Rogerh91

"This place is overwhelmingly full of smart people, and I sometimes feel out of place!"

Don't feel out of place. You may just be suffering from Dunning-Kruger effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

The smartest people for me are those who can drop all pretensions and learn as much as they can. You're well on your way.

Steve Blank has a great article about how you need to provide value to even begin getting into somebody's space. http://steveblank.com/2013/08/12/how-to-get-meetings-with-pe...

Now you might say, I'm a student, what could I do? But there's a lot you can offer, from your story and perspective to the skills you have. Even just writing from the perspective of somebody offering value rather than just trying to take it makes it easier for you to get meetings with the mentors too busy to see you--the kind of mentors you should aim for.

Starting a relationship is always easier than maintaining it. You want to make sure you could grow with the person you're reaching out to, and that ideally, the conversations you have with them will be mutually beneficial. After a while, you'll be learning from them and they'll be learning from you as well--if you plan for that relationship rather than sitting back and trying to grab a "mentoring" session you'll start seeing your thinking about mentor dots evolve into long-lasting line relationships.

My last note on this is that it's also a lot easier to learn from people if you're working for them.

To sum up

1) provide value to everybody you talk with 2) think long-term 3) work for people you REALLY want to learn from

A plain-text mandarin version in a repo somewhere would suffice to challenge the Chinese government's perception on what it really takes to censor the Internet. I honestly think it would just highlight how much they're losing against an organization of 300.

Failing that, I'm going to resort to my default plan of finding the best way to donate money and time to help support Github, but I thought it was an idea worth entertaining.

Xi Jinping Millionaire Relations Reveal Fortunes of Elite

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-06-29/xi-jinping...

Maybe add a Trollface gif while they're at it.

My name's Roger, and I'm a constituent of your riding. I've had the pleasure of meeting Margaret, and I want to thank you both and your team for the great work you do for the riding.

I'm writing because with each passing day, revelations are getting worse and worse about the surveillance capabilities of security agencies. Just today the Guardian revealed that the GCHQ, our British allies, collect webcam recordings en masse, including sexually explicit material shared between two consenting individuals.

We know the Harper administration is stuck as being part and parcel of Five Eyes, and that the CESC has conducted spying for the NSA, using Canada's good name for nefarious purposes.

I write this in the hope that you are aware of this issue, and to inquire as to what you and your party are doing with this regards, and what active efforts you will be making in the future to shed awareness about this creeping invasion on our privacy. As Canadians, we should be protected under Section 8 of the Charter with regards to reasonable expectation of privacy, but I do not want this to constantly shift because security agencies continually push us down the slippery slope Senator Church so eloquently warned Americans about during the Church Committee:

"If this government ever became a tyrant, if a dictator ever took charge in this country, the technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government, no matter how privately it was done, is within the reach of the government to know. Such is the capability of this technology.

I don't want to see this country ever go across the bridge. I know the capacity that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return."

Let me know how I can contribute to any efforts with this regards. I hope you are well, and eagerly await any response you have on this topic.

"Russ Tice, a former intelligence analyst who in 2005 blew the whistle on what he alleged was massive unconstitutional domestic spying across multiple agencies, claimed Wednesday that the NSA had ordered wiretaps on phones connected to then-Senate candidate Barack Obama in 2004.

Speaking on "The Boiling Frogs Show," Tice claimed the intelligence community had ordered surveillance on a wide range of groups and individuals, including high-ranking military officials, lawmakers and diplomats."

definition of irony

I know some of you may have doubts as to the ties between the media and the government, but the historical record does indicate that the New York Times has had a flagship role in challenging government abuse on many levels. I don't see why it would not have a similar role in this debate.

My expanded thoughts can be read here: https://medium.com/technology-meets-policy/fd097809f88f

Reading back on what happened to Turing and countless other homosexuals gives me those same chills.

What a simple pleasure it is to live in the era we do now. No, not everything is perfect, but so much has improved, and it's up to all of us to improve things even further, and to keep the momentum going.

In an open border world, the balance would be more equalized, but that is more theoretical than practical at this point.

The recent rounds of QE are a great example of this. Those were basically made to inflate asset prices for capital-holders, because economic policymakers are conditioned to placate capital. Case in point: 90% of shares in public markets are owned by 10% of Americans. The hope was that some of this benefit would trickle down, as the infamous term goes---unfortunately that hasn't happened, so far.

So now we live in unequal times not seen in America since the late 20s.

pre bust: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/business/15gilded.html?pag...

post bust: http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/income-inequalit... (big ups to Shiller)

There's a couple of ways to go about resolving this, from heavy handed government intervention to restrict capital, to loosening government restrictions on labour movement.

There's outside the box thinking too, from how Iceland forgave those holding good homes rather than those holding bad debt to opening the pool of capital to a wider pool of people in the vein of equity crowdfunding---

this is a very pressing issue, and there are tons of solutions out there. I think the one constant is that if technology is going to play a role in solving this, people need to be given equal access to that technology, and the knowledge required to understand it. discuss and spread code!

http://www.globalresearch.ca/swiss-in-forefront-with-basic-i...

I made a mistake blindly sticking Alito in there, without considering his views on privacy. However, he does have a very strong deference to executive power that would place him in that bucket of deferring to national security agencies (and indeed probably drove his majority opinion on Clapper v. Amnesty).

"One troubling memo concerns domestic wiretaps - a timely topic. In the memo, which he wrote as a lawyer in the Reagan Justice Department, Judge Alito argued that the attorney general should be immune from lawsuits when he illegally wiretaps Americans."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/24/opinion/24sat1.html

While I have this comment thread going, I'll clarify what I meant by wildcard. I never intended to note this being a special instance for the court, but rather I wanted to emphasize how this particular forum (a hub for technology leaders) can get involved in a deep policy issue like this, and have their views be well-respected. That doesn't happen that often. It was my call to action to this forum, rather than any particular critique of the court.

Regardless, in this case, a well-written amicus brief from technology leaders could also shape some of the ideology that would come to play, and I think it would be respected because they would be subject experts.

I also agree that it's not as simple as liberal v conservative, but given the liberal bloc tends to vote together on issues like this---and many issues, I thought it was the easiest way to frame it. If people have more details to add, I'd be glad to have that be part of the discussion. I'm not a professional SCOTUS-tracker, and by no means claim to be one: just a hobby of mine. I wanted to start a discussion though, and hopefully some action with what I do know about the situation.

That seems to indicate a certain degree of deferral to both legislative and executive branches in this matter.

As for garbage law in, garbage decision out, Scalia can't be counted on to rely on his own purported originalist thinking, lest we forget that the Voting Rights Act overwhelmingly re-approved by Congress had Section 4 knocked down by an opinion Scalia joined.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/06/scalia-doma-...

"The judges who sit on the US Supreme Court have little knowledge of Facebook, Twitter, email, or other modern capabilities, despite society's widespread use of such technology, according to Justice Elena Kagan.

“I think we’re going to have to be doing a lot of thinking about that,” she replied, adding that the judges often seek out younger clerks to assist with questions about technology. “It’s a challenge for us.”"

This is why I think there is a huge role to play for leaders in the tech field in this debate.