Major problem here - what happens if they start blackmailing people over the fact they are going to release "violent" criminals - and the only remedy is to pay them off? Or decide they will simply imprison the prisoner for life, budget be damned?
Case 1 they pay a big penalty under the contract and lose money.
Case 2 they exceed the budget and have to pay out of their own pockets and lose money.
Provided the contract is well written we all win. However I suggest that this scheme could start with low risk, non violent offenders at first and progress to the others one the companies build up the relevant experience.
Yeah, there are some things that should never be for-profit, and prisons are right up there near the top, along with law enforcement and healthcare.
Generally I incline to agree with you, however...
The critical issue here is whether the contract we write can be engineered to produce the outcomes we want. One of the problems with "corrections" is that it is easily influenced by political grandstanding. It is exactly this type of grandstanding that has produced the problem described in the article.
If we could engineer the private contract to favour the outcome we really want - which is minimum re-offending with minimum expenditure whilst avoiding physical punishment - then the laws of economics could drive the private companies towards innovative solutions that might improve things for everyone. The problem is that in general private prisons have been viewed simply as low cost providers of capacity.
Having said that I do believe that there is a small scale experiment along the lines that I described in the UK now.
The best solution would be to change the terms of the contract.
Instead of a sentence for each offender give a budget. The private prison would then be under no constraint to keep the offender in prison for any fixed length of time - but would simply be penalised if the prisoner re-offended after release.
This would save a lot of money, reduce the prison population and reduce crime - which is why it won't be tried!
Once the technical step is in place which allows a company to override the user's encryption, that means that (a) other countries can create their own legal step to compel the technical step to happen, and (b) the user loses the technical ability to keep their data secure.
Actually b) is: any smart hacker in the world can take the technical step without the authority of a government.
It is hard enough to create a secure system when you don't put such a "technical step" into the mix.
Actually these regional designations are better than standard trademarks in one important respect,. They are non transferable. A big company can't just come along, buy the company along with the trademark and move the production elsewhere. It's a bit like a copyright that can only remain with the originator.
At the end of the day it is about not misleading the public. There is nothing to stop a company producing a cheese just like Stilton and selling it. They just can't call it Stilton.
Americans whinge about it of course because they don't have much in the way of local produce that would be worth protecting in this way.
As so often there is a half truth in there - but it is twisted.
The way the logic could work is this:
People get Netflix but find that their connection is too slow to use it properly. Netflix then decides that it is in their interest to pay the ISP a subsidy to upgrade the connection to make their service viable for more people.
There is nothing wrong with that scenario - since it is entirely voluntary and both Netflix and the customer will gain from the deal.
Superficially it resembles what is proposed here but it is not the same.
Wow. Harper can't go away soon enough. My condolences to our Canadian friends.
The problem is that every government has its good and bad policies - and unfortunately the bad policies seem to be on a ratchet. So it is unlikely that a successor will undo his bad acts - but they may well undo any good ones - then when the system reverses itself again it is the bad things that are kept and the good things that go.
This history ot Thatcher/Major->Blair/Brown->Cameron in th UK makes this all too clear.
The publication of the draft code follows David Cameron's speech last month in which he pledged to break into encryption and ensure there was no "safe space" for terrorists or serious criminals which could not be monitored online by the security services with a ministerial warrant, effectively spelling out how it might be done.
Unfortunately if there is no safe space for criminals on the internet then there is also no safe space from criminals either - and no safe space for my bank account!
Playing devil's advocate here I would point out that the link to filing foreign patents may also be a factor. Valuable patents are more likely to be filed worldwide and this may well distort the data - having said that - personally I would love there to be a good answer to that objection - anyone gort one?
As I said, it only takes one contrary scripture and Christians believe their hatreds are justified.
A gross oversimplification:
Here is John Quincy Adams on this subject:
This appeal to the natural hatred of the Mussulmen towards the infidels, is in just accordance with the precepts of the Koran. The document does not attempt to disguise it, nor even pretend that the enmity of those whom it styles the infidels, is any other than the necessary consequence of the hatred borne by the Mussulmen to them—the paragraph itself, is a forcible example of the contrasted character of the two religions. The fundamental doctrine of the christian religion, is the extirpation of hatred from the human heart. It forbids the exercise of it, even towards enemies. There is no denomination of christians, which denies or misunderstands this doctrine. All understand it alike—all acknowledge its obligations ; and however imperfectly, in the purposes of Divine Providence, its efficacy has been shown in the practice of christians, it has not been wholly inoperative upon them. Its effect has been upon the manners of nations. It has mitigated the horrors of war – it has softened the features of slavery – it has humanized the intercourse of social life. The unqualified acknowledgement of a duty does not, indeed, suffice to insure its performance. Hatred is yet a passion, but too powerful upon the hearts of christians. Yet they cannot indulge it, except by the sacrifice of their principles, and the conscious violation of their duties. No state paper from a Christian hand, could, without trampling the precepts of its Lord and Master, have commenced by an open proclamation of hatred to any portion of the human race. The Ottoman lays it down as the foundation of his discourse.
