jthill

Verizon have argued in court that they have a first-amendment right to edit everything that crosses their network.

You could see your ISP demanding you install and trust crypto keys so Verizon can inspect everything you say, insert any ads they like, and refuse to deliver anything they decide you shouldn't be allowed to see or say.

Of course, it won't start there. This is how starts.

Spectral fingerprints: different chemicals absorb/reradiate different frequencies.

Our eyes are sensitive to some frequencies. We see those as different colors and can generally identify many different materials that way.

Instruments can be more precise and sense a broader range of frequencies, so they can "see" differences between what seem to our eyes to be identical or colorless materials.

Horse-drawn DLC of course: foot traffic, horses, horse-drawn carts and wagons, maybe, maybe train stations.

Managing priorities to reduce latency problems is good service.

Managing priorities to introduce latency problems is fraudulent service.

Hey. Just want to say I think the people who downvoted this belong somewhere that promotes herd loyalty above respect and open discussion. Thanks for a coherent, interesting, and at least reasonably well founded viewpoint.

Lots of people have observed over many years now that our representatives represent far too many people -- I'm sure you've already figured on average each one represents about as many people as there were in the entire nation when it was founded. I think the role the constitution establishes for congressional representatives simply can't work well with the setup we have now, and I'd be very interested to see anyone's attempt to argue against your point about the behavior corporations find most economical, because I simply can't imagine one. Pretty sure that's got to be just me, but still.

But it seems to me there's already a well-established, successful setup that clearly solves the two-party problem, clearly ameliorates much of the problem decentralization addresses and still keeps a federal power sufficient to stand up to even multinational corporations' power.

So my question is, that it seems to me a strong federal power is the only arrangement that has the proverbial snowball's chance in hell of breaking the corporate takeover currently in progress here, and something substantial has to actually change, not simply be broken down and exposed to "hang separately" tactics -- so: what would the decentralization you're proposing look like, and most specifically how would you address the resulting difficulties withstanding corporate takeover attempts that would be so easy for them if decentralization were done wrong?

edit: I know a response to a question asked this late would be very, very unusual for an iama, so I guess this is more of just an i'll-just-leave-this-here question than anything else.