Readit NewsIf they're looking to capitalise on FB's data revelations, asking to download binaries is the wrong way to go about it. You need a no-commitment approach here.
Tribalism, to feudalism, and any point in between we see the same situations play out. Look at all the empires over the ages. We're all just incrementally advancing the same playbook each time.
I don't have any suggestion as to how this cycle would ever be changed. The only thing that differs is the move makers. The moves all look pretty similar. One nation crumbles, proffers change, wants to avoid repeating/continuing discovered atrocities, another nation/empire is ready to take it's place.
We can call out the atrocities globally as we see them. Try to fight each individual fire. There's no pretending that every nation isn't guilty of trying to advance it's position by any means necessary. Offering the humanitarian excuse as a "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" deal is universal. Doing what you can to avoid the aforementioned "calling out".
> is a utopia where money cannot leave – or even exist – outside the banking system, but can only be transferred from bank to bank.
How do people in a cashless economy pay for stuff that demands discretion, and that which they don't want documented or traced back to them?
Example: Buying weed or drugs or underage alcohol, maintaining mistresses or paying for sexual services or anything else that is either a social taboo or is downright illegal? Are you telling me that everyone in Sweden is a 100% law abiding, obedient 'good' citizen and hence they don't have a need to be able to transact from time to time using a relatively discreet currency = cash ?
Would be trivial to accept and process these payments.
Another avenue might be some kind of mutual fund. A building society for the grey market. One where your paper trail would tie you to a fund used for illicit goods, but not directly to your particular flavour of illicit good. That'd require a great deal more work though... And comes with the obvious risks.
Final thought there's always replacing cash. After all cash is just paper we all agree has value. If the underground markets can find a similar good with similarly agreed value that might work. I've heard of phone scammers requesting their mark's buy gift cards/vouchers. Presumably they're monetizing the voucher on their end somehow.
The goal of a cashless society seems to be more in line with the even greater transparent creation of money. These "we can track criminal financiers!" soundbytes sound more like the cursory glance reason you'd give the public.
Largely cashless societies recently seem to have either been deeply entrenched in the financial industry, or rife with wider corruption. Both of those will want to continue in a clandestine manner. The law might not apply to the rich, but you can bet you'll be slapped down for not at least trying to hide it. I can't imagine a system cashless or otherwise that didn't have at least some mechanism to move wealth without fanfare.
Heck, there are several different programs named neo on the first page of google search results for "neo editor"!
I've often had the itch to create tooling to automate tasks. Later deciding to make it more generic and open source it. I have such a time trying to give them names. Internal tooling, fine, just name it what it does and move on. Public releases though... Oy, I'm sweating just thinking about it.
> We believe that if this license were widely adopted, it could actually reduce meritless litigation for all adopters, and we want to work with others to explore this possibility.
They do not give a pathway for litigation with merit. This is a patent weapon.
Somewhere along the line we lost the distinction between "Open Source" and "Source Opened".
You seem generally confused about the points you are trying to make.
Depends on the context doesn't it? You'd see things like that in a political comic strip and you'd recognise it as condemning those actions. You might see it in a White Supremacist's distribution and see it as endorsing or encouraging the actions depicted.
The use of comics & visual art to convey disgusting happenings in a publication-wide context has been used for a long time in Western media. The act of drawing the image, the act of publishing the image, I can personally find neither morally reprehensible without taking the wider context into consideration.
I'm also a fairly strong supporter of allowing media I find distasteful to be distributed (I caveat this with as long as the production of the media isn't hurting anyone). Largely because censoring everything doesn't achieve a great deal, just hides those ideas from people who in all liklihood weren't the intended audience. Having folk bring their more 'underground' affiliations into the sunlight sure helps know who to avoid.
I've seen it many times where I'll be vetting a new employee or supplier, see their Facebook profile, and be genuinely appalled by the stuff they're sharing and supporting. Do I think that free mode of 'speech' should be shut down? Pfft, no, gave me a glowing indicator not to deal with this person without having to go through the trouble of dealing with them first and realizing it to be a mistake.
Deleted Comment