There is little creativity without freedom of expression.
People redirected their efforts into privat projects, rather than building something for the public.
The “lay down” movement in china starts to move along similar lines.
I've got this suspicion that many of all these insane ideas are a dog whistle for 'bad people' to find eachother among 'good people' and later if they have control some sort of filter process to lurk out dissident 'good people'.
At least the older grown ups have had part of their lives where they didn't have to live with that.
Take note of the name. People like him should be forcefully removed from society.
If you doubt that the extremely wealthy are indeed above our laws, please show me even one instance of a billionaire being successfully jailed for a criminal offense in the entire history of the USA. As far as I am aware, it has never happened because the government fears the wrath that their wealth and their political connections can bring to bear.
Edit: This argument was defeated, I forgot about Bernie Madoff.
Larry Ellison in particular literally owns 98% of one of the Hawaiian islands.
I have noticed, not in every instance, but in many, that unusually wealthy people, especially wealthy and intelligent, have a tendency to detatch a bit from general reality, often becoming idealistic in ways that seem clear to the individual, but are fundamentally delusional. I think compassion and grounding has a tendency to become compromised by the insidious nuances imparted by security and abundance, ie great wealth.
Again, though, I've observed exceptions and am aware of the limitations to my own observations and may be missing a lot. I also do not protest wealth, but do wish it came with a sustained understanding of its underlying dependency on the very things, people and factors that enable it to be.
Jouaquin Guzman Loera (El Chapo) - $1 billion - drug trafficking - convicted in 2019, serving life sentence
Raj Rajaratnam - $1.3 billion - securities fraud and conspiracy - served 7 years of an 11 year sentence
Bernard John Ebbers - $1.4 billion - fraud and conspiracy - served 12 years of a 25 year sentence
David Ng Lap Seng - $1.8 billion - bribery - served almost 3 years of a 4 year sentence
John Kapoor - $2 billion - racketeering and wire fraud - served 2 years of a 5 and a half year sentence
Allen Stanford - $2.2 billion - Ponzi scheme - convicted in 2012, serving 110 year sentence
Carlos Enrique Lehder Rivas - $2.7 billion - kidnapping, drug trafficking, and murder - served 33 years of a 55 year sentence
Alfred Taubman - $3.1 billion - antitrust violations - served a 10 month sentence
Rishi Shah - $3.6 billion - mail fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud, money laundering - recently given 7 and a half year sentence
Michael Milken - $3.7 billion - securities and tax violations - served 22 months of a 2 year sentence, later pardoned by President Trump
S. Curtis Johnson - $4 billion - fourth-degree sexual assault and disorderly conduct - served 3 months of a 4 month sentence
Viktor Bout - $6 billion - conspiring to sell weapons to a U.S. designated foreign terrorist group - 10 years of a 25 year sentence, released in a prisoner swap with Russia in exchange for a WNBA basketball player
Seriously though. This is consistent with Oracle's history: their first customer, the organization for which they created their first product, was the CIA, and they've remained tight with the military-industrial complex to this day.
(Note: To flag a comment, click on the comment time/date, and then flag)
It just means there should be laws against certain antisocial behavior. Behind every law is the threat of violence to remove someone from society.
Maybe something like “The Silicon Bourgeoisie should be figuratively guillotined.”
More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41562750
I believe this, especially in explaining why European crime rates are generally low. You don't need much punishment to prevent a hungry person from stealing an apple when people in need can access food at a foodbank.
> Many people make the mistake that presumes criminals think rationally and therefore consider the consequences.
Obscenely violent punishments can take advantage of this irrationality in the opposite direction. I suspect this plays a factor in crimes of insatiable desire like sex, drugs and politics.
Drugs are rare in Singapore, western movies are rare in North Korea and adultery is rare in Saudi Arabia.
There's also something special about the death penalty in preventing reoffending.
If we consider the myriad things people do that are unambiguously legal but clearly unethical or immoral, we could have, in principle, a substantially larger portion of humanity involved in criminality. A whimsical shift in law could render many millions either criminals or upstanding citizens at the drop of a mouse click.
The desperation issue is integral to this, especially with what I presume is a vast minority of individuals with stalwart integrity and high precision moral compasses.
It's no surprise that it's not only these "criminals" who don't think rationally, but a whole global population that struggles with this, and consequentially, engages regularly in behavior that could, at any moment, be judged criminal.
I suppose some might wonder what examples there might be of this crazy proposal. Take general, common business practices; deception, dishonesty, fraud and many other foul attributes that are status quo, accepted behaviors. Negligence, whether authentic or unintended. Exploitation. Greed. The list could tire any voracious reader.
The fact that throughout humanity, values and morals are so diverse, even within more homogeneous societies, complicates it all too. And the reluctance or outright refusal of most to ponder the subject and embrace kindness, means that big decisions are often made for us by authorities - authorities that aren't perfect nor interested in even trying.
Pardon the rant if you will. But my primary point is that to sincerely consider the meaning of "criminal" might be quite uncomfortable and disturbing, but also might lead to some positive solutions to an exponential clusterfuck of problems.
It was impossible to be alone and everyone knows everything if you have any friend group. That bothered me, at first.
For the first… month… I felt like I had to be on my best, most generic, behavior. It made my think twice about hookups and which women to pursue. I distinctly remember being in the backseat of a car playing with glowsticks with a lady, and I was just like “nah.” and left. For superficial reasons along with not being that interested, but thinking about the social consequences more than I would in a big city. I would have made out at least otherwise.
But after that I went super polarizing and things got way more fun. More partying, more raunchiness, more visibly. Some of my other tech transplant friends had an issue, but the far more attractive people I wanted loved it.
and that's why I don’t think constant surveillance will have that specific outcome. Maybe less murder and assault? But people might define themselves and self segregate more greatly than before
yeah that was the other weird side of things, the community is nice but each one has this one gatekeeper to everything, and if they're temperamental you get ostracized from everything
which means that even people pleasing everyone isn't a good social strategy because you had to choose a niche group anyway if you wanted favor in any regard
> It's also massively different from having your every movement recorded, kept on file forever
I wonder how people will adapt to that then. I disagree with the quote in the headline
... is this an eupheism for something?