Author Topic: Laws  (Read 6102 times)

Junkenstein

  • Technically-Oriented & Horribly Mobile Crecy of Crab Lice.
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 114953
    • View Profile
Re: Laws
« Reply #30 on: October 30, 2014, 10:51:09 pm »
Quote
So it comes down to how to even make faraday cage bags or body armour illegal...I mean, when does an ESD bag used to ship PC components become a "terrorist anti-EMP device", or when does a piece of sheet metal with a zamak coating become "body armour"?

When it is expedient, or convenient, or hells even just amusing to those in control of the system. For reference here, look at the shitstorm related to 3d printed guns.

Any freedom or privilege you enjoy by law today can disappear by law tomorrow.

And it doesn't even take that much really to provoke that change.


There's more to add here, particularly in relation to "open carry" bullshit. I've been thinking about those guys recently and I'm increasingly suspecting that what these assholes want is just to provoke a gunfight by their presence (Scaring someone enough, pissing of the wrong cop,whatever.) as an excuse to unload in a public place. Or they may be a westboro baptist situation and are actually proving the point for gun control advocates just by wandering around. 
Nine naked Men just walking down the road will cause a heap of trouble for all concerned.

von

  • 000
  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 4214
    • View Profile
Re: Laws
« Reply #31 on: October 30, 2014, 11:05:23 pm »
Quote
So it comes down to how to even make faraday cage bags or body armour illegal...I mean, when does an ESD bag used to ship PC components become a "terrorist anti-EMP device", or when does a piece of sheet metal with a zamak coating become "body armour"?

When it is expedient, or convenient, or hells even just amusing to those in control of the system. For reference here, look at the shitstorm related to 3d printed guns.

Any freedom or privilege you enjoy by law today can disappear by law tomorrow.

And it doesn't even take that much really to provoke that change.


There's more to add here, particularly in relation to "open carry" bullshit. I've been thinking about those guys recently and I'm increasingly suspecting that what these assholes want is just to provoke a gunfight by their presence (Scaring someone enough, pissing of the wrong cop,whatever.) as an excuse to unload in a public place. Or they may be a westboro baptist situation and are actually proving the point for gun control advocates just by wandering around.

God, don't even get me started on those fucking morons who open carry long arms...especially the double-retarded ones who do it for "protest". I mean jesus fucking christ, I can see carrying a long arm when one is out deep in the woods, or cased on the way to the range, but bringing a rifle or shotgun to bear on an assailant in public is too fucking slow for effective self defense.

Anyway, I think my prior point was mainly, how do you legislate banning basic materials? I mean, I can see illegalising using a piece of sheet metal as armour, or using an ESD bag as an anti-emp device. But simply illegalising the materials themselves? I can't think of how you'd do it...it'd be like illegalising plumbing parts in order to curb home made submachine guns.

Junkenstein

  • Technically-Oriented & Horribly Mobile Crecy of Crab Lice.
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 114953
    • View Profile
Re: Laws
« Reply #32 on: October 30, 2014, 11:16:48 pm »
Oh there's other potentially more profitable ways than just making X illegal.

For example, you can restrict, license and tax the everloving shit out of it. You could treat X in the same manner you treat say, meth precurors and prosecute and feed the prison system accordingly there.

Anything you can legally purchase today, can be illegal to purchase tomorrow, By law. Take the UK talking today about banning "All legal highs". Seriously. This is the level we're working with over here with drug legislation. What the hell is this supposed to cover exactly? Well, nearly anything and everything to a canny copper. In the meanwhile you've created swathes of criminals to be caught and punished as law dictates. 
Nine naked Men just walking down the road will cause a heap of trouble for all concerned.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Laws
« Reply #33 on: October 31, 2014, 06:31:50 am »
Oh there's other potentially more profitable ways than just making X illegal.

For example, you can restrict, license and tax the everloving shit out of it. You could treat X in the same manner you treat say, meth precurors and prosecute and feed the prison system accordingly there.

Anything you can legally purchase today, can be illegal to purchase tomorrow, By law. Take the UK talking today about banning "All legal highs". Seriously. This is the level we're working with over here with drug legislation. What the hell is this supposed to cover exactly? Well, nearly anything and everything to a canny copper. In the meanwhile you've created swathes of criminals to be caught and punished as law dictates.

