Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | prometheus76's commentslogin

Interesting that the author didn't mention anything about stem cell injections. Those have been in vogue among the elite for decades (millennia?).


Yeah… and anytime the narrative switches from transfusion to blood-sucking, I object “but what about stomach acid?” Bodies break stuff down first.


How could it be millenia? Have we been able to isolate stem cells that long, or are you suggesting feasting on placenta as suitable?


The joke is presumably ancient vampires doing it in secret to be alive for millennia.


I was under the impression that the injunction against playing cards was because of their proximity to tarot/occult practices. Mormons had the same injunction against playing cards until the 80s, when the teaching was no longer promulgated. Speaking as a former Mormon...


Here in Sweden, where we also have free churches such as Baptists, Laestadians etc., the concern was definitely about gambling.


I think that's not wrong. Same principle, different sin... it looks like gambling, or the occult, or...


The government is the majority of people. So the government very well can be against 49% of the people and it would still fit your definition.

If 100 people were about to embark on a journey on a ship, what makes you think 51 of them know who should run the ship if none of them have ever even been on a ship?


There are a variety of ways that democratic governments are structure that make this an inaccurate characterization of how things work.

The US, for example, apportions representatives and votes for President in a way that overweights less populated states, and there are various aspects of parliamentary systems that help avoid landing in a two-party system where a simple majority gets the say in everything—they force compromise and coalition building among disparate groups. Additionally, Constitutional systems will enumerate the rights of its citizens such that they cannot simply be taken away by a simple majority of any body.

Democratic countries are also basically never "pure" democracies where everyone votes on every decision as in your Plato's ship analogy—we elect people who audition for the role of running the ship, ostensibly those among the people who are best suited to the task.


> , Constitutional systems will enumerate the rights of its citizens such that they cannot simply be taken away by a simple majority of any body.

Only if those are enforced. The wealthiest are the ones with the power, as they can pay for the guns.


Again, we're talking about a functioning democracy.

If you take an example of a non-functioning democracy, it's not a good way to describe a functioning democracy.


So how do you stop a function democracy becoming a non functioning democracy

Ultimately it comes down to who has the power. The more that power is concentrated the more fragile it becomes. It doesn't change overnight.


> So how do you stop a function democracy becoming a non functioning democracy

I wish I knew :-). A functioning democracy seems to be an unstable equilibrium.

But it remains that a functioning democracy is what we should aim for.

> Ultimately it comes down to who has the power.

Well it starts with the people giving them power. Trump did not seize the power in the US, for instance. He was elected. Twice.


Governance by democracy isn't about qualification, it's about legitimacy.

If the government ends up filled with incompetents that's a failure of the people that elected them.


> So the government very well can be against 49%

I think you're confused.

First, it is not always the case that there are only two parties. You can totally have a government made by representants of all "relevant" parties (by "relevant" I mean that the party needs a minimum size, otherwise anyone could create a party of one person).

Second, your ship example is pretty weird. The people gets to elect representatives regularly. It's not embarking on a ship with complete strangers: you have been on this ship all your life. "Never have been on a ship" would mean electing a newborn baby... that wouldn't count as a functioning democracy :-).


Liberal democracy is rooted in Christian ethics. It does not make sense to a Muslim culture or the Chinese culture.


Christian ethics? What is that exactly?

IIRC, "Christianity" used to be very much tied to monarchy in Europe, as well as feudalism. Then it was used to justify slavery. Then apartheid. And now it's sometimes used to justify stripping minorities of their rights.

There is no Christian ethics, only people justifying there political views by invoking Jesus.


I imagine the people of Malaysia and Taiwan would be surprised to learn this.


Or Indonesia. Or Turkey, which has a long history of Democracy stemming from Attaturk


Ancient Greece sure as hell wasn't Christian


But Christian swallowed Greece Philosophy, until to the point where it is a core part of Christianity. There are much less a break between different high-cultures as people make it be after the fact, but more of a continuous morphing into each other.


Ancient Greeks and Romans spent more time in the Middle East than they did in Northern Europe. If Christians borrowed from anyone, it was Middle Easterners... ie: themselves.

Granted, Islam is not the same as Middle Eastern, but European and the Middle Eastern cultures have interwoven for millennia. The Middle East is not monolithic, either. They have had their own Christian communities ever since the religion was invented.

