... i personally think it's biggest problem is that it's European.
... not as in 'as opposed to asian/american/etc', but as opposed to 'reasonable numbers of people in charge of reasonably sized things within reasonable reach of those they are supposedly working for'
it's the same problem that's been biting the US in the arse for ages, it's the reason Russia only ever worked properly as a feudal/absolute monarchy, it's the reason china repeatedly found itself having to clear out the bureaucrats from the top of the system.
the whole thing is just too damn big for the people to be meaningful to the supposed 'elites' at the top of the system.
the EU was just set up badly from the start, relatively speaking, in an era of rapid communication, so the problems are showing up earlier.
it's not a matter of how big the government itself is, it's how big the gap between the people running things and the man on the ground is.
(economically speaking, the highest viable level of authority for this is the city-region. essentially a city-state and it's hinterland. the moment you start trying to take more than that at one go you start getting false feedback in the system due to the responses being based on the average of all such units rather than the actual situation with that specific unit.)
had that happen to a few things here...
asset stripping is also unhelpful.
(usually happened when American interests gained control of significant assets which were only marginally profitable in their own right, if that, but required to allow other things to function properly. such as the railways. the instances of it happening Without American involvement generally are due to people who made their money exploiting the system rather than actually DOING anything... who think NZ should be more like the USA. still not sure how the hell we ended up with John Key as PM when everyone KNEW he was one of these people...)
neither of which have Anything to do with democracy one way or the other.
(plutocracy is rule by the rich, aristocracy rule by ... nobles, i guess? not sure on the precise meaning for that one. please note that Neither is rule by the people (democracy). blood and steel or gold and ink, either way the common man gets shafted. difference is, that's how plutocrats Get there, so it becomes ingraned, while aristocrats have at least Some hope of having other ideas.)
the solution to ballot stuffing here seems to be to have observers from multiple parties in the room at all times and have the boxes the votes go in sitting right out in the open in the middle of the room where everyone can see the damn things.
also, to have enough boxes that there is never any need to swap them. add in voters wandering in and out all day and, while not impossible, it does become difficult to do.
(also, one is Registering to vote is compulsory, though actually voting is not, so there is a List of everyone who can vote in a given electorate, and if you're not on that list you don't get to. also, if your name is checked off at multiple polling stations i'm pretty sure your vote is tossed. when you go to vote, they fill out your name and number on the top of the sheet on their pad of voting papers, then tear off the ballot paper itself and give it to you to go vote with. i believe the two bits of paper have corresponding numbers on them, but i'm not sure. that'd be so that in the event of irregularities they can pull the right papers. the people who count the votes only see the ballot paper which, if i remember rightly, does Not have identifying marks on it appart from that number... i could be wrong though, this is from memory from some months back.)
... i suspect that was the point, with the possibility that it might take a little longer with the republicans because of the other things they'd be doing upon taking control.
here abouts, depending on the time of day, there may or may not be an usher or two about, may or may not (but Usually is) someone between the ticket counter and the theaters themselves checking your ticket, someone manning the candy bar, and some people selling tickets.
... it is not at all uncommon for this to be reduced to two people (one checking tickets, one selling them and the food and drink) during slow times of day. (... and just to confuse everyone, when there's only one person manning the counter, they use the Candy bar's cash register, not the ticket counter's one. the two are connected and the relevant equipment is in place, but the signage makes it confusing.)
incidentally 'candy bar' is a terrible pun and brand name thingy. other theaters call it other things (and many just make mention that stuff is for sale in the lobby or something to that effect.)
so, yeah, no automated ticket machines yet, but close :)
or, you know, plutocracy, of which any such thing would be a subset... and which is already a word. and the general state of affairs. (the aristocracy was not replaced by democracy, in most of the world, but by plutocracy. it just likes to look democratic when doing so doesn't work against it's purposes. less likely to end in uprisings and beheadings that way.)
did that in New Zealand in the 1800s with Maori, actually. didn't even need to spread it. the written language they created spread across the country faster than they could have gotten everywhere if they wanted to... before they even got around to moving to the next place.
good, in that a corporation can't just write it's own laws and shove 'em through (at least, not more than before.)
bad, in that it makes it difficult-to-impossible for this method to get any law in place that benefits the public if it involves cutting into the powers or profits of the government.
