131–140 of 229 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't suggest that such a plan is remotely likely, but a massive organized tax protest would be interesting and probably even beneficial.
Totally agree. The first country where people do this will write history about who is really in charge in a country.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
... are you suggesting that the entire US population refuse to pay any taxes until surveillance issues are fixed? Because that's a terrible idea.
Demand an upper limit on total government spending as a % of GDP + upper limit for marginal tax rates for all individuals. Given the popularity of welfare very likely government will be forced to bring sense into its spending. That is the only way. Other way is to use your second amendment rights.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd love to hear ideas on this. I am dismayed, nay, infuriated that we waste taxpayer dollars in such a manner when the returns have been found to be non-existent. Yet, I read about atrocities committed every day by ISIS and the US government sits back and does little. This is not the world I want to live in, and I have no idea how to solve these non-technical problems. EDIT: Regarding downvotes and the replies as of…
> If ISIS wants us to engage them, we just sit back and allow them to rape whole villages and sell women into the sex trade? ISIS are an insignificant mock army of goat herders with guns. They could be eradicated in an afternoon. It's presense though helps with strategic goals of instability for the region. > You don't go to war for oil. You go to war for human rights and to prevent the slaughter and abuse of innocen…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does more data hurt an investigation, if you are statistically literate? What is the conditional probability on that DNA test when it turns up a match with someone who also knew and was in recent contact with the murdered person and had a motive? Same with watch lists, doesnt all the ineffectiveness go away if they have tiering or triage system?
> Same with watch lists, doesnt all the ineffectiveness go away if they have tiering or triage system? If properly used, perhaps. However, the standards for government forensics have been... questionable. Generally speaking, government "tests" seem more focused on confirming the prosecutor or investigator's theory than on actually resolving truth about facts. You seem to be assuming a great deal of statistical litera…
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/22/mystery-plane-no-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If ISIS wants us to engage them, we just sit back and allow them to rape whole villages and sell women into the sex trade? ISIS are an insignificant mock army of goat herders with guns. They could be eradicated in an afternoon. It's presense though helps with strategic goals of instability for the region. > You don't go to war for oil. You go to war for human rights and to prevent the slaughter and abuse of innocen…
> Besides that's the role of cops. Who appointed any country world cop? Should third countries had invaded the US to end "slavery", seggregation, the "police state" killing blacks etc? You don't appoint someone to do the right thing. The US civil war was large enough that it was tantamount to another country (the North) overthrowing the South to end slavery.
Only slavery was just a pretext for that war.
I think this is our future, whether it's dystopian or not. Technology is eventually going to make it impossible to really prevent "Persistent aerial surveillance". What requires an expensive small blimp today might become the size of a ping pong ball (or wide area flock of them) and come out of a 3D printer tomorrow. So who will be using such tech? Governments and private entities alike - we can try to legislate agai…
The bigger concern is the possibility of misuse and abuse of such technology, both by the government and by unscrupulous individuals. That is what will make the future dystopian. In fact it has been happening for many years now: think lie detectors and cell phone tower tracking- both demonstrably bullshit, but widely abused nevertheless!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Totalitarian? Nearly omniscient? US law enforcement can't even keep bombs off airplanes, drugs out of prison, and people from getting away with murder.
> US law enforcement can't even keep bombs off airplanes, drugs out of prison, and people from getting away with murder. They could if that were an actual priority of theirs. But I suspect it's not, and growing their power is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does more data hurt an investigation, if you are statistically literate? What is the conditional probability on that DNA test when it turns up a match with someone who also knew and was in recent contact with the murdered person and had a motive? Same with watch lists, doesnt all the ineffectiveness go away if they have tiering or triage system?
You’re now basing your case on circumstantial evidence which is considered near worthless for a reason. If you have 5 suspects and then do DNA testing that's solid evidence. Ex: Paternity test. But, if you find someone with DNA testing you need to completely ignore that evidence after that point as 100% of its predictive power has already been used. PS: To show just how easy it is to mess this stuff up. Suppose a mur…