On Tue, 10 Jul 2001 15:40:25 +0200 (MET DST), you wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Tiberius Gracchus wrote:
>
>> Of course I don't trust the govt. That's why the cameras should also
>> be everywhere in any govt institution. Heck, cameras should be
>> everywhere we can put them.
>
>I presume you've spoken to your local political representative (judging
>from your alias, of the S in SPQR) about installing a public cam in his
>villa's thermes, and he was unreserved enthusiastical about it?
>
>Of course, if cameras there are, they "should" be pointing both ways.
>However, you might observe that solving the quis custodiet by mutual
>snoopery, strangely, has not so far cropped up on the Big Brother's
>agenda. They like keeping the tabs on you, unilaterally, and like to keep
>it that way.
>
>A much simple solution would seem to not install the darn cams in the
>first place, thus not granting the license to snoop, or revoking it,
>where, foolishly, it was granted, using the usual political channels.
>
>Private cams be different, since they be not blanket.
Well, I am not sure what your references mean, but the nom de Net
comes from a Roman populist of sorts.
Re my political philosophy: it is evolving, as always. Generally, I
think that the USA should be run more like a corporation, a business,
with us the citizens as its shareholders. I think that model yields
more for me, and my fellow citizens, or at least most of us.
Businesses have many controls, such as accountants who scrutinize each
transaction, every detail of the business. Transaction controls are
built into every aspect of business. They de facto define a business,
in some ways. So should it be in the USA, and any country.
I have long been a student of zoology and espcially animal behavior,
and everywhere I see evidence of the strong victimizing the weak. In
fact, that in large part IS how the strong remain strong. We do not
seem to take this natural axiom much into account here in the USA, or
perhaps we have forgetten it. We should scrap the Constitution as it
is presently written and rewrite it to take into account the natural
axiom that in essence holds that those that have will automatically
attempt to exploit and victimize and hold back those that do not.
You call for simplicity. Why? The caves were simple.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:44 MDT