1. This is default expectation (to have privacy, to have doors)
2. If you go abstract, it’s not too useful (its good to have of control of information sharing/ it’s good having control who access your house)
3. It seems impractical to go into details, due to very many different scenarios, details, expectations.
Take a set of different “motivations” (incompetence+personal gain+for terror+for ideology push), multiply it by types of actors (phone manufacturer, government, enemy state, criminals), mix in the possibility that law and approach can be changed/ expanded, while keeping in mind that motivations and actors will change year to year. (One thing when such tool is available for consertive gov., other thing when such tool is available for extreeme right/left gov.)
Parallels do diverge eventually, with door if somebody breaks it you most probably can see it immediately. While negative effects of privacy breach can take years to surface.
For me it’s a very bad analogy avoiding to give an answer.
Doors and how they’re used is highly cultural and has evolved. There’s nothing “fundamental” you can derive from your mental model of today.
Same goes with bike locks and the like. I used to live in a student town where people simply never locked their bikes. It was a custom of that time and place.
I’m not from USA, (so only educated guess whether statistics lie), but I wager that millions could not afford homes then and millions can afford a home today.
first graph has very sharp peaks and dips, but please note that the y axis has values from 62 till 70.
Based on this I would say that it would be misleading to state “in 1980 people could afford homes and today we can’t afford”
But I can see a lot of “outrage” in US media.
My unrequested speculation: more people got college and university degrees, but that did not change their ability to own a home. (But it did change their expectation, especially how pricey degrees seem to be in USA)
You're conflating 'having a home' with home ownership, even though the GP talks about the hassles of dealing with landlords and therefore clearly includes renting.
Rent used to be a lot cheaper in the US. I'm not sure about the 1980s, but in the 1980s I had a spacious room in a nice San Francisco neighborhood for $300/month.
Median family income in 1980 was $21k. Also San Francisco back then may not have been the San Francisco of today. So if you factor in inflation and increase in desirability and local wages, this would make for a more meaningful comparison.
Not difficult to guess. Most probably, looking for possible connections with people that could (hypothetically) have reasons to have planned or pay them for a sabotage act. Places visited, times, conversations, a recent biography of the owners... Is all in the phones.
They may find that nothing is suspicious, and this would be in fact a valid result to include, but it will worth a try.
From the point of view of the phone owners, a problem is how to guarantee that the phones are not contaminated with fake data later. I assume that there are official protocols deployed to keep the chain of custody safe and clean.
Important to note: The NTSB so far has listed no probable cause (the preliminary report is linked somewhere else in this thread.)
The phones were confiscated by the FBI, I'm not even sure how they are involved in such a request. The ship would be under maritime law so if anyone is handling the investigation and seizing devices wouldn't it be the CBP?
Maybe someone on this site knows more about maritime law and how this works?
Planet and nature will be just fine. Number of species bounce back after extinction events. As long as there is at least one ameba, life will find a way.
Humans on the other hand might have tougher time during each next century.
This is not a useful take and does not contribute to the discussion. Nature being reduced to "one amoeba" is not "just fine" according to any human value system. I don't understand this need to say "akshually the planet will be fine" just because someone used the phrase "harm the planet".
I would add that it is also not true that life will bounce back; Earth is 4.5 billion years old, the vast majority of which time it was inhabited by no more than microbes; and we have 1 billion years left before the sun boils the oceans. Humans are the first technological civilization the Earth has seen, and will likely be the last - there isn't time for another go-around.
Addendum: I googled "akshually the planet will be fine" and the top result was this[0] HN thread. Even has the "one amoeba" line. Is anyone working on some sort of platform that can crosslink parallel discussions so we don't have to have the same discussions over and over ad nauseam forever?
1. This is default expectation (to have privacy, to have doors)
2. If you go abstract, it’s not too useful (its good to have of control of information sharing/ it’s good having control who access your house)
3. It seems impractical to go into details, due to very many different scenarios, details, expectations. Take a set of different “motivations” (incompetence+personal gain+for terror+for ideology push), multiply it by types of actors (phone manufacturer, government, enemy state, criminals), mix in the possibility that law and approach can be changed/ expanded, while keeping in mind that motivations and actors will change year to year. (One thing when such tool is available for consertive gov., other thing when such tool is available for extreeme right/left gov.)
Parallels do diverge eventually, with door if somebody breaks it you most probably can see it immediately. While negative effects of privacy breach can take years to surface.
reply