In general the violence in video games etc is not realistic. I know of exactly one video game in which the violence (or at least its effect) was realistically portrayed.
That game was developed as a training aid for first responders to major accidents or terrorist events. The scenes were really disturbing (which in a way proves that the scenes in regular games are not).
Of course you really do want the paramedic who treats you after a car accident to save you life - not leave you to go off and throw up in a bush.
I don't think anyone who was trained on that game became violent as a consequence.
This just shows that even if the violence is realistic and even if you become inured to it - it doesn't necessarily make you violent yourself.
Even the US institution of slavery was argued during the rise of abolitionism as being biblically sanctioned.
But the motivation for abolition came from Christianity (Newton, Wilberforce etc). Islam on the other hand officially approves slavery and the religious leaders protested when western pressure forced abolition inthe 19th century.
"Western Culture" also blazed its trails across much of the globe, both before and after the Ottoman Empire.
Western culture is not Christianity. Christianity includes all the eastern churches from Russia down through the middle east to Ethiopia and across to Kerala in India. Sadly these churches have themselves often suffered from "Western Culture" and continue to suffer today from the fallout of western adventurism.
Ironic how the fall of Communism has landed us in Corporatism...
Like those two were really different to start with.
In Communism a group of large organisations that you can't control dictate what you can buy, where you can live, where you can go to school, where you can work, what healthcare you can get etc etc.
whereas is corporatism...you can insert the words "afford to" in front of some of those lines.
On the post: Mandatory Sentencing Guidelines Have Nothing To Do With 'Justice'
Re: Re: Private Prison Contracts
Case 1 they pay a big penalty under the contract and lose money.
Case 2 they exceed the budget and have to pay out of their own pockets and lose money.
Provided the contract is well written we all win. However I suggest that this scheme could start with low risk, non violent offenders at first and progress to the others one the companies build up the relevant experience.
On the post: Mandatory Sentencing Guidelines Have Nothing To Do With 'Justice'
Re: Re: Re: Private Prison Contracts
Generally I incline to agree with you, however...
The critical issue here is whether the contract we write can be engineered to produce the outcomes we want. One of the problems with "corrections" is that it is easily influenced by political grandstanding. It is exactly this type of grandstanding that has produced the problem described in the article.
If we could engineer the private contract to favour the outcome we really want - which is minimum re-offending with minimum expenditure whilst avoiding physical punishment - then the laws of economics could drive the private companies towards innovative solutions that might improve things for everyone. The problem is that in general private prisons have been viewed simply as low cost providers of capacity.
Having said that I do believe that there is a small scale experiment along the lines that I described in the UK now.
On the post: Mandatory Sentencing Guidelines Have Nothing To Do With 'Justice'
Re: Re: Only 14 months?
The whole point of having a justice system in the first place is to avoid that kind of emotional connection.
Also, statistically, if my kids were in the photos that would make me the most likely suspect for having taken them in the first place!
On the post: Mandatory Sentencing Guidelines Have Nothing To Do With 'Justice'
Re: Only 14 months?
In your humble opinion - which is less informed about the details of this case than the jury - from which the 14 months recommendation came...
On the post: Mandatory Sentencing Guidelines Have Nothing To Do With 'Justice'
Private Prison Contracts
Instead of a sentence for each offender give a budget. The private prison would then be under no constraint to keep the offender in prison for any fixed length of time - but would simply be penalised if the prisoner re-offended after release.
This would save a lot of money, reduce the prison population and reduce crime - which is why it won't be tried!
On the post: NSA Director: If I Say 'Legal Framework' Enough, Will It Convince You Security People To Shut Up About Our Plan To Backdoor Encryption?
Re: It's the second step that's the problem...
Actually b) is: any smart hacker in the world can take the technical step without the authority of a government.
It is hard enough to create a secure system when you don't put such a "technical step" into the mix.