NO MORE TEA!
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”


The Johnny

  • did nots
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 41296
    • View Profile
Re: Laws
« Reply #34 on: November 01, 2014, 10:05:09 pm »
As technology progresses, I've been increasingly thinking about Laws and the justice system.

To start with, it's an odd word to use; Law. It would imply, that like say Gravity, it would apply and be enforced all the time. Without fail or favour. It seems to me that we are increasingly reaching a point where it would in fact be trivial to do this.

Think about it. Everything on-line is monitored by a variety of folk. You're on CCTV from the moment you leave indoors. Staying inside is an option but the phones are tapped and they can just switch on your mobile's microphone whenever they feel bored. Hell, they can go old school and just stick remote surveillance on your place and watch the windows to know exactly what you're actually saying. Sound reconstruction is crazily advanced now. Or go quite modern and just shine a laser at your place to know what you own that you shouldn't. This is all assuming they don't want to get handsy and come a-knocking.

Now, that might sound slightly paranoid, with the "they" and the remarkably intrusive shit for no reason. And yet it happens. Constantly. Daily. Increasingly frequently.

So, Laws. As before, I would understand a Law to be something that would be enforced constantly. And it seems so easy to do so given that half of the above is done to you already whether you like it or not. For your own safety, of course.

Upon then pondering the myriad of Laws that I am apparently bound to obey, the natural conclusion would seem to be that I am a horrendous criminal, as well as likely everyone else I know. Take a simple motorway journey. Sit in the slow lane at 80. You'll be being overtaken by around 70% of traffic. Anywhere. Minimum. A GPS system to monitor this is a pittance. If even the simplest of traffic laws were enforced with 100% efficiency, then there would be stunning numbers of banned drivers overnight. You literally wouldn't be able to build the required jails and such quickly to deal with it.

This leads me to thinking that we may need to look at some of the crimes we punish and how we punish them. Honestly, consider what your potential fine or jail term is just from what you've done today. If you honestly think it's nothing then the chances are you're not familiar with all of the laws that apply to you. You certainly aren't skilled at thinking like a servant of the Law.

Which leads to enforcement. The classic scene of a dossier filled with pictures slapped in front of the guilty. You're very, very guilty. Of what? Well, what would you like to talk about? By default, you're having this conversation with someone who has access to at least the crudest methods of surveillance, and if so inclined likely others. This is an easy reality for anyone who wants to bother. Most of the time they won't need to as you're already spilling your guts. Do you think confessions and testimonies against others increase or decrease in a recession? Check it out, I wonder why those numbers are like that.

There are, surely, some Laws that universal enforcement would be laudable. Crimes against beings and to a relevant extent property should probably prevented and deterred. Just saying there's obviously some lines that most would like to draw.

To me, the current various justice systems seem to be lacking incredibly behind what current technology could potentially enforce. You would need to take an immediate look at every single law and consider the what 100% enforcement would do and if if such a thing is wise.

And then I think, I am a horrible old man. Surely brighter, younger minds have considered the shape of the society they are perpetuating into the future.

I look at the politicians and I wonder.

I look at the police and I wonder.

I look at the press and I wonder.


I wonder when they will all stop being so fucking stupid and help people.

(Im replying to OP before reading other's responses as to not get tainted by your opinions  :fnord:)

Rather than thinking in terms of "Innocent until proven guilty." i think its more efficient and coherent to think of terms of "Innocent until you are proven economically viable to be prosecuted.". What does this mean?

Theres a bridge between Laws and Prosecution called Enforcement, and Enforcement is constrained by Efficiency and Manpower which are a basic equation that gives you Cost-Efficiency.

Traffic tickets are done either by automated cameras at stoplights (which generates FREE pillaging the citizens other than the initial costs of infrastructure and repairs) or say, speed traps at the bottom of hills; the latter poses a problem, in which it involves the time and attention of an officer which has a salary, so the commitment of said officer to given bottom-of-hill must be Cost-Efficient to have surplus value from the salary that is paid to the officer.

