6 ms·

It would be nice to add a "right to private thought" to the Bill of Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as well as something similar to othe

It would be nice to add a "right to private thought" to the Bill of Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as well as something similar to other countries' rights and freedoms laws wherever possible.

ronsor 25d ago
Shouldn't this already be covered by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments?
- oofdere 25d ago
  many things should be covered by other things but that's never a valid reason not to cover them explicitly
  - DoctorOetker 25d ago
    This is why I think we should treat or reframe laws as formal systems, akin to Lean / Metamath / etc... : treat it like a database of axioms / principles and theorems with proof. As long as we don't we have to choose between explicit and repetitive or implicit but concise. The advantage of implicit but concise is that individual citizens can grasp larger sets of axioms & principles, but the we run the risk of having lawyers, judges etc. be confused, confusable, or feigning "innocent confusion" about the law and the spirit of the law. The advantage of explicit but repetitive is that its much harder to confuse if a party can point to a literal sentence stating exactly the situation in one place, but the law easily bulks up exponentially. On the other hand using a formal system, you can clearly distinctly mark the axioms and normative postulates, and include example theorems ("yes a black citizen is also a citizen", "yes the gypsy is a human", etc...). Even when cases haven't been covered as explicit theorems, the formalized aspect means parties can derive unambiguously the sentences they need to shove in the face of a judge.
    - oofdere 25d ago
      I get the argument, but I feel like most issues arise from incentive structure rather than not being able to define things precisely enough. Plus it's important that the law can be read by the average citizen as well. Not that current US laws are, but, it's an ideal to strive towards...
BurningFrog 25d ago
Technology like that would be incredibly valuable, which means it will be developed if it can be. You might possibly convince decent democratic countries to not do it, but if you think China, Russia, etc, would hesitate to get hold of this power we don't live in the same universe.
- wartywhoa23 25d ago
  Sure, the old trusty "if we don't do it, someone else will" rhetoric. And of course "think of the disabled"!
  - BurningFrog 24d ago
    That rhetoric is old and trusted because it's true.
    - wartywhoa23 24d ago
      Yep, true and helps immoral scumbags embrace their depravity and do what the others would otherwise do, and even bear some semblance of a moral ground in the eyes of the clueless.
      - BurningFrog 22d ago
        We clearly live in very different moral universes. Hope yours works for you!
- inigyou 25d ago
  Okay? In North Korea they're all malnourished and forced to work 20-hour days but how is that relevant to anything in the US?
- dustfinger 24d ago
  > Technology like that would be incredibly valuable, which means it will be developed if it can be. I agree! The technology to read the thoughts and intentions of the human brain has some positive applications. I am sure Stephen Hawking would have appreciated significant improvements in this space when he was still alive. The right to private thought does not revoke the right to subject oneself to mind reading technology. Research could still proceed, and positive, lawful application of the technology could still benefit those in need. > You might possibly convince decent democratic countries to not do it, but if you think China, Russia, etc, would hesitate to get hold of this power we don't live in the same universe. I agree! The independent governance of countries has consequences, but I believe its advantages outweigh those of global governance. I would rather that there always be a tension between many democracies and dictatorships, than a single governing authority.
conradev 25d ago
The Neurorights Foundation works on this: https://www.neurorightsfoundation.org/advocacy/united-states https://www.neurorightsfoundation.org/advocacy/united-states
wartywhoa23 25d ago
Aha, yet another right that will be given exactly zero fucks by the corpocracy.

ronsor 25d ago

Shouldn't this already be covered by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments?

oofdere 25d ago
many things should be covered by other things but that's never a valid reason not to cover them explicitly
- DoctorOetker 25d ago
  This is why I think we should treat or reframe laws as formal systems, akin to Lean / Metamath / etc... : treat it like a database of axioms / principles and theorems with proof. As long as we don't we have to choose between explicit and repetitive or implicit but concise. The advantage of implicit but concise is that individual citizens can grasp larger sets of axioms & principles, but the we run the risk of having lawyers, judges etc. be confused, confusable, or feigning "innocent confusion" about the law and the spirit of the law. The advantage of explicit but repetitive is that its much harder to confuse if a party can point to a literal sentence stating exactly the situation in one place, but the law easily bulks up exponentially. On the other hand using a formal system, you can clearly distinctly mark the axioms and normative postulates, and include example theorems ("yes a black citizen is also a citizen", "yes the gypsy is a human", etc...). Even when cases haven't been covered as explicit theorems, the formalized aspect means parties can derive unambiguously the sentences they need to shove in the face of a judge.
  - oofdere 25d ago
    I get the argument, but I feel like most issues arise from incentive structure rather than not being able to define things precisely enough. Plus it's important that the law can be read by the average citizen as well. Not that current US laws are, but, it's an ideal to strive towards...

BurningFrog 25d ago

Technology like that would be incredibly valuable, which means it will be developed if it can be. You might possibly convince decent democratic countries to not do it, but if you think China, Russia, etc, would hesitate to get hold of this power we don't live in the same universe.

wartywhoa23 25d ago
Sure, the old trusty "if we don't do it, someone else will" rhetoric. And of course "think of the disabled"!
- BurningFrog 24d ago
  That rhetoric is old and trusted because it's true.
  - wartywhoa23 24d ago
    Yep, true and helps immoral scumbags embrace their depravity and do what the others would otherwise do, and even bear some semblance of a moral ground in the eyes of the clueless.
    - BurningFrog 22d ago
      We clearly live in very different moral universes. Hope yours works for you!
inigyou 25d ago
Okay? In North Korea they're all malnourished and forced to work 20-hour days but how is that relevant to anything in the US?
dustfinger 24d ago
> Technology like that would be incredibly valuable, which means it will be developed if it can be. I agree! The technology to read the thoughts and intentions of the human brain has some positive applications. I am sure Stephen Hawking would have appreciated significant improvements in this space when he was still alive. The right to private thought does not revoke the right to subject oneself to mind reading technology. Research could still proceed, and positive, lawful application of the technology could still benefit those in need. > You might possibly convince decent democratic countries to not do it, but if you think China, Russia, etc, would hesitate to get hold of this power we don't live in the same universe. I agree! The independent governance of countries has consequences, but I believe its advantages outweigh those of global governance. I would rather that there always be a tension between many democracies and dictatorships, than a single governing authority.

conradev 25d ago

The Neurorights Foundation works on this: https://www.neurorightsfoundation.org/advocacy/united-states https://www.neurorightsfoundation.org/advocacy/united-states

wartywhoa23 25d ago

Aha, yet another right that will be given exactly zero fucks by the corpocracy.