On the post: Total Wipes Decides The Word 'Download' Means Infringement, Issues DMCA Takedown Loaded With Non-Infringing URLs
valid or not
Means exactly what it says. All links are either "valid or not valid" so it is trivial to identify them as such.
On the post: UK Intellectual Property Office Plays Up Imaginary 'Toxic' Claim In Grabbing Food Pretending To Be From Somewhere Else
Re: Re: You really don't want to go there.
At the end of the day it is about not misleading the public. There is nothing to stop a company producing a cheese just like Stilton and selling it. They just can't call it Stilton.
Americans whinge about it of course because they don't have much in the way of local produce that would be worth protecting in this way.
On the post: French Minister Thinks Netflix Needs To Pay ISPs A 'Bandwidth Tax' To 'Level The Playing Field'
Twisted
The way the logic could work is this:
People get Netflix but find that their connection is too slow to use it properly. Netflix then decides that it is in their interest to pay the ISP a subsidy to upgrade the connection to make their service viable for more people.
There is nothing wrong with that scenario - since it is entirely voluntary and both Netflix and the customer will gain from the deal.
Superficially it resembles what is proposed here but it is not the same.
On the post: If You Care About The Environment In Canada, You May Be Targeted As An 'Anti-Petroleum Extremist'
Re:
The problem is that every government has its good and bad policies - and unfortunately the bad policies seem to be on a ratchet. So it is unlikely that a successor will undo his bad acts - but they may well undo any good ones - then when the system reverses itself again it is the bad things that are kept and the good things that go.
This history ot Thatcher/Major->Blair/Brown->Cameron in th UK makes this all too clear.
On the post: If You Care About The Environment In Canada, You May Be Targeted As An 'Anti-Petroleum Extremist'
Re: Re:
Time to build an Ark then...
On the post: FBI Claims Drone Impact Assessment That Was Redacted In Full Six Months Ago Suddenly Can't Be Located
Re: What I consider most likely
On the post: FBI Claims Drone Impact Assessment That Was Redacted In Full Six Months Ago Suddenly Can't Be Located
FAA
On the post: UK Police Forces Have Secret Facial Recognition Database Of 18 Million People, Many Innocent
Re:
"He said searches of the database using facial recognition were 100% reliable in cases where there were clear images,"
So the defintion of "clear images" is now "where the facial recognition gets it right".
On the post: UK Surveillance Consultation Suggests It Is End-Point Security, Not Encryption, That Cameron Wants To Subvert
Safe Space
Unfortunately if there is no safe space for criminals on the internet then there is also no safe space from criminals either - and no safe space for my bank account!
Do they not realise how the two are linked?
On the post: Study Confirms That Revealing Secrets, Rather Than Hoarding Info, Is Good For Inventors
Ah but there is another factor
On the post: French Gov't Warns Citizens About Shifty Folks Who Don't Eat Delicious French Baguettes
Re: One contrary scripture
A gross oversimplification:
Here is John Quincy Adams on this subject:
On the post: More Violent Video Game Research Says Real World Violence Link Is Crap
The violence is not realistic
That game was developed as a training aid for first responders to major accidents or terrorist events. The scenes were really disturbing (which in a way proves that the scenes in regular games are not).
Of course you really do want the paramedic who treats you after a car accident to save you life - not leave you to go off and throw up in a bush.
I don't think anyone who was trained on that game became violent as a consequence.
This just shows that even if the violence is realistic and even if you become inured to it - it doesn't necessarily make you violent yourself.
On the post: French Gov't Warns Citizens About Shifty Folks Who Don't Eat Delicious French Baguettes
Re: Re: Re: No-one ever actually READ Mein Kampf
But the motivation for abolition came from Christianity (Newton, Wilberforce etc).
Islam on the other hand officially approves slavery and the religious leaders protested when western pressure forced abolition inthe 19th century.
"Western Culture" also blazed its trails across much of the globe, both before and after the Ottoman Empire.
Western culture is not Christianity. Christianity includes all the eastern churches from Russia down through the middle east to Ethiopia and across to Kerala in India. Sadly these churches have themselves often suffered from "Western Culture" and continue to suffer today from the fallout of western adventurism.
On the post: Two Leaks Reveal How TAFTA/TTIP's Regulatory Co-operation Body Will Undermine Sovereignty And Democracy
Re:
Like those two were really different to start with.
In Communism a group of large organisations that you can't control dictate what you can buy, where you can live, where you can go to school, where you can work, what healthcare you can get etc etc.
whereas is corporatism...you can insert the words "afford to" in front of some of those lines.
Next >>