- Right, I’m aware of the excuses the government uses to keep secrets.
But on principle, what right does the government have to keep secrets from its own people? I don’t believe we had that button at the founding, it was added somewhere along the way. I’m asking what is the justification for this, and whether in the grand scheme of things that outweighs the principle of the government not being a separate entity from the people.
There are multiple ways to approach witness protection. For example if we have a problem with witnesses being harmed we could make being involved with witness harm at any layer of indirection a capital offense. We can probably think of other options besides the government being allowed to keep secrets from its own people.
- Well that scenario I have in mind is basically extreme AI geometry up scaling. You make a blocky draft and AI makes it pretty without touching the gameplay or level design. That seems feasible, no?
- But no they literally aren’t. If the Chinese government takes data from a Chinese company in China, there is no legal process available to anyone affected because it is outside of US jurisdiction. What is America going to sue China the country in American court? That’s <mentally deficient>.
I don’t mean US law is perfectly enforced on US drone companies, that’s <mentally deficient>. I mean that there exists a legal system that harmed people can use, as opposed to the case of Chinese companies where there does not exist etc.
- Stupid question: why is the government even allowed to redact stuff? Isn’t the government keeping secrets from the people totally antithetical to democracy?
- Under investigation for what? Like the self driving claims thing or something nefarious?
- US made drones are subject to US law.
- I think AI has the potential to shrink dev teams back down to what they were the the 90s, which would be great for coherency and experimentation. Once you get a big enough org going there seems to be too much design by committee all over the place.
- Not what I meant, thanks for the mind reading attempt though.
- Can someone have a golf lifestyle? Like, they go to golf courses, they own golf clubs, they socialize with other golfers? I mean it in that sense. You seem defensive.
- Root cause as a verb is common in every engineering group I’ve ever worked in. That doesn’t strike me as odd at all, though I haven’t heard it outside of a professional engineering setting. No opinion on demise as a verb.
- > who insist that no books containing LGBT characters appear in libraries
Is this a common stance? I thought it was more like, no books glorifying LGBT lifestyle or teaching it as if it’s not controversial and it’s just a fact of life (as proponents sincerely believe, of course, not saying no one is thinks it is a fact of life, that’s just the part that is controversial). I understand disagreeing with that, but it isn’t the same as opponents pushing for zero gay/etc characters period, right?
I haven’t been following this topic too closely though so I might be missing what people are screeching about on the right today.
- Was rape that common? Like in hunter gatherer times (most of human history) most mating would have been within the band. I don’t think intra-band mating would have been rapey, mostly. Incestuous by modern standards, for sure, but I don’t see why it would have been rapey. Inter-tribe conquest mating definitely happened, but was it really that common compared to the normal mode? It takes way more effort, at least.
My similarly controversial take is that modern rape is traumatic because rapists are no longer hung in public. I think public hangings might have had an under appreciated healing effect on the psyche. Like if a guy who attacked you is still out there, he might attack you again. But if you saw him hang, you just might feel better.
- American south? Many contact, few rainbows and unicorns.
- Staying hunter gatherer isn’t sustainable unless everyone does it, because of the larger population size enabled by agriculture. Larger groups can generally dominate smaller groups absent a technological difference, but here again agriculture has an advantage because it at least seems like it’s easier to develop technology when your stuff isn’t getting moved around all the time.
- Did he try any control topics?
It’s possible that no matter what he asked, the people of Seattle would respond negatively.
- New marijuana euphemism just dropped.
- See: demographic projections.
Europeans are projected to numerically lose control of America, which in a democracy is equivalent to losing control functionally.
It’s very convenient for a lot of people to pretend this doesn’t matter at all, and many or even most Europeans have at this point been brainwashed through childhood conditioning to not be able to go there even in their thoughts, lest they become the deepest evil, according to their conditioning.
But, in a sane world, anything pre-1945, the statement “Europeans are projected to lose control of America within single digit decades” would spur a panic.
Let me guess, I’m just a horrible immoral person and I’m not allowed to think about this, right? Do you have any arguments besides that one?
- The way I think about this is, let’s say a lot of Americans are moving to Switzerland illegally by overstaying their visas. If I went along with that group, I would not be surprised to be deported by force. If I went there legally and got caught up in a raid or something, or even targeted personally because I sound American, and I get locked up for a bit and then sent back to America on an airplane, would I be upset? Absolutely I would be, that would be a terrible experience. But at the same time, I would understand that a lot of my countrymen are breaking Swiss law and the Swiss have to do something about it, and I can see why it might be hard to not make any mistakes. It would probably make me not want to go back to Switzerland.
Is that not a valid take? Does it not apply somehow? If I put myself in their shoes, that is how I feel.
- There is quite a lot of daylight between “something to complain about” and “authoritarian regime”. I never said they had “nothing to complain about”.
I’m not trying to convince anyone that there isn’t authoritarian regime behavior happening. I am just trying to figure out what people are talking about when they refer to that as if it is happening.
I am using “Germans of the ‘30s” as a euphemism. Obviously I know the timeline of what happened, you are just misinterpreting as an opportunistic drama nitpick. Whether the misinterpretation is happening consciously or subconsciously, I don’t know.
If the “Germans of the ‘30s” had only ever done deportations, which they did do, i.e. had they stopped there, we would not view them in the same way. Ergo, if the current regime stops with deportations, which we have no evidence to show that they won’t, then there is nothing to suggest that they will end up behaving in an authoritarian way, because further massive steps are required to get there. And besides, the current American regime has tremendously more legal justification for these deportations than the Nazis had for the Jews deportation. The Nazis presumably had to change German law to even deport the Jews. No change of law is required here, because it is perfectly congruent with the existing legal framework (and was done consistently for decades prior to this administration, just more quietly and I guess in smaller numbers).
It’s weird how slippery slope arguments are only valid in public discourse when it comes to the Nazis, and in that case it’s so valid it is just taken as a fact. Just because someone is doing something that can be squinted at to look like something that happened prior to a genocide, does not mean that it will lead to genocide. The ad absurdum version of this line of thinking would suggest banning vegetarianism or painting, as genocidal mania soon followed.
Otherwise, just don’t do war. It’s pretty simple. Especially when you have zero need for land.
Witness protection is a compensation for an inadequate and overly soft criminal justice system. If the person calling the hit fully expected to die by hanging for calling the hit, he would not call the hit.