Why do rich people get off of jail time? (other than race issues, etc) Its because they can demonstrate to the Prosecution thru expensive lawyers that they generate more revenue OUTSIDE of jail than INSIDE jail... OUTSIDE of jail they generate revenue thru taxes, while INSIDE prison they only generate revenue thru proxy, thru the formal contracts of prison operators which pillage taxes. So the expenditures in court are merely a demonstration of how you will generate revenue to the system, thru your taxes or thru proxy.

Maybe i could ramble on and on, but i think my basic argument has come across, what do you guys think?

The Johnny

  • did nots
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 41296
    • View Profile
Re: Laws
« Reply #35 on: November 01, 2014, 11:26:55 pm »
And after reading thread, my thinking is that technology will and can augment the Cost-Efficiency of Enforcement, so things that are hard to prosecute will be made easier to do so; get ready to pay a littering fine for spitting bubblegum on the pavement.

Junkenstein

  • Technically-Oriented & Horribly Mobile Crecy of Crab Lice.
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 114953
    • View Profile
Re: Laws
« Reply #36 on: May 06, 2016, 04:26:53 pm »
Just wanted to note that I miss Johnny. He came out with a lot of good stuff.

Nine naked Men just walking down the road will cause a heap of trouble for all concerned.

Prelate Diogenes Shandor

  • Promotor Fidei
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 17456
  • Behold! The Yellow Sign of Dobbshead
    • View Profile
    • Yiffstar User Profile
Re: Laws
« Reply #37 on: June 04, 2016, 12:33:01 am »
Dunno how accurate the info I had was but there was a figure in a doc I watched that about 80% of legal work was "discovery" which is not talking your ass off in court, winning over the jury but poring over documents, accounts, email and shit like that trying to build a case.

This process (80% of the stuff lawyers do) is about to get automated by deep learning systems which can do the job infinitely faster and an order of magnitude more accurately.

100% of lawyers with 20% stuff left to do should be interesting. I'm not thinking techno unemployment (That's call-center staff and burger chefs) more a case of less backlog. What's going to happen to the legal system once the backlog is reduced by 80%?

The lawyers will lobby for even more laws.  Many of them will instead go into politics.

America:  Shoot a programmer today.

I'm thinking more along the lines of the School to Prison Pipeline you guys have going on over there. You could be approaching "peak-prison" where you can't build them fast enough. What happens then? Escape from New York?

That trend has slowed down, with the consequence that prisons are emptying  out and the private prison industry is in deep financial trouble.

But not deep enough. Anything short of the total ruination of the industry and its investors is unacceptable.
Praise NHGH! For the tribulation of all sentient beings.

a plague on both your houses -Mercutio

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrTGgpWmdZQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVWd7nPjJH8

It is an unfortunate fact that every man who seeks to disseminate knowledge must contend not only against ignorance itself, but against false instruction as well. No sooner do we deem ourselves free from a particularly gross superstition, than we are confronted by some enemy to learning who would plunge us back into the darkness -H.P.Lovecraft

He who fights with monsters must take care lest he thereby become a monster -Nietzsche

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHhrZgojY1Q

You are a fluke of the universe, and whether you can hear it of not the universe is laughing behind your back -Deteriorata

Don't use the email address in my profile, I lost the password years ago

Acuddle

  • Known
  • *
  • Posts: 225
  • It spells, punctuates and grammars, at times
    • View Profile
Re: Laws
« Reply #38 on: July 20, 2016, 01:59:56 pm »
Laws need optimised. Stripped down to the bare essentials. Don't kill. Don't steal. Don't lie. We are rapidly approaching a situation where we can prevent these things. Deal with them before, not after they happen. Minority report? Yup, it's less than a decade away. It won't work quite the same way as it does in the movie - psychic mutants plugged into the internet but the net effect will be the same. The annihilation of privacy (trust me - you really will appreciate it when you see it) via ubiquitous micro (later nano) -scale sensors will know when something's about to go down. Drones will intervene to prevent the crime taking place faster than the human can carry it out.

The current mountain of ridiculous legislation won't work. You're absolutely right - everyone would end up in jail. We'll have to dump them and go back to basics. So I can almost hear the grinding of teeth from the Orwell followers reading this. The abuse. The human rights violations. Right? Wrong. What will happen in a totally transparent society is that there will be no place for Big Brother. Everyone can see through him, just like he can see through everyone. People can spy on you taking a shit or jacking off to tubgirl videos but guess what - you can see them spying on you and so can all their friends.