... to be the greatest nation that ever existed would take a hell of a lot more than THAT.
it would move it from the realm of 'impossible' to merely 'neigh-impossible' though.
(to actually achieve it you need to utterly BREAK the corporations and the insanity that is the copyright and patent systems (and possibly tidy up the trade mark system a bit) and then actually get your economy working again properly. step one to That is to realize that the Nation is not a meaningful economic entity. nor is the State (which is closer to what the rest of the world mean by 'country', anyway.) but city-region. there's a couple of places in the states where this apparently causes some administrative headaches due to city-regions being naturally occurring things and crossing not-at-all-natural state boundaries. and that's just to start with.)
'mixed' doesn't just mean that a number of people have taken each side of a two sided argument, ya know? there's more positions than that to be had. could be that pretty much everyone agrees it's not going to work. doesn't mean they don't disagree on the hows and whys of it or whether it's a good idea or not.
odds are good it's like NZ. self defense only works as a defense if you don't escalate, and doesn't Necessarily cover your property. (that is, unless the thief had a gun, if you used one it's not self defense. it's also a 'yes, i did kill/assault the guy, but here's why' type deal... more likely to work the less damage you did in the process, too.)
and 'no guns' doesn't make self defense difficult, at all. just means most violent crimes involve other weapons. mostly melee weapons. (there's a reason why, if memory serves, blades are quite heavily restricted in the UK as well?) this changes the dynamics a Lot. (in hand to hand combat, the odds of successful defense go up, the odds of accidental death go down, the odds of recoverable injuries go up, and, generally, any fight takes longer, giving more time for someone else to notice it and intervene. though it's also quieter and thus less likely to be noticed unless additional noise is made. or at least, that's what my knowledge of such things would indicate to me.)
there's only one reason for the common citizen to have unrestricted access to guns (there's a number of reasons for limited subsets to have limited access, mind you). resisting corrupt and tyrannical governments. that's EXACTLY why the USA has a constitutional right to keep and use them.
i note that the citizenry never seem to take advantage of that. there is no other situation where letting anyone have a gun Improves things. (here, at least, i'm pretty sure hunting accidents cause more deaths than murders, when it comes to gun use. given that the response to armed criminals is to deploy a police cordon and call in such wonderful things as LAVs armed with autocannons as a counter measure (which are armoured and will happily chew through the walls of most buildings, so hiding inside and sniping won't save you) i'm not really surprised.)
actually, most instances of break-ins, the would-be burgler is unarmed, or has some sort of tool used in the non-violent portion of such activity. almost Any weapon would be escalation.
some of this holds in the UK, some doesn't. point is, a lot of the rhetoric about gun laws that comes out of the USA doesn't really apply and derives most of it's validity from the impossibility of convincing a government it should not take actions against an institution specifically created to cause it's destruction.
one of these days i'm gonna get enough sleep and actually manage proper levels of coherency.
On the post: European Commission Blames Social Networks For ACTA Failure; Worried About Its Imminent Directive On Copyright Enforcement
Re:
... not as in 'as opposed to asian/american/etc', but as opposed to 'reasonable numbers of people in charge of reasonably sized things within reasonable reach of those they are supposedly working for'
it's the same problem that's been biting the US in the arse for ages, it's the reason Russia only ever worked properly as a feudal/absolute monarchy, it's the reason china repeatedly found itself having to clear out the bureaucrats from the top of the system.
the whole thing is just too damn big for the people to be meaningful to the supposed 'elites' at the top of the system.
the EU was just set up badly from the start, relatively speaking, in an era of rapid communication, so the problems are showing up earlier.
it's not a matter of how big the government itself is, it's how big the gap between the people running things and the man on the ground is.
