canoebuilder

What? I have never heard anything like that at all. Rights are absolute.

That sounds like it is coming from the "Sure free speech is fine, so long as it doesn't offend me," crowd.

it's proposing vaccination as a condition of participating in things that people can opt out of.

People here are generally highly attuned to one of the big surveillance ad corps trying to massage people into accepting some invasion of their personal sovereignty, how is this different? You think if something like this is accepted there won't be pushes to go further?

If this infrastructure is put in place, it will be abused, and it will coopted for other things.

Big piece of the puzzle you are ommiting there.

If so, they've always had limits when it came to impacts on others. The freedom to swing your fist ends at the tip of someone's nose

Whoa, you've got that horridly twisted.

It's not a human right to demand that others undergo a medical procedure for your own perceived interest. It's not a human right to demand others undergo a medical procedure, or be injected with something, because you've been told it will benefit you in some way. Every individual has complete choice and autonomy as to the medical procedures they undergo. That is the human right.

>Article 6 – Consent

1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.

http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=31058&URL_DO=DO_TO...

A volcano could erupt tomorrow and create much cooler climates around the world.

Al Gore’s movie from the early 2000s said Florida would be underwater by now. What’s the actual sea level rise in the intervening period been? A cm or 2, if that?

“Faintest bit of background” Meaning, your two competing hypotheses leave out pretty much everything that is known at this point, not an academic credential or such, just a basic reading on the known facts at this point.

“Natural origin” was the leading hypothesis from the start more than a year ago. At this point, there is no evidence for it, there is substantial evidence against it, and the pile of circumstantial evidence for the Wuhan lab being the source is a mile high.

Infections from nature aren’t rare, unfortunately neither are infections from labs. In fact, if you compare the relative few places on earth where this type of viral and pathogen research occurs to all the places humans interact with the natural world, I.e. the whole world, you could say infections coming from labs are actually are far more common occurrence proportionally adjusted. There is even a paper trail of government officials expressing concern about lax safety measures at this particular lab. Well before the world heard of coronavirus.

If it is common for humans to be infected by bat viruses, I don’t see that as a point against the theory that one or more humans working at a lab that analyzes and manipulates bat viruses were infected with a bat virus that then led to a larger spread of the infection outside the lab.

Highly tendentious claim...

>and it's not unusual for it to take many years to figure these things out.

Is that the case? Are you well-versed in this field? It is my understanding that previous epidemics of this sort in Asia in recent decades a host animal was identified in a matter of months. Are you privy to some valuable knowledge that is not widely dispersed in the literature? Because what you’re saying would seem to contradict it.

At this point, this is not a complete black box, “novel virus.” There is a scientific understanding of the virus. There are known related viruses in the wild, just not anywhere near Wuhan. There are multi-pathway paper trails linking this class of viruses to the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the people working there.

I don’t mean to be too harsh on you, the media environment around all this has been so bizarre, how various waves of suppression have ebbed and flowed. But if you’ve known where to look, are an independent thinker, not one who just repeats what the large media bullhorns are trumpeting, and can connect dots for yourself, there’s been discussion, discourse, evidence gathering of the very likely source of this virus since the beginning.

What exactly would a central bank “digital currency” bring to the table?

Dollars, pounds, yen, are already digital.

Communication platforms in the US should adhere to the US constitution.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terroristic_threat

FJ Haydn spent the bulk of his working career in Hungary, toward the end of his career he went to France and England and received large adoring audiences, not as some kind of exoticism, but because he was/is a giant of European/white culture.

Why would anyone say “white isn't a culture” except to express animosity towards white people?

Arch, Debian, Suse, etc. are cultures, but gnu/Linux isn't?

Twitter should not be filtering and censoring public discourse, debate, and information, acting as the arbiter of what ideas and information can influence politics.

Communications platforms in the United States should adhere to the United States constitution.

And maybe one aspect of human consciousness is ants thinking, "hmm what are these large things that seem to leave sugary refuse in their wake?"

Simple file system interface to all devices first, then any further software interfaces on top only if desired.

Thanks for making the option available for remote storage John!

The night time lighting humans(and our non-human co-inhabitants of earth) have evolved with and known for a very longtime comes from fires of various types, flames with a much warmer color temperature.

Cross border maybe, but then what court would you go to?

> Look into newer projects like Solana, Polkadot or Cardano

Are these newer projects more or less built with the same vision? What is their reason for being?

