Canadian Law and Policy
Awesome pic. Looks like they're enjoying the weather. Thanks for the post James.
I've learned common law derives from 12th century UK practises, and civil law from 6th century Roman Empire. The common law is somewhat superior as it derives from the judgements of judges and not policians. The latter having to invest time in serving their local districts's minor needs. Incremental change is also good in preventing intractable tyranny and extinctions as the precursors for such might not trigger an immune legal response in time in civil law.The 1200AD UK environment is superior to the Roman Empire. No doubt Justinian was influences by the rational Greeks, and Henry II incorporated Jewish Law and whatever Germanic Tribe customs there were at the time. But simply, UK is at less risk for an invasion and is more able to tolerate potentially subversive human rights. I like the UK foreign policy since 1600 of enacting a Europe-westernRussia balance of power. The Greek polises used it too but were not large enough land entities.For future WMD and tyranny enabling technologies, surveillence will be necessary. But even if you get a good administration, it might get worse at some point. Then you either turn the surveillence off or you take the risk that your NSA becomes tyrants. The Europe Balance of power until the Gatling gun, probably bred good gvmt.At some point human behaviour can be altered or can choose not to be tyrannical, but this might not be desirable as there are non-surveilled risks that might need some rebellious thoughts. In the nearer term, being an NSA employee might entail some permanent surveillence once NSA employees observe technologies (especially conquering ones) they can make at home. At this hour, I'm hoping it is possible to surveil the future NSA without knowing about the technologies they are studying. The status of NSA employees should be expressed de giorno.
...so implementing and running a surveillence network automatically risks NSA personnel will become experts at building or stealing future WMDs or agents-of-tyranny (such as an obedient super AI). So the network itself and other safeguards would have to be able to police itself and keep itself secure right off the bat. This suggests there will a time when surveillence network technologies are developed that are in the (future) present, insufficient to effectively surveil the world. At such a point would be a good time to complete the negotiation of treaties and synchronizating of global policing and military authorities.
I like Rawl's concepts of lexical rights and human development. But he still isn't very good at defining normative estimates of what is good and in what order. Life is an old right. Liberty and happiness were tacked on. Much of substantive law merely means law in congruence with international human rights. However, this misses future WMDs. Is too left wing.University curriculums and adult media can be improved from present, and take into account addressing future WMDs. Same for national budgets and foreign policies and university/public/private R+D. This requires both surveillence and responsible NSA-type actors. It can be defined legally in a lexical manner. Defining why tyranny and extinction is bad.I like that FDR went for a pretty girl who was happy with the world as it was, and was shown aspects of working class hardship by a different girl who wanted the world to be better. This is why too much religion is no good: the world needs to be better to enact future WMD surveillence and responsible future NSA. Looking at the Battle of Hastings, both sides seemed similiar. But the Scandinavian side was inferior. They had a maraduing religion harmful to the capital of cities: universities, public sanitation...Islam also. It is good at Hastings, the Catholic influence won as the Roman Empire (Christianity) was cities. Thomas Jefferson didn't like cities and he liked the French Revolution...we can get to surveillence and responsibility all via the law. Law is a lot like religion.
...Human Rights might lead to communist tendencies and an innefficient economy. People would be safer if at least some people have some degree of surveillence. People in positions of power should have regular brain imaging scans to test against mental illnesses. It will be necessary to surveil against WMDs and tyrannies. Surveilling the NSA will require the loss of some NSA Human Rights.Law needs to incorporate technologies of the future. The USA overvaluation of property rights might be why global warming is a problem. In Canada, we missed a chance to implement Chretein's GAI and give everyone a chance to brainstorm a better world.
Post a Comment