(economically speaking, the highest viable level of authority for this is the city-region. essentially a city-state and it's hinterland. the moment you start trying to take more than that at one go you start getting false feedback in the system due to the responses being based on the average of all such units rather than the actual situation with that specific unit.)
On the post: European Commission Blames Social Networks For ACTA Failure; Worried About Its Imminent Directive On Copyright Enforcement
Re:
it's purpose is not to represent the people, but to placate them.
it's basically the plutocrat's way of doing the same thing aristocrats used to do with swords and poison *shrugs*
just has the added bonus of also reducing the odds of revolt, and, when such does happen, the odds of those who lose power also losing their heads.
On the post: Putting Lives Before Patents: India Says Pricey Patented Cancer Drug Can Be Copied
Re: Re: But....what about the life of the corporations?!
On the post: NYT Pays Former CEO $24 Million To Go Away; The Paper Made $3 Million Total Over The Last 4 Years
Re: so net net, earnings would be ...
On the post: NYT Pays Former CEO $24 Million To Go Away; The Paper Made $3 Million Total Over The Last 4 Years
Re: Re:
doesn't change how stupid the result is though.
On the post: NYT Pays Former CEO $24 Million To Go Away; The Paper Made $3 Million Total Over The Last 4 Years
Re:
asset stripping is also unhelpful.
(usually happened when American interests gained control of significant assets which were only marginally profitable in their own right, if that, but required to allow other things to function properly. such as the railways. the instances of it happening Without American involvement generally are due to people who made their money exploiting the system rather than actually DOING anything... who think NZ should be more like the USA. still not sure how the hell we ended up with John Key as PM when everyone KNEW he was one of these people...)
On the post: NYT Pays Former CEO $24 Million To Go Away; The Paper Made $3 Million Total Over The Last 4 Years
Re: Another Pathetic Example
admittedly, they don't seem to be loosing money (mostly, yet) but the customer gets epicly shafted.
i think it's more a case of the elites in general being completely divorced from reality...
On the post: 'Don't Get SOPA'd' Is The New Mantra On Capitol Hill
Re: Oh noes, the U.S. might become a democracy!
they're plutocrats
neither of which have Anything to do with democracy one way or the other.
(plutocracy is rule by the rich, aristocracy rule by ... nobles, i guess? not sure on the precise meaning for that one. please note that Neither is rule by the people (democracy). blood and steel or gold and ink, either way the common man gets shafted. difference is, that's how plutocrats Get there, so it becomes ingraned, while aristocrats have at least Some hope of having other ideas.)
On the post: 'Don't Get SOPA'd' Is The New Mantra On Capitol Hill
Re: Government response
On the post: Ltlw0lf's Favorite Techdirt Posts of the Week
Re: Re: Re: Re:
also, to have enough boxes that there is never any need to swap them. add in voters wandering in and out all day and, while not impossible, it does become difficult to do.
(also, one is Registering to vote is compulsory, though actually voting is not, so there is a List of everyone who can vote in a given electorate, and if you're not on that list you don't get to. also, if your name is checked off at multiple polling stations i'm pretty sure your vote is tossed. when you go to vote, they fill out your name and number on the top of the sheet on their pad of voting papers, then tear off the ballot paper itself and give it to you to go vote with. i believe the two bits of paper have corresponding numbers on them, but i'm not sure. that'd be so that in the event of irregularities they can pull the right papers. the people who count the votes only see the ballot paper which, if i remember rightly, does Not have identifying marks on it appart from that number... i could be wrong though, this is from memory from some months back.)
On the post: Ltlw0lf's Favorite Techdirt Posts of the Week
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
that or he just forgot to include that line.
On the post: Edgar Rice Burroughs Inc. Using Trademark Law To Prevent The Use Of Public Domain Stories
Re: Re: Re: Re:
of course, far more intelligent would be to have a simple fixed length in the first place, but oh well.
