The Biden administration wants a billion dollars to begin to process Afghan citizens eligible for evacuation. This comes out to $50K per applicant, or about $40K more than airfare to the US along with a few grand to tide them over while finding a job. cnn.com/2021/07/26/pol…
Biden wants these Afghan heroes who helped us detained on military bases for reasons I still can't understand. The refusal to just grant them temporary resident status and welcome them into the United States is not just immoral and asinine, but is costing us money.
These special visa applicants are Afghans who speak English, understand America (kind of by definition) and are on track to become US citizens. At what point do we stop treating them like dangerous criminals, and let them settle with their families and send their kids to school?
For that matter, what about the millions of other Afghans in the country we spent twenty years bombing? What exactly is the risk of letting them come live here and open fantastic restaurants? And what about all the Afghan women who have no future under the Taliban? Let them in!
We're wasting the biggest strength of being a rich, pluralistic society, which is to let people from all over the world immigrate, work hard, and send money home. This approach is not only a win/win, but makes people like your country much more than drone-bombing their weddings!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Banning cryptocurrencies is a foolish idea; all we need to do is regulate the exchanges.
If people insist their play money is real, then make them do time in the real-world pokey for breaking any of the rules that govern doing stuff with money. It's a similar strategy to making your kid pay rent and utilities if they insist they be treated like an adult.
Banning cryptocurrency would only reinforce the cult's belief system. We should take advantage of the fact that the technology is completely unworkable, and let it die a natural death. Regulating the exchanges will protect civilians while the fanatics get their wiggles out.
Klobuchar's bill would make online companies liable for users who post misinformation about public health, in a year when public health authorities have done multiple U-turns on what is true. It would be a windfall for lawyers and serve no public interest. wsj.com/articles/bill-…
The bill would give the Department of Health and Human Services de facto censorship authority over social media, exposing anyone who defied HHS guidelines to predatory lawsuits. If such a law were proposed abroad, we'd correctly identify it as an attack on freedom of speech.
All you have to do is remember back to summer 2020, when systemic racism was asserted to be a public health problem commesurate with covid, to recognize how quickly such a mandate would expand in all political directions, changing with each election. This is how censorship works.
The spyware scandal in the news today is a chance to reiterate that human beings are incapable of producing defect-free software at any scale. In particular, there is no such thing as a secure online system or a secure mobile platform. This foundational issue won't go away.
Our main line of defense against malicious software is that human ingenuity is also limited, so we only find a fraction of our errors. And the malefactors go on to make more mistakes coding the malware. Incompetence is the great defensive wall securing most of our infrastructure.
The phone situation in particular is dire, and I hope we see a future where these all-in-one devices are supplemented by simpler machines that do just one thing (make phone calls, send text messages) and can't be turned into a 24/7 surveillance beacon by hacking an emoji renderer
The law he is presumably referring to is Section 230, which keeps owners of online forums from being liable for what participants post. This law allows small websites like mine to exist. Without it, we would only have the tech giants, who can afford massive legal departments.
If you or someone you love has been hurt in an online argument, and you want to bring the fun and excitement of US personal injury law to the world wide web, then Section 230 repeal is for you! You may be entitled to a cash settlement; call the number on the nearest billboard.
This view that misinformation is inflicted on an unwilling and innocent public is starting to grind my gears. The demand is driven by people hungry for more and more of it. Mark Zuckerberg is not responsible for the human condition, and linear algebra didn't radicalize your aunt
I watched the first episode of a 2016 Chinese police procedural called "Medical Examiner Dr. Qin" last night, and I can't recommend it highly enough. Spoilers ahead, but as you'll see it doesn't really matter.
The show starts with police finding a deep-fried human hand in a vat of illegal cooking oil. An unscrupulous vendor skimmed it from a sewer, where a criminal had just happened to dump the deep-fried remains of his two victims.
Having found deep-fried human remains of a human hand at a food market, the police decide they have 48 hours to solve the crime before the public becomes upset. For the rest of the show there is a digital counter, letting us know how the men and women in blue are doing.
I understand that "DOOM! DOOM!" is an engaging headline, but we should talk some more about how to live in the coming world as a practical matter, and how to create economic incentives to help the people most affected.
Much more climate change than we're already seeing is locked in. If emissions went to zero tomorrow, we'd still see hotter summers for years. I understand the political goal of making every headline sound like we're about to die, but it's cynical and I believe counterproductive.