5 ms·
Isn't there a catch-22 here? The system is a republic which writes its own requirements; if it's been compromised and exploited by outside systems to the point
by alexanderdmitri 8y ago
Isn't there a catch-22 here? The system is a republic which writes its own requirements; if it's been compromised and exploited by outside systems to the point its kernel level processes are funadmentally corrupt/compromised, how can you trust it to autocorrect in a way that actually fixes the fundamental issues? The tools designed for "the people" to use and interact and influence the system have been neuteralized with mathematical precision (assuming a point where they worked as specified, there is an argument to be made that the system has always given lip service to the end user while really only catering to management).
I think you only have a chance at implementing change if you're able to locate and leverage an exploit that the viruses within have either overlooked or can't completely secure against.
- elihu 8y agoI think democracy works pretty well in general, but it's prone to instabilities. Most problems that arise can be corrected. (I don't want to say that democracy is self-correcting; rather that correction is possible with appropriate intervention.) If things get too far off the rails, then the fate of the political process rests in the choices of a few powerful people whether or not to do the right thing, the level of engagement and organization of the resisting populace, the strength and independence of our various institutions, and plain dumb luck. There are many modern examples of failed democracies. We shouldn't think that "the pendulum will swing the other way"; sometimes it does, but if it doesn't then it's to late for a do-over. My thoughts on this are greatly influenced by a recent book called "On Tyranny; Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century" by Timothy Snyder.