551–560 of 662 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn’t be surprised looking at his historical track record of funding NGOs with specific angles and what he said.
it was a joke, to be clear
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The worse things get, the better they do. It's an insidious, vicious cycle.
Iran, Haiti, Russia, Syria, Lebanon, Argentina have been at the "worse and worse" stages for decades and there is no "better" in sight.
What do you mean? In the last 25 years life expectancy in Russia has risen by almost 10 years
[0] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.LE00.MA.IN?locat...
An earlier article on the same blog had some very useful information on how easily the aggregated census data from 2010 (before differential privacy) could be used to reconstruct real data for individuals: https://desfontain.es/blog/us-census-reconstruction-attack.h... I am personally convinced that the reason noise infusion was banned was because powerful people were already reconstructing individual data from censu…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Iran, Haiti, Russia, Syria, Lebanon, Argentina have been at the "worse and worse" stages for decades and there is no "better" in sight.
>Russia ... have been at the "worse and worse" stages for decades and there is no "better" in sight What do you mean? In the last 25 years life expectancy in Russia has risen by almost 10 years [0] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.LE00.MA.IN?locat...
And it's undeniable that the whole country is falling backwards - the economy is in tatters with high inflation, high interest rates , severe economic and kinetic damage to the main revenue generating activities (export of oil, gas, raw materials, military equipment), a poorly hidden ballooning debt crisis. And worst of all, a leader who cannot admit defeat so can't get the country out of the quagmire. So things will get a whole lot worse before there's any chance of them getting better.
An earlier article on the same blog had some very useful information on how easily the aggregated census data from 2010 (before differential privacy) could be used to reconstruct real data for individuals: https://desfontain.es/blog/us-census-reconstruction-attack.h... I am personally convinced that the reason noise infusion was banned was because powerful people were already reconstructing individual data from censu…
Why do you need individual data for gerrymandering? Don't you only need area level?
Once you've table voter preferences to actual street addresses you are no longer in the realm of "broad area cumulative averages and medians".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did similar and you summarized the feelings well. It's really sad and hard to rebuild that trust And disheartening that people continue to gravitate to a political party that proudly announces desires to abuse this data.
>And disheartening that people continue to gravitate to a political party that proudly announces desires to abuse this data. The same party that promotes distrust in the government (that is justified by the abuse the same party does when in power). Amazing, innit.
Perhaps because they know how corrupt they, themselves, are, they assume everyone else is the same way:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accusation_in_a_mirror
Perhaps the possibility that others are more altruistic does not enter the realm of possibility in their minds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mainstream parties could take a hard stance on immigration and destroy „far right movements“ overnight. But somehow they are not interested in saving the democracy, instead they prefer to ignore hot topics and pretend they don’t exist. Hmmm, maybe it is this ignorance destroying the democracy?
> Mainstream parties could take a hard stance on immigration and destroy „far right movements“ overnight. No they would not. It would just empower far right to make further demands as everything shifted toward them. And you can even see it practically, each time mainstream parties move toward right, far right becomes stronger. Meanwhile, anti-far-right voters end up without anyone to vote for. Becoming far right your…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Many countries"? Do you have any evidence for this statement? I think that actually the US is an outlier.
When Germany invaded the Netherlands they found it extremely convenient that the Netherlands had a nice centralised paper filing system telling them exactly where all the Jews lived. The Holocaust proceeded more efficiently in the Netherlands than it had in Germany.
France also sent people to the Germans during the occupation, and there was very little info needed. The gov wasn't caring much about due process or lengthy and accurate investigations anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here was my request: > Can you describe the specific chain of events required to create a fraudulent vote that is "impossible" to detect? You literally just described a scheme that is possible to detect in any meaningful amount. 10, 100, or 1000 ballots coming from a single address is, obviously, trivially detectable.
I see. It's possible to detect the scheme per se even though the detection would not lead to charges (ballots from the people registered at the same address are completely legal) and thus would not be conducted. The point your correspondent has initially made: it's impossible to detect illegal voting in such a scheme.
Virtually every type of fraud is first detected by detection of a nominally legal but abnormal behavior, then it's investigated to figure out whether fraud actually occurred. That would – obviously – be exactly how any voter fraud detection scheme works, but I guess you're saying that because the initially detected abnormality is not itself illegal, it wouldn't be investigated?
This is like saying "it's not illegal for all the numbers on your tax return to end in $xxxx.00 and $xxxx.50, so therefore tax fraud is undetectable by means of analyzing numerical patterns."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if the death camps hadn't been for the purpose of genocide but rather for disposing of the poor or convicted criminals or perhaps those suspected of being illegal immigrants would that have made them okay? It seems to me that "I'm not sure we have camps where we're committing genocide in the states" is largely irrelevant to the issue at hand.
You're making the argument the Nazis only deported people? Sounds ironically more generous than the actual nazis claiming it either didn't happen or was 'deserved'.