>>5281764

if we changed the architecture of phones we wouldn't need centralized phone companies. If we changed the architecture of social media, we'd could all have our own individual sites. That model doesn't let the telecom sell 'your data'.

the model of the phone is broken.

I should be able to 'get a call' on any phone in the area. In other words if I travel I let my 'people' know where I am and they will know it's me and where I am and they will 'connect' the call in a secure way.

the model of 'one phone' and the 'device' being the 'person' is very broken. We need to start treating them like walkie talkies.

but they say 'how will the good people track the creeps'? There will still be ways. There just won't be a central money whore data-mongering disreputible paymaster central office of low level fat-cat cucks, worthless so they get the mid level manager job and demand a cut of all the patents made in the company, and act all high born, making sure that they have access to the expense account. They are often called 'marketting managers' . They usually try to drive engineers into process of sleep deprived fury (most California software is crap like that. The stuff made in Maynard and else is much much better than anything out of the drug-fields of california office slave shop coder factories.

look for all versions of source, old archives, everythign like that. Hand it to a prosecutor.

>>5281929

The clear priorities of allowing the courts to let a warrent is an important and necessary part of the design process for such a system. You simply can not allow a channel tellecomm channel to allow for unmonitorable use of such systems. FISA, in fact, was designed to be that system.

Does FISA work? We'll really would like a proof of that, wouldn't we?

The law says that courts can let authorities listen in. All such telecom system must adhere to that law or we have a security problem.

the only thing we need to figure out is who iis the gatekeeper to the system and how do we prevent them from using it for self dealing and blackmail?

>>5281767

she's still with us. This just makes people think we are petty. Pray for her instead. She might get visited by Dickensonian ghosts and repent.

>>5282356

I think it's important to understand that if she were passed on, then she, herself, is a victim here in that she didn't get proper burial or respect for a deceased person. So we need to not keep having her as a villain. If she is dead she isn't a villain because she would not be involved in any plotting because, well, she'd be passed on. So should we not just assume that she isn't? And we might find out she is if someone were charged with not filing death reports, etc. That hasn't happened. So we must assume she is still with us.

so that means that most tasteless of meme captions ought to be held back.

>>5282350

I don't know this for sure but I think sometimes when a woman says "i don't want them" she is unable to tell you , because it's too painful, that she can't have any. And that's really none of your business so she says 'don't want'