1,121 karma · joined May 16, 2015
None of that is civilized, but however, that is not the end of it. Covert operations blowing up arm depots in other countries. Financing anti-system helpers and being successful in finding traitors who sell classified information. Russian government having ambitions in toppling post-Cold War status quo in Europe. All this induces massive militarization in Europe, which will get stronger as Russia comes closer.
Only parents would have access to surveillance records. Children often do not like stuff their parents make them do, and their power over them, this would be one more thing, with great benefits.
> Why the hell not?
Because they are children, they do not have full responsibility for their actions, and they are more vulnerable to abuse, and protecting their safety is more important than protecting their privacy. I want to keep the status quo, where children are protected, and adults have rights. The way stuff is going, we're all getting more like children with one parent called Big Brother.
> Would you be happy if there was a camera constantly watching you as you jerked off as a kid?
That is not what I'm suggesting. I'm talking about public spaces (including online) where adults are present. If the kid wants to jerk off, or two or more kids want to make love, they can go home or use some private space like a bathroom.
Anyway, it makes no sense to put down a discussion on privacy or other human disagreements as trivial just because there is a big bomb that can wipe us out. This risk is present for many decades, and we are not able to affect it in a meaningful way. Nukes are here to stay, and eventually will be used. The important thing is to use your time until you die.
The proper acceptable course of action for Putin & Co. was to compete economically and propagandistically, not invade with soldiers. They tried before with Yanukovich, but in 2014 these russian collaborators lost grip on power, and Putin & Co., instead of folding up graciously, or trying with another helper later again, went insane and tried to force their interests with military methods. That is an escalation that has no moral justification.
When you find a scorpion at your doorstep, even if it talks smoothly, and proposes to share the room as mutually advantageous, you don't negotiate with it.
This scenario sucks, shows weakness, it has its own risks, russian-controlled Ukraine is a big security and money problem for neighbouring states, and is not necessary while Ukraine can fight with western weapons, and thus nobody relevant wants to try it as of yet. But anti-war naives do not think that far ahead.
If Ukraine runs out of soldiers, or U.S. backs out, some variant of this may however get on the table and we will be subjected to massive militarization.
1) even if so, can I check my vote recorded at the district vote collection center is the same as the vote I meant to send?
More importantly, can I check the resulting numbers announced on TV/radio/online are the same as the sum of all legitimate votes, and not influenced by illegitimate votes, and not doctored?
This is all impossible, in any system of voting.
> men and women were equally likely to experience nonconsensual sex, and most male victims reported female perpetrators. [1]
[1] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sexual-victimizat...
I think elsewhere online this may happen.
Also, some public broadcasters use the "far right" word group suspiciously often, almost as if it was some kind of effort to softly suggest to people how not to vote, but I must be imagining things, because they would never do that:)
If this sort of surveillance stuff gets accepted, in time, you're gonna get noticed, put into database, and maybe called for questioning. Why are you using encryption, people that have nothing to hide do not use it.
Actually police and various agencies do, because when most people aren't encrypting, the few that do are suddenly interesting. Some of them will turn out to be organized crime, but some of them are just adults who want to communicate privately.
They may be coming down the pipe, after the soft version gets people macerated.
> at which point you won't be living in a democracy
But you will be hearing from talking heads that you are, and Russia and North Korea are the real dictatorships.
And maybe they will be right, because what is democracy? The word has different meanings to different people, and it won't be difficult to shape the discussion about what our liberal democracy is all about. Maybe it's about accepting who has power now and about protecting the vulnerable. We have seen a bit of this stance and real capabilities in recent years.
One way that would put down lots of exploitation and support privacy of adults would be video and online surveillance of all children when not alone, using a parent-controlled computer to detect bad things happening. This could start in kindergarden and school and gradually expand to all spaces that are not home. Children have some right to privacy, but not as strong as adults.
On the 16-th year, if the child wants so, surveillance gets turned off and he/she is granted more privacy. Like with age limits on car driving or working, at some point the state says, you are old enough to take responsibility, we won't protect you from harsh life anymore.
This is a targeted, reasonable solution with little collateral damage, that upholds the right to privacy for adults. It's what parents would want, instead of the bureaucrats. And who really, actually cares about safety of the children, parents or bureaucrats?
I did not stop reading your comment, because I didn't think it is dangerous to do so, and I thought it was funny. I write here to you because I think now it is not that funny, and you should abandon this behaviour and change it for better. For example, before commenting on an article, I recommend you first read it all to understand what is it that the article says. You will then be in much better position to make a useful and funny comment here.
Then you say the problem is they informed us about that stupid behaviour of theirs. I'm not so sure that is the problem here. Maybe it is their strange encrypted way to ask for discussion, or help. And we should explain that behaviour is bad and should evolve for better.
But then you're proposing we should adopt that behaviour to save us the trouble with them. Thus you're proposing using behaviour which you criticize on others, or in general, because it sounds clever/funny in the present case. But it isn't, because as you've realized, it does not work.
If you want to save people trouble from stupid posts, my advice is, explain why they are stupid, but do not propose using any stupid behaviour, including behaviours suggested in other posts, even if it looks like it could work towards the end goal. The reason is that end goal is not important enough, and suggesting people adopt stupid behaviour in one case to save trouble, is still stupid, and unfortunately, promotes use of that stupid behaviour in general.
> he's even claiming that Spinrite can improve SSD performance by repeatedly reading/writing data, which is absurd.
Is it really so absurd if it works? Did you do some careful tests of Spinrite on SSDs and did you find it never improved their performance? You seem to be describing 1) your mental model of the SSD drive, and 2) your belief that this model prevents Spinrite from working as advertised. How it prevents that? If SSD firmware does relocate data to other cells when read problems are detected, or refresh the cell charge where the data is, why performance can't improve?