draw a direct line from to what we are facing today - basically the continued escalation of giant douche vs turd sandwich. But that's not what people seem to mean when they hand wave about authoritarianism during Covid. Rather such gripes are more often an embrace of that trend!

Re: We can still stop California's 3D printer surveillance scheme

#203

Post by platevoltage »

giardini wrote: post #193
platevoltage wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all know Missouri really cares about the rights of the people.

Another fellow who hopes to fight in the American Civil War! Why don't I see more of these guys going to the Ukraine?

What on earth are you going on about?

Re: We can still stop California's 3D printer surveillance scheme

#204

Post by jatora »

RossBencina wrote: post #156
xbar wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike the downvoters, I'm genuinely curious: do you believe a narrative that the US has no gun control laws? Sometimes I wonder if that is what people outside the US think.

I'll try to answer as accurately as I can. The narrative that I read into the media that I consume is that (1) the US has ineffective gun control laws, and (2) that there is widespread availability of a variety of guns and ammunition to anyone who wants it. I believe that gun ownership is a constitutional right in the US. I was aware that only some states are "open carry." I am not surprised to be corrected that some…

Lol what an AI response

Re: We can still stop California's 3D printer surveillance scheme

#205

Post by hagbard_c »

albedoa wrote: post #198
hagbard_c wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that has been clear for a long time, about as long as CA has been a one-party state. The real question is why you supposedly smart Californians keep on falling for the... same... old... lie... every... damn... time. It is not as if the pie-in-the-sky people haven't promised a chicken in every pot and a cow in every shed and a car on every driveway - replace these with whatever modern equivalents you like - a tho…

Whoops, looks like my insight about you was entirely accurate how can that be: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48643270

Explain how 'your insight' into me is 'entirely accurate' in reference to my posting of another person who claimed to have insight into other people who happened to disagree with whatever was posted on this site. Before you do that I'd follow the advice I gave in that post: take a mirror and have a good look at it. What you see is what you get.

Re: We can still stop California's 3D printer surveillance scheme

#206

Post by RossBencina »

jatora wrote: post #204
RossBencina wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll try to answer as accurately as I can. The narrative that I read into the media that I consume is that (1) the US has ineffective gun control laws, and (2) that there is widespread availability of a variety of guns and ammunition to anyone who wants it. I believe that gun ownership is a constitutional right in the US. I was aware that only some states are "open carry." I am not surprised to be corrected that some…

Lol what an AI response

Except it wasn't.

Re: We can still stop California's 3D printer surveillance scheme

#207

Post by xp84 »

croisillon wrote: post #149
hagbard_c wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that has been clear for a long time, about as long as CA has been a one-party state. The real question is why you supposedly smart Californians keep on falling for the... same... old... lie... every... damn... time. It is not as if the pie-in-the-sky people haven't promised a chicken in every pot and a cow in every shed and a car on every driveway - replace these with whatever modern equivalents you like - a tho…

calling California a one-party-state is a bit exagerated: even the Democrats have had a governor from time to time too, in the past 100 (or the past 60, or the past 40) years

I don't understand what you're trying to say. The stats don't lie: https://ballotpedia.org/Party_control_of_California_state_go...

And the only bit of "red" on that diagram besides the blip in 96 in the Assembly, was Schwarzenegger, who was quite a moderate figure, and given his party didn't control the legislature at all, he didn't make a tremendous or long-lasting impact besides a few budget showdowns.

Re: We can still stop California's 3D printer surveillance scheme

#208

Post by croisillon »

xp84 wrote: post #207
croisillon wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

calling California a one-party-state is a bit exagerated: even the Democrats have had a governor from time to time too, in the past 100 (or the past 60, or the past 40) years

I don't understand what you're trying to say. The stats don't lie: https://ballotpedia.org/Party_control_of_California_state_go... And the only bit of "red" on that diagram besides the blip in 96 in the Assembly, was Schwarzenegger, who was quite a moderate figure, and given his party didn't control the legislature at all, he didn't make a tremendous or long-lasting impact besides a few budget showdowns.

but apart from 10 years Warren, 6 years Knight, 8 years Reagan, 8 years Deukmejian, 8 years Wilson, 8 years Schwarzenegger, when did Republicans ever win any election in California?
Post reply on HN