>the whole point of society is that we don't need this ridiculous "natural" nonsense. We beat it. It can stay outside. We replaced it with society.
When the silent part is said out loud. "We" didn't beat anything, and "we" certainly aren't gods that managed to counter natural law, despite the current zeitgeist that likes to pretend it is so.
Humans are predators, and to pretend otherwise will be the folly of our species. One need not look any further than the political, corporate, or social elite to see what predators look like in so-called civilized society.
What a wonderfully Machiavellian and incomplete argument, given the history of societies all the way up to today. You'll go far, kid.
Next time though, don't make the classic mistake of talking about the group by talking about individuals in the group. Society is, and this one's confusing if no one taught you this before, not the same as the sum of the behaviour of individuals in that society. They're entirely different rungs on the ladder of abstraction.
Clever condescension, you'll go a long way with intellect like that, kid.
Nice job dropping 'given history' in there, you win! History shows that is a fantastic argument and adds significant value to your post.
Next time, though, try to use that big brain of yours to figure out how to address what I said instead of resorting to reddit level dialog and a straw man.
Did you genuinely believe that I was referring to every individual human? That's an awfully Machiavellian take on what I said.
Illustration counter to assertion (not an argument): "Of course humans have red hair, just google 'natural redhead'"
Society is, and this might be confusing if nobody's taught you this before, filled with people with disproportionate amounts of power, whether social, capital, political, corporate, legal, or other. This might be scary to your sensibilities, but predators are attracted to positions of power. I don't think anyone of consequence disagrees with this.
We obviously agree here, because you based your entire straw man on the fact that they don't represent every single human everywhere.
I would however like to understand how you think we beat 'natural law' and the predators with this mythical society when you also think that they are the richest and most powerful in said society.
Society "beat" predators? I think most people who have been victims of systemic or institutional oppression would disagree here. I know every police victim I have worked with sure would.
Or maybe I'm wrong and they are all just misunderstood when they beat, steal, lie, and kill the underclass while they destroy our planet and laugh about it.
Foraging scavengers, who figured out that the stone used to crack skulls of already-dead animals could also crack the one of animals that were still alive.
It's interesting to see you victim blaming instead of trying to bridge the gap with folks that could be sympathetic with your viewpoint.
Or did you change positions to at the same time they did? I've noticed a lot of the "big government" "anti police state" (used with maximum sarcasm) folks suddenly start praising the things they spent a decade railing against now that its domestic white religious conservatives instead of foreign brown religious conservatives that are the target.
It might shock you to find out that the lockdowns were a wakeup call to the reality of policing for many of those "quotes" you stereotype.
I have a couple of friends who were regularly arrested by the police, and kept over the weekend until they would drop charges. Naturally the more it happened the more they would tell the cops how they really feel, continuing the circle of life.
The food of the future is going to be 25% Teflon, 30% mealworm, 30% lab-grown meat concentrate, and 15% assorted insects as real food is regulated out of existence for us proles.
At least we can take solace in watching our betters jet around the world to dine on real food on TV or whatever social network is in vogue at the time.
I've left parties because they go to clubs that scan your ID and take your photo before you can enter on several occasions. Cryptographically verifiable identification is not a good idea, regardless of intentions.
> Cryptographically verifiable identification is not a good idea, regardless of intentions.
Technically not an identification, but Zero-Knowledge-Proofs might be the solution to that. If I remember correctly, some countries in the EU are looking into this for medical prescriptions - proving your eligibility while exposing zero information about you.
I had an argument with my local supermarked when they insisted on scanning my ID each time I buy beer. To add insult to the injusry: I was in my forties at this time with grey hair. I stopped shopping there.
An ID (I’m thinking specifically of a drivers licence in Australia) usually contains virtually all information anyone would ever need to identify themselves as you over the phone - name, address, date of birth, drivers licence number, etc. Having someone scan this and save it is not something you really want anyone to ever do.
I'd assume the information on the 2d barcode is the same as what's printed on the front. The problem is that you have no idea whether a scanner is connected to a larger surveillance database. A GDPR-style law and real enforcement would go a long way to restoring some societal trust in the US. As things stand right now, it's prudent to put tape over the 2d barcode and the printed ID number, and only remove it when necessary (eg actually interacting with the police).
Well, your address is printed right on the front too. I thought eye color was printed on the front, but I guess not. So perhaps there are a few fields like that.
I wouldn't think printing out your own 2d barcode with some fields masked would be strictly illegal, as long as you weren't committing fraud by putting fake info.
Practically though, even just covering mine up with tape I've run into a few people who call it a "tampered" ID. IIRC this has only happened for situations where I accept they're going to require the identification number, so I've removed the tape from the printed number on the front but not the barcode on the back (because it's harder to nicely put the bigger piece of tape back). When I hand over my ID I ask them to key in the number instead of scanning, and most people will happily do so. But the occasional person will get tense and say it's a "tampered" ID and refuse to accept it. I've always quieted them right down by removing the back tape and handing it back to them. But I can imagine if you have a different barcode and someone notices it might set off similar "serious business" flags that you won't be able to assuage so easily.
But if you've got the bandwidth to try it, go ahead. Human rights aren't going to defend themselves! Just remember to be pleasant in your interactions, and it helps to have examples ready of why you want to keep your information out of databases.
Your post reads like a teenager yelling "you don't understand me" at parents who also were teenagers at one point. You really think that those are new and unique problems? Your bullet points are like a list of NixOS features. I just did all of that across half a dozen servers and a dozen virtual machines with `services.homelab.enable = true;` before I opened up HN while its deploying. I'm not surprised that you can't see us lowly peasants from your high horse but many of us have been doing everything you mentioned, probably far more reliably and reproducibly, for a long time.
