You've been breaking the HN guidelines by repeatedly posting uncivil and/or unsubstantive comments, and also by using HN for flamewars and ideological battle.
Norwegian and USA societies are vastly different. There is absolutely no reason that something that works in one country will work in the other.
For instance, look at the gun ownership/gun crime rates.
I want to add another comment, which is slightly more difficult. You say that your daughters school "has over 30 nationalities, and that it's not a bad thing". I admire you for this. BUT I don't think it's representative of how Norwegian society is, judging from my 6 months working in Oslo.
> There is absolutely no reason that something that works in one country will work in the other.
Nope. There are plenty of reason to expect that, and it should be the default assumption. People don't become aliens just because they were born at the wrong side of an imaginary line.
If you would like to protest that assumption, it is up to you to provide data.
> For instance, look at the gun ownership/gun crime rates.
Could you expand on this?
Norway ranks at 6th place in number of guns per 100 inhabitants and 39th in number of firearm-related deaths per 100,000 population per year. The US ranks 1st and 11th respectively, having 3.6 times the number of guns per 100 people and 6 times the number of firearm-related deaths per 100,000 people compared to Norway. [1]
I don't know how Wikipedia shows that - following the links at the bottom gives 33599 US deaths in 2014 with 270-310M guns for ratios of 0.0001244 - 0.0001084 deaths per gun.
For Japan in 2014, 6 deaths in 2014 with 710K guns for a ratio of 0.0000085 deaths per gun.
Double-checking, the US has 5600 x more deaths with 380-435 x more guns for a ratio of 12-14 more deaths per gun.
> Norwegian and USA societies are vastly different. There is absolutely no reason that something that works in one country will work in the other.
Can you elaborate on which social differences you think might make it difficult or impossible to implement a Norwegian-style justice system in the USA?
You need the whole social structure that goes with it, not just the prison system.
It includes the social security net, health care system, education, low corruption etc.
The corruption part is actually quite important. Even if you do not call lobbyism corruption it has the same effect and people can see that decisions are not made "for the people", but for the money. This drastically lowers institutional trust and will affect all of society.
None of those things ("social security net, health care system, education, low corruption etc.") are necessary conditions for the USA though, and if Americans were willing to consider rational arguments for prison reform then they might also be willing to consider rational arguments for reforms in those other areas. It's not obvious to me that those things represent vast social differences, per-se, but that is obviously a matter of interpretation - I was really interested in hearing HalfwayToDice's view on what that phrase meant.
To respond (with a question) to your point, do you think that any of those areas can be successfully reformed individually, eventually making it possible for the USA to reform its prison system, or do you think they are all so interdependent that none can be changed without changing the other?
I agree that they are vastly different and I don't think you can expect the prisoners that have been conditioned to be animals to change overnight. I'm not saying the way used here is the ultimate solution, however it seems to work better. In the presentation you can see that a hardened criminal has a very long path through the system before they are released.
In regards to the society. There are always many different views and situations, however mine is not uncommon. I know there are some that do not look favorably on this but they are from my experiences in the minority. Most people I know are more in line with this man[1]. Personally I think that a diverse society is a strength rather than a weakness.
I am a native Norwegian so that might have something to do with my experience and I won't say you have not had another in Oslo.
Of course not. One of the reasons why this kind of industry popped out of no where is because these kinds of things are not regulated. If they were, targeted ads would be a much harder problem.
You're not the only one who thinks the idea of wearing a tin foil hat when you use Windows because the NSA only knows how to attack Windows is demeaning to the intelligence of other tin foil hat wearers.
A trade secret proprietary and obfuscated operating system from an organization known to collude with the government
Or
Code I have read in part, and know others read, and stand to believe that among all of us using those with the money or time would also audit
Given, we are all on predominantly x86 computers with proprietary obfuscated control processors that can seize control of the system and do whatever they are told by the manufacturer / those the manufacturer gives access to, so the security is in general a whiff.