Censorship resistance would be nice, so would laws against private censorship in certain areas. Distributed mechanisms of censorship resistance would be more trustworthy and transparent. But people find information in centralized locations, be it a library, or Twitter, etc.

Is there legit headway towards combining beneficial aspects of distribution with the efficacy of centralized platforms? What are the mechanisms that keep it running and the incentives involved?

When I say code is law, I mean “law” in the physics sense. We can code, print “hello world”, and know exactly what the code will do. We can write code up to some threshold of complexity and know exactly what it will do in all cases. Like how given certain information about a physical system we can calculate trajectories or whatnot up to some threshold of complexity.

I was making the point that civil law is a different kind of law from this physics sense of the word.

With more clarity, code is physics law, but civil law is not physics law, i.e. civil law cannot be fully ported to computer code.

Maybe I'm wrong and all civil law could be translated to computer code. Might that make for a better world? Even if possible, there's so much inertia in the system with lawyers and judges wanting to keep their job which is another human complexity that would have to be worked through.

Not at all, I appreciate the info.

Cardano I believe uses PoS of some sort.

What is the thinking about what keeps these distributed application servers running? Is it still mainly the mining reward model?

What sort of applications most excite you? Are there places the distributed model works better than the traditional? Are there applications the distributed model enables that the traditional does not?

And vice versa, what are the limitations of the distributed model? What things just aren't feasible? Could you build Twitter or YouTube like systems?

What are some concrete examples?

I think most of us who are critical are still interested, because we do see things that are going on, and we ask ourselves, are we missing something?

But we seem to run into the same road blocks again and again.

“Solutions” seem to come from people subtly or transparently “talking their book,” that is, they have an undisclosed vested interest in you not thinking too much about those roadblocks.

What is some fruitful research being done in the areas of well known roadblocks? What are some application areas with a genuine pathway to viability and no better non-blockchain alternative?

It's also completely contrived. Being digital means infinitely replicable, or thereabouts. Do we really need this game of artificial scarcity?

People used to talk about things like property records, but if this realm of artificial scarcity is going to interface with the realm of actual scarcity in the real world, it's still going to need the systems of adjudication that already exist in the real world.

Code is law. But law is not code, otherwise legal disputes would have long since been settled and we wouldn't need systems of courts and various legal avenues to surface new areas of contention and revisit old areas in new light.

If the above wasn't an issue. How do you get past the resource hogginess? These things are currently handling a minuscule portion, if that, of what their proponents propose they take on, and they are already comically massive resource hogs. How can they scale?

Instead of pocketing the difference in greater photon production efficiency the trend has been to just make things brighter.(where they really don't need to be)

Not to mention, not just lighting use, but lighting design needs a complete rethink in the age of leds. Much nighttime lighting, public and private used to cast a nice, pleasant glow, now very often led nighttime lighting is far too bright, and produced in wavelengths that can be quite unpleasant on the eyes, and registers as cold, sterile, and unnatural.

The problem of light pollution is not solely about energy wastefulness. Light pollution disrupts natural rhythms and ecosystems. The blotting out of the night sky is a great loss for the human soul and human experience.

But light pollution, while producing waste heat, is also just unnecessary in general.

We don't need to keep office buildings lit all night, we don't need to have cities lit up all night like sports fields. Night time lighting should be on a targeted and as needed basis.

Hate is an emotion, it is subjective. You might feel hate when you see or hear something, but it is not an intrinsic, objective quality of other people's words.

Without using these emotional trigger words, do you think the citizens of a country should be able to decide who visits them in their country?

Trump is an unfortunate edge case and has set bad precedents that can hopefully be wisely washed away in time.

We need clearer and consistent norms in the digital space that are seen to embody the fundamental civic aspects of the nation from which this digital space arose. Such as equal access to certain things, the "dumb-pipes" model for the certain baseline trappings of modern society. Whether or not that means stripe here, I'm talking about the broader moment.

We don't want an escalating tit for tat of one bad thing leading to another. If the violence this summer had been dealt with more soundly, voices of leadership tamping it down instead of egging it on, it seems a good bet the recent activity at the capitol would have been more tame.

Similarly, we don't want to respond to a grasping, ineffectual, quasi-autocrat in the executive branch, with more effective autocratic tendencies in the techno-social sphere.