What's going to happen is people are going to be forced to become a lot more tolerant. People are going to be forced to become a lot more polite. To the point where you can fuck your significant other on a busy street corner and no one will watch because they'll know that you don't want them to and that will be enough. The reason this sounds far fetched is because, although this level of mutual respect and politeness is most people's ideal, the fact is that most of the human race are biologically and psychologically incapable of practising it. Transparency, not privacy is the key to this. Openness, as opposed to sneaking around and hiding which, when it comes right down to it is the fundamental nature of privacy. 

The laws of the future are implicit. "Do what thou wilt", "Be excellent to each other", "Live and let live"

Our technology will not "Enforce" these laws.

Our technology will "Enable" them.

Laws have, in the beginning, sprouted from the need of respect among people. Most laws have their origins in various religious texts such as the commandments. :fnord:

But Laws are only useful in a society where the majority of people are solipsistic, only thinking of their own good above all others. Our "society" is based on working for others to get the means to live, it is based off intimidation and violence, even if that violence is bound and enabled by laws.
We (almost) all work at the figurative gunpoint of our job contracts.

So it is normal that in such a society, exploitation is the norm rather than the deviation, and that people have to be bound by laws to disable them from exploiting in "non-default", "antisocietal" ways.
But people who exploit in the "default", "societal" ways are given means to live better, and a lot more love. Those people, in turn, made laws to force people to exploit or be exploited, calling that enforcement "order", and calling alternatives to "order" "chaos" and making them illegal.

Enhancing "justice" with technology is just giving and will be giving an even more and more unfair "edge", helping "legal" exploiters. And it will make the change to a new, altruistic society that much difficult.

In as society where people are altruistic and have to trust each other to get the fullest experience of life, rules made to limit people from lacking respect amongst themselves become irrelevant, as exploitation itself becomes a deviation.
Exploiters would be shunned upon, would be given a lesser share of love, therefore getting a worse life experience. Therefore they would revert back to less exploitative ways by themselves, without the needs for violence in the name of "justice" or "order", nor the need to shun chaos...

Quote from: Reginald Ret
I think it would be fair to say that being in Dutch (or Norwegian) prison is like living with your mom. In theory it is nice to have everything taken care of but in practice you just want to GET OUT. It has the added benefit of a long-term improvement in the relationship with the authority figure. Rehabilitation Through Smothering, it works!
I got this hilarious image stuck in my head of a bad ass long-term criminal whining "But mom! I don't want to go to bed! I wanna read my comics!" "And the warden saying "No. You need your sleep and that is final. And turn your playstation off as well!" "But mom! I haven't saved the game yet!" etc. etc.

...as as Gandhi said, the power of love is a thousand times stronger than the power of fear and intimidation. 8)

Junkenstein

  • Technically-Oriented & Horribly Mobile Crecy of Crab Lice.
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 114953
    • View Profile
Re: Laws
« Reply #39 on: July 20, 2016, 02:17:55 pm »

This process (80% of the stuff lawyers do) is about to get automated by deep learning systems which can do the job infinitely faster and an order of magnitude more accurately.


:cn:

Interestingly, this has actually come to pass to a degree. There's a few Legal AI-assistants on the market now designed to pour over old case histories and precedents and supply an (apparently) easy to read version for a solicitor on the go.

I can reasonably see this extending to various Law enforcement agencies without much effort. It'll be more fun to watch when it starts to get state useage and involved in prosecutions. If any law system essentially comes down to competing prosecution/defence AI's then legal shennanagins look very different.

And that's not even starting to think about hacking/malware/errors in code/programming etc. etc.

ETA - http://www.techinsider.io/the-worlds-first-artificially-intelligent-lawyer-gets-hired-2016-5

Quote
Ask ROSS to look up an obscure court ruling from 13 years ago, and ROSS will not only search for the case in an instant — without contest or complaint — but it'll offer opinions in plain language about the old ruling's relevance to the case at hand.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2016, 02:20:27 pm by Junkenstein »
Nine naked Men just walking down the road will cause a heap of trouble for all concerned.