Or more generally, don't use Linux for a false sense of security, because the security holes go much, much deeper than just the kernel and whats running on top of it, and Linux itself is nothing outstanding from a security architectural standpoint.
From the phrasing of your question, I suspect we disagree on the answer to your theoretically rhetorical question. I don't care what people could or would like to audit with their free time, I care what people do audit with their actual time, generally because they are paid or have a financial motive to do.
Windows is fuzzed, analyzed, traffic analyzed, attacked, and picked apart inside AND outside Microsoft with higher frequency and greater depth than Linux is, regardless of which happens to be open source and theoretically easier to examine. If Microsoft were to inject malicious stuff into Windows it would be found and reported and exploited. There is too much money, too much exploit opportunity, and too much security researcher brand cred available to anyone who discovers even a hint of malicious behavior on Microsoft's part for it to go unnoticed and unreported.
And again, the point of the comment wasn't "Windows is secure" as nothing in tech is secure. The point was that someone who advocates wearing tinfoil hats around Windows to protect against the NSA while thinking Linux somehow gets a pass from those same bogeymen is not making a rational case for how to behave or what to fear.
It embarrasses me to see such conspiratorial nonsense on this website.
There are many reasons why such things happen: coincidence, someone google the topic from the same router IP address, ad tracking on Googled websites, etc etc
The idea that one of the worlds largest companies would risk their entire business by secretly recording their users for ad revenue is absurd on almost every level.
Yet some people on HackerNew, a forum that self-selects to a highly educated/intelligent part of the community actually believes it.
> The idea that one of the worlds largest companies would risk their entire business by secretly recording their users for ad revenue is absurd on almost every level.
Right[1]. Nobody makes risky[2], ethically challenged[3] decisions[4] in business[5]. Ever[6]. Doesn't happen[7].
> The idea that one of the worlds largest companies would risk their entire business by secretly recording their users for ad revenue is absurd on almost every level.
I'm with you on the skepticism, but they are one of the largest companies in the world because of ad revenue. It's not putting their business at risk, it is their business.
It embarrasses me to see such horrible logic and head-in-the-sand thinking on this website.
Whether they record ambient audio or not, how is it implausible or out of character with everything else they do? Facebook and many other companies collect countless dimensions of data on users to profile them for marketing. Audio is just one more. It's not even really that disturbing or far fetched. Why would they ignore such a lucrative data source when they've already tapped so many others?
It's a direct business plan with Amazon's echo for christ sake. What is so hard to comprehend about this?
Not wearing my tin foil hat, just reporting what I found when I tried to test it myself. Only our computers on the router, had never googled the topics.
See my updated post just above. I just tried it with my Nexus 7 and saw nothing around mic uploads. Install Fiddler and MITM your Facebook app and repeat your experiment. I'm very curious to see if you find something different from what I found.
She specifically mentioned it in her announcement of forming a government yesterday outside downing street, but none of the broadcasters included it in their reporting.
It's why I voted against her and am disgusted she's still trying to force it through. They even knew the attackers and it didn't stop anything, it's completely unnecessary.
But the headline says "Theresa May to launch sweeping internet regulation", which is complete nonsense, which is why no-one is reporting that.
For US readers, The Independent was a UK newspaper which closed last year. The website was handed over to a marketing team who make money farming outrage clicks from left-wing people on Facebook and Reddit.
Corbyn most definitely lost, no argument there. But so did May. She set out to get a mandate for her vision of the future. She has none.
Personally I think both of them should go. But May will struggle on due to the lack of viable alternatives, and Corbyn will continue to do ...whatever the heck it is that he's doing... because of low expectations.
This is a rather simplistic analysis of why poor people often vote republican in the USA.
Ironically, I just visited Gothenburg in "socialist Sweden", and it was the most racially/poverty segregated city I have ever been to in the modern world.
