Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:A republic, if you can keep it... (Score 0) 193

It was. The problem Democracy was not designed to address is a completely different one. To trust Democracy, you have to feel you benefit of it. For a long time, living in a democratic country meant improving your standard of living, slowly but steadily. Respect for the current system of government comes from the system of government benefiting you. It's aligned with the Golden Rule: Don't do unto others what you don't want to be done to you. The system of government sets boundaries of things you can do, and you respect them because you don't want the same things happening to you. You respect Democracy, because if the current government does something you don't want, you can always publicly complain, elect different officials or run for office until your grievances are addressed.

Several decades without real improvement of the standard of living for the average citizen has shaken the support for Democracy, because people feel Democracy has failed them. They no longer insists on upholding the rule of Law, because there is the impression that the Law benefits the wrong people. Decades of sentiment, reiterated in countless movies, novels, documentations and opinion pieces, have consolidated to the general view that government officials and politicians are either incompetent, grifters or blocked by countless laws and regulations to do something for you -- and this view is now so ingrained that people don't expect anything anymore from Democracy and are ready to try something else. The U.S. has broken the promise of your pursuit of happiness, and the pundits explain to you it's your fault. Throw out the rule of Law, throw out the balances of power, throw out elections in general when all they apparently do is benefiting the wrong persons.

Comment Re:A republic, if you can keep it... (Score 1) 193

It objectively wasn't. The system assumed those morons wouldn't be self-serving grifters. Modern politics is evidence that this was not considered in the design.

Actually, it was. The whole point of a democracy is to have non-bloody rules to get rid of an unpopular government. The more hoops you have to go through, the less democratic a system is. At the end of Dashiell Hammett's "Glass Key" (the novel, not the movies), Paul Madvig comments that this time, the other side will win the election, and he will lie low for four years until the next vote. And yes, Paul Madvig is a self-serving grifter.

Comment Re:Shocked it was ever that high (Score 1) 60

Okay, I'll feed the troll: I choose to comment on Slashdot. I also choose not to use less privacy-respecting platforms like Facebook. And make no mistake, I'm under no delusion Slashdot-the-company has been anything more than yet another data harvesting endeavor since CmdrTaco sold it.

I do not have a choice in whether or not Flock misreads my license plate and I'm arrested at gunpoint as a direct result - Or worse, which will eventually happen; and Flock somehow magically bears zero liability because hey, their contract admits they're unreliable and requires users to do their own due diligence. Which absolutely none of them do.

Comment Re:Dual purpose age-bracket signal :o (Score 1) 121

And your problem is apparently an inability to figure out that two plus two equals four.

First, those age brackets are necessarily dynamic or the OS would be out of compliance the day after installing - Because y'know, people tend to age one day per day, at least until we have space stations orbiting Sgr-A*.

And second, if you visit Facebook the day before you turn 18 and the day after, whaddya know, they magically now know your actual birthdate without ever needing to be explicitly told. This ain't rocket science, dude (space stations orbiting the nearest supermassive black hole aside).

Comment Re:Dual purpose age-bracket signal :o (Score 1) 121

That's really the biggest question in all of this - What means of enforcement on the end-user will end up attached to this?

I suspect the vast majority of us are just as fine with lying to Microsoft as we are with lying to Facebook. And as a privacy freak myself, the law itself honestly sounds about as tame as we could have hoped for (short of no law at all); but almost guaranteed Microsoft / Apple / OEMs are already rubbing their hands together and cackling with evil glee over having not just an excuse, but a near-mandate, to demand a license or passport merely to activate a new install.

And what about preexisting installs? At what point is MS itself effectively going to ransomware the very PCs we own for a pic of our license, and what recourse do we have when they invariably brick some fraction of those? Because it will happen.

Comment Re:They are blocking police reports... (Score 1) 34

Nobody's paying a few grand just to steal a similar few grand in hardware; and the booth bunnies / bois couldn't care less about having a few work laptops stolen, insurance would cover it and it's not a personal loss anyway.

Rather, this is 100% about stealing what was on those devices, and the potential value could be hundreds / thousands of times higher than the cost of the lost hardware itself. Imagine a pre-release build of GTA VI, almost certainly without the DRM baked in yet so it doesn't embarass the vendor at exactly the wrong moment, and you have the right idea.

Comment Re:Dual purpose age-bracket signal :o (Score 2) 121

Slashdot Top Deals

The next person to mention spaghetti stacks to me is going to have his head knocked off. -- Bill Conrad

Working...