Live data from Hacker News

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

eff.org

61–70 of 208 posts

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

#61
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each congressperson's staff gathers all of the comments they get, counts them up, and reports back to the congressperson, passing along anything they think would be useful information; if you write a clear and careful letter about an obscure topic there's a decent chance the congressperson themself will see it. Congresspeople typically have local ties in their area and caring what their constituents think is their jo…

Not an American, but I've wondered about increasing numbers myself. Certainly, giving each representative fewer citizens to represent could help. I worry about the size of the bodies, however. Too big, and they become less wieldy. Maybe I'm wrong, but I wonder about other solutions. I was thinking of, for example, 10x the number, but each grouping of 10 has a representative, and they each give proxies on votes. Maybe…

With modern electronics I really don't see why we can't have arbitrary numbers of representatives.

In fact I think my preferred system would be representatives get a number of votes equal to the people who voted for them, and anyone can assign anyone as their representative. Gate things like getting speaking time on representing more than x% of the vote, and maybe even have a minimum threshold if we're insisting votes are cast in person for cyber security reasons, but generally the bar for being able to represent people should be low and there shouldn't be winners and losers in elections but just people who represent different numbers of people.

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

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

enforce that law Califoria would not be a sanctuary state if they actually cared about enforcing laws.

Why would a state enforce federal law?

The US legal system never ceases to amaze me. Why indeed should a state enforce a law? Like, one of those anti-discrimination laws?

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

#64
post #2

guess what, the state of california on the printer bed, depicted in the article, looks close to the profile of an AR15 pistol grip. im looking forward to the idea that the outline of Ca. may trigger false positives

It looks even closer to a California banned "large-capacity" magazine.

https://dpmsinc.com/media/catalog/product/cache/7217d38013ee...

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

#65

Let me get this straight. The USA has no gun control laws but legislators want to prevent people from making guns with 3D printers?

Some states, like California, and New York (which recently passed the first 3d printer ban), have restrictive gun control. These laws are in conflict with Supreme Court rulings supporting the 2nd Amendment, but the litigation and appeal process is very slow. It is 9 years into the Duncan case in California challenging magazine capacity limits, 7 years into the Miller case challenging California's Assault rifle ban.

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

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over the last few years, I’ve felt as though I’ve been living in a feverish dream all the time. Laws, regulations and general changes in the world are so detached from reality and so far removed from the reality they are meant to serve. And this is yet another example.

[flagged]

So lockdowns are still happening? If not why?

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

#67

California voters, write to your state senator. I'm in San Francisco, and I wrote to Scott Wiener, who recently voted to pass this out of committee. Before that when it was still in the assembly, I wrote to Matt Haney, which didn't do much good because he voted for it both in committee and for passage. But, I feel like bay area legislators need to know many of their constituents know this bill is misguided and are pa…

It doesnt matter. you know how much campaign financing is tied up with gun control groups? It sucks to lose all your campaign funding and get primaried, right? Wouldn't want that!

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

#68
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each congressperson's staff gathers all of the comments they get, counts them up, and reports back to the congressperson, passing along anything they think would be useful information; if you write a clear and careful letter about an obscure topic there's a decent chance the congressperson themself will see it. Congresspeople typically have local ties in their area and caring what their constituents think is their jo…

Not an American, but I've wondered about increasing numbers myself. Certainly, giving each representative fewer citizens to represent could help. I worry about the size of the bodies, however. Too big, and they become less wieldy. Maybe I'm wrong, but I wonder about other solutions. I was thinking of, for example, 10x the number, but each grouping of 10 has a representative, and they each give proxies on votes. Maybe…

The modern democracy is unchanged from original Ancient Greek version to adapt to having 100,000 voters per representative from 100 when democracy was invented. It was never questioned if it supposed to work at this scale.

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

#69
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is better to at least do what can be done instead of accepting a defeat without even trying.

[flagged]

I've written a state rep and had legislation come out of it. I've written a congressperson and had federal bureaucracy expedite my case out of it. People who think their government is unresponsive generally haven't actually tried asking their government for a response.

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

#70
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I've written a state rep and had legislation come out of it. I've written a congressperson and had federal bureaucracy expedite my case out of it. People who think their government is unresponsive generally haven't actually tried asking their government for a response.

There seems to be a propaganda thread in the culture now to get people cynical and thinking everything is rigged against you in advance, and a prerequisite to accepting this is to ignore how to the system actually works. The end result is to prevent you from getting involved. You never know if you don't try.

As an example (maybe some of the HN audience will dislike the outcome here but the point stands nonetheless), this week two sitting members of Congress were knocked out in New York, and their party told them the previous year to not bother trying.

Post reply on HN