Neither is Europe free of Muslim thought. Spain is an obvious example, but there was also trade, which is how algebra came to Europe.


I don't get you claim. Greek philosophy existed earlier than Christianity, and borrowed e.g. from Egypt, and not really from Israel, which is the cultural branch Christianity evolved from.


Yes, what I meant to convey is that the lands around the Mediterranean constituted a coherent region more than the Northern Mediterranean combined with Northern Europe.

Greeks and Romans traveled throughout the area. To a Roman, a northern Barbarian was more exotic than the peoples South of the Mediterranean.

We are more similar to Middle Easterners than it might seem, though, granted, Islam today is a huge differentiator.


Sorry, did you wanted to point out a contradiction or just add to the point?

What I mainly disagree with is:

> ie: themselves.

Those were completely different incompatible cultures. "middle eastern" simply isn't a term, that makes sense for that time as a cultural distinction.

> Islam today is a huge differentiator.

On yet another note, some claim Islam to be somewhat of a Christian sect.


Oh, by 'themselves' I wanted to point out that the first Christians were, obviously, Middle Easterners. There have been Christian communities throughout the region ever since.

Yes, I gather Islam incorporated both Judaism and Christianity.


No evidence supports this. “Rule by the people” is in no why an idea unique to Christians. This is simply false info


Democracy is pre-Christian.

Liberalism is rooted in Christian sectarianism.


Another impact on solar adoption in the United States is that many home insurance companies are refusing to pay on claims against roof damage from poor installs. And there are a lot of poor installs, which has led to this problem. So now the homeowners are taking all of the risk on a solar install that already has an 8-10 year ROI.


Those diseases are back because of rampant immigration. People from other countries bring them here. It has nothing to do with "obscurantist beliefs", whatever those might be.


> prior to the widespread deployment of malicious microphones, were adequate authentication for many purposes

Can you elaborate on this? I don't understand the context for malicious microphones and how that affects secure passwords.


Oh, well, it turns out that keyboard sounds leak enough entropy to make it easy to attack even very strong passwords.

Microphones on devices such as Ring doorbell cameras are explicitly exfiltrating audio data out of your control whenever they're activated. Features like Alexa and Siri require, in some sense, 24/7 microphone activation, although normally that data isn't transmitted off-device except on explicit (vocal) user request. But that control is imposed by non-user-auditable device firmware that can be remotely updated at any time.

Finally, for a variety of reasons, it's becoming increasingly common to have a microphone active and transmitting data intentionally, often to public contexts like livestreaming video.

With the proliferation of such potentially vulnerable microphones in our daily lives, we should not rely too heavily on the secrecy of short strings that can easily leak through the audio channel.


Using a password manager is an easy and useful protection against audio leaks of passwords.

But this is an example of the kind of thing the OP is talking about. You're probably not at a very realistic risk of having your password hacked via audio exfiltrated from the Ring camera at your front door. Unless it's Mossad et al who want your password.


Like "you're probably not at a very realistic risk of having your phone wiretapped", this is overindexing on past experience—remember that until Room 641A commenced operations in 02003 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A), you weren't, and after it did, your phone was virtually guaranteed to be wiretapped. Similarly, you aren't at a very realistic risk of having your password hacked via audio, until someone is doing this to 80% of the people in the world. As far as we know, this hasn't happened yet, but it certainly will.


But again, that’s the Mossad scenario - NSA in this case. You’re essentially reinforcing the OP point. There are three threat models given in Figure 1 of the OP doc, and what you’re saying really only applies to the third.


No, their Mossad threat model is that the Mossad wants to kill particular people, not steal the passwords of literally every single person on Earth.


They fired most of the UI/UX team soon after Steve Jobs died.


They farm you for attention, not electricity. Attention (engagement time) is how they quantify "quality" so that it can be gamed with an algorithm.


If you have access to ethanol-free fuel, that basically eliminates gasoline "going bad". It's the ethanol that degenerates over time.


I wouldn't say it "eliminates" it. Even without ethanol, gasoline still goes bad far faster than diesel. Gasoline is full of aromatic hydrocarbons that eventually will break down, and after a few years you're left with a brown stinky liquid.

Up until a year ago where I live, Chevron 94 Octane was ethanol free. I had issues with older carbureted engines after leaving gas in them for ~2 years. With E10 I wouldn't dare go that long as it can be so corrosive.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: