The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number is self-protection…the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.
Look again at that dot. That’s here. That’s home. That’s us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every “superstar,” every “supreme leader,” every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there — on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
There’s an out of control trolley speeding towards two workers. They’re massive dicks. You have the ability to pull a lever and change the trolley’s path so it hits just one person. He’s an even bigger dick.
This one is high quality.
This began the fire inside of me to build a more free life, and though it will be a challenge, I know it is in my heart to live this way. So to anyone struggling with their current life situation, whether that be their job, their relationship, or their struggle for freedom, my advice to you is to jump, and the net will appear.
The closest approximation we have for “a computer that runs all the programs except the one you don’t like” is “a computer that is infected with spyware out of the box.” By spyware I mean operating-system features that monitor the computer owner’s commands and cancel them if they’re on a blacklist. Think, for example, of image scanners that can detect if you’re trying to scan currency and refuse to further process the image. As much as we want to prevent counterfeiting, imposing codes and commands that you can’t overrule is a recipe for disaster.
Why? Because for such a system to work, remote parties must have more privileges on it than the owner. And such a security model must hide its operation from the computer’s normal processes. When you ask your computer to do something reasonable, you expect it to say, “Yes, master” (or possibly “Are you sure?”), not “I CAN’T LET YOU DO THAT, DAVE.”
First: We shouldn’t be spying on Americans who haven’t broken any laws. Darrell Spoonauer of Topeka, Kansas, made a lot of coherent points on this subject in an email to me. He also made a lot of coherent points when he made the same arguments in emails to his wife, to his mother-in-law, to his college buddy Drake (twice), to a parody account for the comedian Jeff Foxworthy, and to a Washington Post reporter, sent from an email address created to ensure his anonymity.
So, Darrell: We respect your privacy.
However, a sharp dissonance strikes the attuned ear. The dissonance is born from the erroneous presumptive congruence by these popular accounts between the foremost of such Framers—James Madison—and the paragon of those classical political scientists—the Baron de Montesquieu.
But I live here, and I live now, and in my neighborhood, people are dying in the streets. It’s like, French is a great idea, but nobody is going to invent French if they’re constantly being attacked by bears. Do you see? SYSTEMS HACKERS SOLVE THE BEAR MENACE.