throwaway28409

2 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by throwaway28409 2y ago

   Technology very much does. It's the flesh that has a hard time triumphing over force. To counteract this, you can also engineer a system that can resist it through e.g. split secrets on multiple people located in different jurisdiction
2. 2.▲
   by throwaway28409 2y ago

   Note that I said "can", not "legally can". You can destroy currency, alter passport, reproduce copyrighted images if you want to. There may be legal consequences but you can. You can also stab a person with a knife you o
3. 3.▲
   by throwaway28409 2y ago

   > It may be wrong, but it proves that technology can't beat politics and policy. It very much can. In a battle between human force and physics, physics win every time. If I send an encrypted email to you, you have the choice to not
4. 4.▲
   by throwaway28409 2y ago

   > they operate? How are they operating? It might as well be viewed as citizens of Sweden interacting with a foreign service out of their own volition. In general, laws are backed up by the threat of violence. To the extent that Sweden&#x
5. 5.▲
   by throwaway28409 2y ago

   > The idea, that companies or politicians can force the user's machine to work against it's owner, is wrong. You are hinting at something important here. Let me strengthen your point: to own an object means to subject it fully