On the post: Forget Home Taping: Evil Robots Are Killing Music!
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Forget Home Taping: Evil Robots Are Killing Music!
Re: Not EVEN the ticket seller, actually...
... it is not at all uncommon for this to be reduced to two people (one checking tickets, one selling them and the food and drink) during slow times of day. (... and just to confuse everyone, when there's only one person manning the counter, they use the Candy bar's cash register, not the ticket counter's one. the two are connected and the relevant equipment is in place, but the signage makes it confusing.)
incidentally 'candy bar' is a terrible pun and brand name thingy. other theaters call it other things (and many just make mention that stuff is for sale in the lobby or something to that effect.)
so, yeah, no automated ticket machines yet, but close :)
On the post: Forget Home Taping: Evil Robots Are Killing Music!
Re:
On the post: The Gutenberg eBook: Once Again, The Bible Is At The Forefront Of Publishing Technology
Re: Re: Re: Re: Pidgin?
On the post: Finnish Act Lets The Public Send Bills To Parliament, Volunteer Group Makes It Easy
Re: Re: Removing the Middleman
good, in that a corporation can't just write it's own laws and shove 'em through (at least, not more than before.)
bad, in that it makes it difficult-to-impossible for this method to get any law in place that benefits the public if it involves cutting into the powers or profits of the government.
On the post: Finnish Act Lets The Public Send Bills To Parliament, Volunteer Group Makes It Easy
Re: Same mental frequency
it would move it from the realm of 'impossible' to merely 'neigh-impossible' though.
(to actually achieve it you need to utterly BREAK the corporations and the insanity that is the copyright and patent systems (and possibly tidy up the trade mark system a bit) and then actually get your economy working again properly. step one to That is to realize that the Nation is not a meaningful economic entity. nor is the State (which is closer to what the rest of the world mean by 'country', anyway.) but city-region. there's a couple of places in the states where this apparently causes some administrative headaches due to city-regions being naturally occurring things and crossing not-at-all-natural state boundaries. and that's just to start with.)
On the post: Finnish Act Lets The Public Send Bills To Parliament, Volunteer Group Makes It Easy
Re:
On the post: Finnish Act Lets The Public Send Bills To Parliament, Volunteer Group Makes It Easy
Re: Re:
and 'no guns' doesn't make self defense difficult, at all. just means most violent crimes involve other weapons. mostly melee weapons. (there's a reason why, if memory serves, blades are quite heavily restricted in the UK as well?) this changes the dynamics a Lot. (in hand to hand combat, the odds of successful defense go up, the odds of accidental death go down, the odds of recoverable injuries go up, and, generally, any fight takes longer, giving more time for someone else to notice it and intervene. though it's also quieter and thus less likely to be noticed unless additional noise is made. or at least, that's what my knowledge of such things would indicate to me.)
there's only one reason for the common citizen to have unrestricted access to guns (there's a number of reasons for limited subsets to have limited access, mind you). resisting corrupt and tyrannical governments. that's EXACTLY why the USA has a constitutional right to keep and use them.
i note that the citizenry never seem to take advantage of that. there is no other situation where letting anyone have a gun Improves things. (here, at least, i'm pretty sure hunting accidents cause more deaths than murders, when it comes to gun use. given that the response to armed criminals is to deploy a police cordon and call in such wonderful things as LAVs armed with autocannons as a counter measure (which are armoured and will happily chew through the walls of most buildings, so hiding inside and sniping won't save you) i'm not really surprised.)
actually, most instances of break-ins, the would-be burgler is unarmed, or has some sort of tool used in the non-violent portion of such activity. almost Any weapon would be escalation.
some of this holds in the UK, some doesn't. point is, a lot of the rhetoric about gun laws that comes out of the USA doesn't really apply and derives most of it's validity from the impossibility of convincing a government it should not take actions against an institution specifically created to cause it's destruction.
one of these days i'm gonna get enough sleep and actually manage proper levels of coherency.
Next >>