Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | afpx's commentslogin

Doing the investigations is a whole industry in itself.

If it's true that security is only as strong as the weakest link, and they grant people like Jared Kushner top security clearance, then it's all theater at this point.


I thought this was what Larry meant when he said surveillance will keep citizens on their best behavior. If one’s reputation score is low, sorry no money. Also, if anyone in one’s network has bad behavior, no money and no friends. Maybe the kids will learn to accept it, but being of the last analog generation, to me it seems like a painful future.

I'd like a semi-anonymous private network. Something like: I go to local post office and purchase a sealed token. I use the token to generate a reusable “verified human credential” with limited reuses. The credential allows me to connect to the private network.

I learned about a cryptographic interaction that can support that recently (and have spent a lot of time focusing on the idea as a means of procrastination).

I don't use Kagi but the context was their Privacy Pass thingie https://blog.kagi.com/kagi-privacy-pass

It works similarly to what you'd like: they sign sealed tokens you provide. Later, you can unseal a token and use it without invalidating the signature. It is mathematically too difficult for a classical computer to link the sealed and unsealed token.


You’re going to end up running down the same merry path that DRM companies do - and you can’t patch the wetware layer. Inevitably thousands of ‘human tokens’ will end up in the hands of actual humans working in call centres with 300 phones in front of them.

https://www.scmp.com/news/people-culture/trending-china/arti...


My wife manages 70 software developers. Her boss, the CIO, who has no practical programming experiece, is demanding her and her peers cut 50% of their staff in the next year.

Necessity is the mother of invention. Americans like to invent things - we'll be fine.

History contains abundant, well-documented cases of ordinary people participating in atrocities without coercion. Most people will act decently in low-pressure environments and will act badly under certain incentives, authority structures, or group dynamics. There is no way to know what a person's threshold is until it's tested, but it can be assumed that most people have a low threshold.

Parent was implying “all” humans crave this power over others. This is patently false.

“Most” people won’t act badly to attain this power, “some” will. Being placed into a position and choosing harm is not the same as pursuing it.


That is absolutely against the evidence, but yes people do like to think they are naturally righteous and good.

What evidence is there that ALL humans crave power over other humans?

We're literally animals, evolved for dominance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dominance_hierarchy_sp...

One could try to argue that some of us are special exceptions. But, there's no evidence for that.

(The delightfully ironic humor of it is that people who presumably have your same point of view are down-voting me into negative)


I can understand your POV. My parents were atheists. Then, in college, it was just assumed everyone was one. So, I just accepted that as truth. I went on to read all the philosophy and religions. I always avoided Jesus though because honestly his name was a "bad word" in my crowd. Then, a few years ago I picked up the Gospel (nothing else) and decided to read it for informational purposes. And, it stuck with me. Then, I kept reading more and more, and realized that it was all cohesive and coherent. And, for years I tried to find flaws, but it was just too good and life changing and real.


I too like some philosophers. One or two of them were writing back in the iron age. But I don't worship them.


exactly - the worship part is essential, having obedience to good


Ideas should speak for themselves and compete fairly on their own merits, and there should be no faith.


What I mean is that for some people, the Gospel toggle some previously unknown bits in the brain that activates and transforms them. And, worship just becomes what they do. It's the freedom of it - they become unshackled. I really don't know how to describe it in a way that my previous atheist self would understand.


How about "shackled" instead of "unshackled"? That might make the thing you're describing seem less extraordinary.


You seem to have an almost religious devotion to your worldview. Which makes sense: it works for you and you feel compelled to convince others. You also limit yourself to thoughts and practices that align with these views. Imagine for a moment that this is also true of other people for other beliefs.


What are you trying to argue? This is nonsensical.


> It's the freedom of it - they become unshackled.

Slave. That's what you describe.

I'm not attacking you when I say this: drugs can get you there, too.


If you read about early christianity (which I did for 18months), you will see that the "gospel" is a mess.

If you couldn't find flaws, you are clearly biased. Even religious institutions have found flaws. The contradictions are so well published that you have to ignore them to not know about them,

I don't think you have any true knowledge of the history of your faith (said the atheist).


What about Pershing Square? in 2008 Bill Ackman gave a presentation on how to crash the housing market and profit from it. Looks like he's still out there destroying peoples' lives.


I see it differently: the crash was coming anyway (the market was being irrational). He can't crash the housing market, unless there's a good reason for the housing prices to crash. Turns out there was a reason.


Do you have evidence that he committed a specific crime?

Jailing people is for crimes committed, not for punishing people you dislike.


I've been using my credit card at restaurants for 30 years. I've used it probably 5000 times, and I've only had the number stolen once (from a grocery store).

Where are these low-trust areas of the US? I want to visit and check it out.


There would have to be a very long period of peace, first. Periods of government instability, as we have now, actually cause American citizens to want to reaffirm their rights, not relinquish them. And, the 2nd amendment represents something symbolically beyond its function: a unified collective will against tyranny, corruption, and evil.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: