That's a good example actually - should criticism of Trump now be subject to restrictions due to the two attempts on his life? "Stochastic terrorism" must be applied equally in both directions
Seems like he was targeted by people of his own political persuasion in both cases. So, yeah, maybe Trump should in fact tone down his violent rhetoric.
Likewise, this contrasts with the (rightful) criticism of Google and other companies censoring anti-government material in China - which could also be described as "company complies with local laws"
An important part of democracy is that it proves its legitimacy to the citizens. Threatening citizens who are skeptical or critical of the process (whether reasonably or not) is the only thing here which is a threat to democracy
Yes, but the time to do this is not directly after an election in which your preferred candidate lost.
Okay :: "I think our electoral process needs improvement and changes to make it fair, secure, and auditable."
Not Okay :: "I think our electoral process needs improvement and changes to make it fair, secure, and auditable… and therefore I reject the results of the last election and believe $other_guy to be the rightful president."
> Threatening citizens who are skeptical or critical of the process (whether reasonably or not) is the only thing here which is a threat to democracy
Yet another thing the supreme court judge involved in this Twitter debacle is guilty of.
He opposed all attempts to add an auditable, anonymous paper trail to our electronic voting machines. At some point, he straight up declared that they were unquestionable. It's all "fake news", he claims. Then he started censoring and fining and persecuting anyone who questioned them. Out of all the stupid things our former president said and did, they banned him from politics over his perfectly reasonable criticism of the brazilian voting machines.
Does he have the balls, the sheer audacity to bring his unquestionable machines to defcon and offer them a billion dollars if they can subvert our elections? No. Oh you can audit the machines and the software... By appointment. You're allowed to bring a pen and a piece of paper. The thing runs Linux, good luck with that. Before the elections when I was really engaged with this, I read a report that said the software's makefile downloaded some libraries off the network and linked them right in. Yeah... Normal people protested the elections by actually asking for source code. It wouldn't have helped.
In that case the situations would be very similar, and the reporting should be essentially the same, with some word substitutions. If not, this would be indicative of double standards, which I'm glad you oppose
This is a good point. When we envision a scenario we are tasked to either imagine it playing out in a way that supports our sensibilities about fairness and justice or we picture it playing out in a way that offends and repels us. Heavy weighs the head of those that take up the task of contemplating the infinite minutiae of the multiverse
When I visited I think I spent more time looking at the architecture of the building than the collections. It's very nice. Similar story with the Louvre I suppose - I never went in, but enjoyed walking past the pyramid exterior in the evening
And how many give up after one (if that) when they realize they can't afford the time to do it without enough compensation to reduce hours/replace their day job? Especially when it comes to the boring business side of getting it published and marketed. I can imagine someone writing in their spare time (like any other hobby), but it's much harder to imagine going through all the rest of the process unless they're (a) hoping to make a bit of a living from writing (b) doing it for ego reasons (I guess that's were vanity presses come in)
Self publishing is on the rise. Some people feel the need to share, more than the need to make money... that's why a lot of books get written (I believe), generally not to make money, but to share something (the author feels is) important.
Yep. This isn't a dichotomy between unscrupulous trend chasers vs passionate artistes writing masterpieces just for the love of it. There are plenty of people who would like to make their living selling creative works that they're passionate about, but there's only a finite amount of time in the day, and bills need to be paid. It's fairly well known that being an author or musician is a difficult career, and this is obviously a bad thing for artistic expression. It biases cultural output towards the financially privileged, or those who pander to those who will sponsor them
If you mean the ones that are just a painted strip on the ground, then OK, but for existing traffic lights controlled ones it doesn't seem unreasonable at all. Sensors to detect pedestrian and/or car presence are already extremely common. E.g. all modern [1] pedestrian crossings in the UK have similar sensors, which can extend the crossing time if it detects someone still in the road. And of course your local drive thru can detect your car pulling up, though usually by induction coil
Yes. It's funny how people will claim they only block ads because they allegedly want to pay for good content, but cannot, or claim that piracy is just a service problem. Yet when asked to put their money where their mouth is they instead just continue to openly try and get stuff for free. It's pure entitlement and disrespect for other's labor
As for the "I can; therefore I will" justifications: I can steal from my local corner shop. It's very unlikely they'd catch me. Yet I do not
reply