fitblipper

I'm confused. Are you saying we shouldn't put resourced towards saving the criminals or catching them? After all, as you said, it is only a small % of total deaths.

Either way, it sounds like you have a very low opionion of the search for justice in society.

Tangentially related:

Google is willing to sacrifice children to push engagement. In family link they refuse to let me restrict the Google app. In what world do I want my 1st or 2nd grader opening the Google app and reading the news about murder, rape, and all the other horrendous things that are common in the Google apps news summary? Give us parents actual control in androids parental control app!

... or save some from the boom so you can survive the bust until the next boom, (AKA being financially responsible).

What does "voter activation" mean in a country that requires that every person who can vote must vote?

I was seeing the reports from the first pass which said it was almost guaranteed that Lula would not win because of what the results of the first were. I wonder what caused that prediction to fail.

I am glad the son of a failed coup organizer and a trump puppet didn't get elected and am hopeful for Brazils ability to self govern. Breaking free of US financial monopolies (credit cards) gives me hope they'll continue to produce and innovative into a healthier and competitive world market, but I am also tired of Lula being at the helm and wish someone else could step up and take the reigns. When someone stays in power for so long in a democracy it makes me suspicious of the legitimacy of their power. Are they popular because they are good for the country or are they popular because they have the right people with power, influence, and money on their side.

"Someone was asking me the other day how to keep thieves from stealing my car. I told them it is not possible, if the car is on the street it is on the street. I don't see how making a law will change that..."

Consider that some steps, although not a 100% fix, are still better than nothing. Lock your car doors, or in this case, hand consumers the keys to their digital lives so they can lock their digital doors if they want.

I have an openwrt router running wireguard. I use it to provision the peer keys and routes. I also use openwrts cloudflare ddns which is super simple to setup. Any new client I want to add I jump into the wireguard interface in the GUI, go to the peer tab, and it does everything for me there.

I used to LOVE tailscale. Then I put wireguard on my home network exposed to the internet with a dynamic DNS provider and it immediately became irrelevant. Not only is raw wireguard more stable (I don't have to fight the DNS issues on my mobile phones) it feels faster and is amazingly simple to set up.

That just means the restriction can be used again in the future. All they have to do is recind it faster than the courts work and then it'll always be a tool in their toolbox regardless of the legality of it.

Since those 1s and 0s became heavy enough to cause a global shortage of memory and GPUs.

>even worse, your phone that you carry around in public

Sorry to attach on to such a small part of your comment. Why do you think having it attached to your phone is worse? In my understanding phones are WAY more secure than any run of the mill laptop or desktop due to a variety of security measures like sandboxing, encryption by default, and secure elements. If I came home to a break in I would be way less nervous about them swiping my phone than my desktop.

Contributing to Open Street Map has given me a ton of satisfaction. Knowing that my somewhat minor efforts to correct one address, add one feature, correct one trail will propagate to so many different places and help other people not get lost, find something new, or just be able to navigate more safely in the world makes me feel like I am leaving the world a better place more than a decade of working at FANG ever did.

I've always loved the ridiculousness of the "going dark" label when law enforcement can't access encrypted chats or a back door isn't built into a piece of software. When there are security cameras on the vast majority of houses, stop lights and in people's hands, and when so much meta data about people's associations are shared from Google, Facebook, any other social platform, how in the world can they say they are "going dark". How did they ever solve crimes before these things?

With fewer and fewer interesting things getting added from one generation to the next, freedom, security, and privacy have become my main selling point when deciding on a phone. 7 years of updates, strong hardware enforced security and the ability to run graphene is have been the deciding factors in the last 3 phones I've bought for myself and my family.

Stop manipulating our markets under the guize of national security or protecting Americans. If we need to be protected from bad behavior we need to be protected by all bad behavior regardless of it's origin. Has back doors? Ban it. Has awful security around sensitive data? Ban it. Makes technology available to the masses that is a national security risk? Ban it(if you most). Why give US companies a pass on this? It's because the US government wants in on using the products with bad behavior while still trying to stop other governments the same power.

They should have never been deployed to begin with.

How expensive are drones? Way less expensive than a police officer. They can be deployed at scale. You can imagine a world where every move everyone makes is tracked. If you don't think public spaces hold any 4th amendment protections, they can also see much better into private property that police officers can't see from the street. Back yard, second story windows, all angles into windows, and that is only considering if they use regular cameras, imagine when they have thermal cameras or other sensors.

