3 ms·

About time. The ones protesting about those searches have something to hide and they should be searched first and more frequently. As article stated, children a

About time. The ones protesting about those searches have something to hide and they should be searched first and more frequently. As article stated, children are our most valuable asset and the future. In addition if this works out well we might be able to detect many other crimes as well, maybe even before they are committed. We could for example do some data analysis to find out which household items criminals are likely to own and we could correlate owning those items with potential criminals.

fourtens 5y ago
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or if you are being serious? But, in case you were being serious, I think the blog post does not quite come to the same conclusions you seem have come to
- baal80spam 5y ago
  I'm pretty sure it was sarcasm and a jab at "Minority Report".
  - mewpmewp2 5y ago
    I edited in the second paragraph so it wasn't obvious enough before.
    - tobmlt 5y ago
      Oh, well still, you’ve got your crow with you today. I can see it.
- naasking 5y ago
  Poe's law at its finest.
automatic6131 5y ago
Great idea, let's also correlate the skin color of those potential criminals too [/sarcasm]
darkerside 5y ago
If you're going to satirize, please make it clear. Not by saying, this is satire, but by making it funny.
- mewpmewp2 5y ago
  Just trying to brainstorm ways to make our society safer.
  - tobmlt 5y ago
    I admire one who can stick to character like a true fascist in the face of an internet of doubt. May I request a write up on the benefits of a national psychosis?
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dennis_jeeves 5y ago
  >but by making it funny. That misses the point, right? It has to be said with a straight face...
- andy-x 5y ago
  Satire is not usually funny. And making fun of someone/something is not usually a satire.
  - darkerside 5y ago
    Satire is the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues. I'm confused... What exactly do you think satire is???
aneutron 5y ago
Judging from your stance, I believe your grew up in a fairly free country (I'm guessing the U.S.A ?), and that you never encountered an oppressive regime where everything you say, do, and all your communications are monitored. Let me start by using an analogy: In physics, and science in general, if you want to understand a system, you have to explore its limits. How does it operate when we vary the cursor of the variables (e.g. temperature, etc.). Thankfully, for the {communications, cryptography, warrantless access} system, we've already seen some pretty advanced extremes on the two ends. I grew up in a country where 20 years ago, ALL communications by post were examined thoroughly, and ANYTHING remotely against the regime had you summoned and probably imprisoned. As you can imagine, this is easily weaponisable by the regime. I've seen and read about the extremes of how "think about the terrorists/pedos" can vary quickly drift a whole fucking country into a situation similar to Minority Report (2002). We ALREADY have the means to police our communities and societies. There's a reasons why the folks agreed to seperations of power. That reason is documented in history. Assuming you're american, I'll just hint to your constitution and its 4th amendment. The executive powers DO NOT have business deciding whether to search your home (nor your data by extension), if the judiciary does NOT give them the authority to do so. You cannot tell me that an independant judge will not issue a warrant given solid proof that someone has pedophilic tendencies. But telling me that we should search everyone who refuses to be searched because they're the most probable ones to be pedophiles is EXACTLY the most Nazi way of doing things. All in all, your point of view is not very reasonable. We already have means in place to prosecute and hold pedophiles accountable. But unwarranted search and seizure is not the way to go about it. EDIT: Sorry read before you added the second paragparh, was not aware it was sarcasm ...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

fourtens 5y ago

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or if you are being serious? But, in case you were being serious, I think the blog post does not quite come to the same conclusions you seem have come to

baal80spam 5y ago
I'm pretty sure it was sarcasm and a jab at "Minority Report".
- mewpmewp2 5y ago
  I edited in the second paragraph so it wasn't obvious enough before.
  - tobmlt 5y ago
    Oh, well still, you’ve got your crow with you today. I can see it.
naasking 5y ago
Poe's law at its finest.

automatic6131 5y ago

Great idea, let's also correlate the skin color of those potential criminals too [/sarcasm]

darkerside 5y ago

If you're going to satirize, please make it clear. Not by saying, this is satire, but by making it funny.

mewpmewp2 5y ago
Just trying to brainstorm ways to make our society safer.
- tobmlt 5y ago
  I admire one who can stick to character like a true fascist in the face of an internet of doubt. May I request a write up on the benefits of a national psychosis?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dennis_jeeves 5y ago
>but by making it funny. That misses the point, right? It has to be said with a straight face...
andy-x 5y ago
Satire is not usually funny. And making fun of someone/something is not usually a satire.
- darkerside 5y ago
  Satire is the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues. I'm confused... What exactly do you think satire is???

aneutron 5y ago

Judging from your stance, I believe your grew up in a fairly free country (I'm guessing the U.S.A ?), and that you never encountered an oppressive regime where everything you say, do, and all your communications are monitored. Let me start by using an analogy: In physics, and science in general, if you want to understand a system, you have to explore its limits. How does it operate when we vary the cursor of the variables (e.g. temperature, etc.). Thankfully, for the {communications, cryptography, warrantless access} system, we've already seen some pretty advanced extremes on the two ends. I grew up in a country where 20 years ago, ALL communications by post were examined thoroughly, and ANYTHING remotely against the regime had you summoned and probably imprisoned. As you can imagine, this is easily weaponisable by the regime. I've seen and read about the extremes of how "think about the terrorists/pedos" can vary quickly drift a whole fucking country into a situation similar to Minority Report (2002). We ALREADY have the means to police our communities and societies. There's a reasons why the folks agreed to seperations of power. That reason is documented in history. Assuming you're american, I'll just hint to your constitution and its 4th amendment. The executive powers DO NOT have business deciding whether to search your home (nor your data by extension), if the judiciary does NOT give them the authority to do so. You cannot tell me that an independant judge will not issue a warrant given solid proof that someone has pedophilic tendencies. But telling me that we should search everyone who refuses to be searched because they're the most probable ones to be pedophiles is EXACTLY the most Nazi way of doing things. All in all, your point of view is not very reasonable. We already have means in place to prosecute and hold pedophiles accountable. But unwarranted search and seizure is not the way to go about it. EDIT: Sorry read before you added the second paragparh, was not aware it was sarcasm ...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]