I have fairly simplistic view of the economics involved here. Could you explain why the ability to sell more chips wouldn't be sufficient enough incentive to increase supply?

Might be nitpicking, but USC 1983 does not prevent anything, it is an attempt at restitution after the fact, and even then, when qualified immunity in play the efficacy of even that is questionable.

What does it cost a police force to abuse this technology? Maybe down the road they'll have to spend an afternoon in court explaining how they were just following orders or they were doing as directed by the department's policies at the time. What does it cost a citizen? Beyond the legal costs, it could cost their job when they don't show up because they were unjustly arrested, it could be a chilling effect on their speech when they see their politically active neighbor targeted.

I stand by my statement that nothing prevents the creep from happening. There is no realized cost to those who make it happen.

Just this morning I listened to an EFF podcast episode (Effector) about how license plate readers tend to suffer from mission creep. They might be deployed for one of the "reasonable" purposes you list but when the tool is available to lawenforcement it almost always becomes used for more and more purposes, like the example given in the article about tracking a woman who had an abortion.

The problem with these types of tools are that they provide a foothold into absolute enforcement, not just for current laws you find reasonable, but for all future laws from all future administrations which may not be reasonable.

Why should these cameras used for speeding enforcement today be used to track down protesters the admin decides to label as terrorists or legal immigrants who attended a pro Palestine rally tomorrow? They shouldn't.

What would stop that from happening? Nothing.

I don't think "could" is doing a lot of work here at all. It seems logical that if cases where the misuse of flock systems were discovered only when the same officers misbehaved in other, more visible situations then there are officers that avoid the more visible situations and continue to use the system that does not expose their bad behavior (flock).

That is far down the list of reasons someone might want to know who is performing actions against them with the backing of the federal government. Much higher on the list would be accountability if they do something wrong or to reference them in any follow up legal or administrative interactions they might have in the giant immigration system.

How many judges hide their identity?

Pardons only enable presidents to direct their goons to operate outside of the rule of law without repercussions.Having one individual with strong incentives to enable their team stay in power as much as possible retain the power is shocking.

Judges and juries are at least superficially removed from that sort of corrupt incentive system.

This could fit in well with the Pixel's upcoming desktop mode or Samsung DeX. Hopefully Google keeps developing desktop mode to make it more usable.

This is the tired excuses: If you've got nothing to hide then you shouldn't want privacy And If you already lack privacy in some places you should just give up on having any.

The first is stupid. If there exists capacity to keep things private, why would I NOT want to have privacy? What is in it for me to let arbitrary others see everything I do and am?

The second so strange to hear. It is an argument for turning the slippery slope of privacy erosion that you try to resist into a waterslide that you should enthusiasticly throw yourself down.

It seems like a centralized authority for DNS that must answer to some government is prone to censorship.

Would moving domain registration into a public Blockchain allow for a more resilient and democratized internet?

Organic Maps is great and I'm hoping the transition to Forgejo goes smoothly for the project.

I've recently started hiking and just generally going outside in my community more. When I relied on Google Maps I would get some random business highlighted when navigating around. Since I switched to Organic Maps I see trails, artwork, parks, scenic views, etc, etc that I never knew existed even in my own neighborhood. I also love the idea that if I find something not right on it I can just open up Open Street Map, make a simple edit, and improve the life of everyone else using the app that comes after me.

Have you ever experienced prison yourself or through someone close? Prisons don't put people on a level playing field at all. It is significantly more comfortable to be rich in prison than poor in prison.

Why do you feel that info is relevant? If my driver's license expired yesterday and then I get pulled over while I'm driving to the DMV today to get it renewed, should I not get a citation?

Just because they had permission before and after their actions took place doesn't make it ok if they didn't have permission at the time of the action. To say otherwise seems to be begging for abuse of a loophole. I guess that's why they had to claim the action wasn't one a warrant was required for...

With kids involved many of the rights you normally have are removed. Police and DCS can use your silence (or a pile of dirty laundry, or you asking for a lawyer to be present, or anything they want) as a reason they need to take your child and put them in foster care, claiming that they see your actions as attempting to hide abuse or withhold access to the kid for investigation.

Even more than phones, this is the reason our children are being raised stuck indoors, contributing to the ever increasing mental health crisis with our kids. Instead they should be able to discovering the pride and joy that comes from self sufficient, independent exploration of the world around them. The government and society should form a support for parents, not treat them like their kids are already wards of the state and the parents only exist to support the government.