LOLTRON (Discord ID: 463268279503290388), page 1
Security Advisory: Links in messages may lead to maliciously operated websites that could track your IP address and reveal your identity, or they may contain harmful files. The DiscordLeaks team does not check links and cannot make any statements about the safety of following these links.
Some ways to protect yourself are:
- Do not open files downloaded from links, and do not run any programs that try to download themselves to your computer.
- Use anonymization measures such as Tor Browser or a VPN.
If you are using the Privacy Badger or other privacy extensions, you may need to whitelist Discord and related domains in order for the images to load.
217 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
There's a lot of economic reasons why residential zones are limited. As zones get bigger, the cost of maintenance and support increases proportionally. Roads, parks, infrastructure, sewage, water etc...
```The bottom line is that running a high immigration program requires massive investment and costs a lot, and these costs are borne to a large extent by the incumbent population.
Therefore, if you want wages to be reduced, traffic congestion to get worse, to pay more for utilities and housing, and to see the environment get degraded, then continue with current mass immigration settings. But if you care about maintaining Australian living standards, then immigration needs to be slashed to sensible and sustainable levels.```
The UK could do with a revenue bump... The Anglosphere could do with a boost in numbers...
I thought dealing with the colonized people was the problem, generally?
A lot of that is heavily correllated to the transition from a manufacturing to an intellectual developing economy.. Which is happening in most Western countries...
It depends if sending them back is actually inhumane, doesn't it?
If they're economic migrants, then it wouldn't be illegal to deport them, I would think.
I'd be curious to know what they are basing that on.
Morally, is it right to pull people on to a lifeboat, if pulling more people on will increase the change of capsizing the lifeboat?
Which human right? Half the problem is 'they' don't seem to understand what a 'Human Right' actually is...
I swear these people need a flowchart that shows how these principles are interdependent.
I look forward to ZeFrank's next video... "True facts about Hitler"... `Hitler is literally 50% of the entire population of the Earth; Because that is how Hitler do...`
"extensive state regulation" can also have significant drawbacks as well...
The balance between "limited government" and "extensive regulation" is an important one.
There is a solution; it comes from where this mentality stems from...
We are pretty ethnically diverse where I come from; and for the most part, most people are just too chill to really worry about that sort of thing. It is slowly starting to take root in the left-biased media though which is slowly starting to stir up tensions...
The welfare state is a net good, but it only works with a strong capitalist foundation
They don't want to live here; they just want our natural resources.
In terms of condition; Australia is still significantly better off than the likes of the UK, Canada and the US.
IMO the lack of constitutionally protected freedom of speech is problem #1.. China's growing influence is also a concern.
Has she made any definitive statements either way?
Most people don't care about ethnicity, it's more about attitude and effort.
The attitude here is pretty much along the lines of "tow the line, participate in society, and you're golden"
Why would Bernie dying be a catalyst for civil war?
There's probably a significant percentage that do; but it sure isn't the majority.. And in that light, there's also what we call 'Bogans' which are the white equivalent. There's way more of them.
I don't know what the percentage split would be, but it'd sure make for an interesting infographic.
As far as I can see, the Dems don't have a candidate that could challenge Trump in 2020...
They are a single issue party now.. They are Anti-Trump. That's it...
I'm not convinced Bernie has the political clout to hold the Dems together anyway...
It's entirely likely, and probably desirable, that the Dems split into a center-left and extreme left parties... When trump leaves in 2024, the same will happen to the Republicans.
Oh boy; i hope they come up with a better name than that 😛
Saying something can't be automated just suggests a failure of imagination.
Many countries are doing it though. It does simplify a lot of bureaucratic systems, but it also has huge privacy implications.
Yeh the knives thing.. That's just crazy.. I saw a video the other day of the Mayor of London defending it as the problem that needed to be solved to stop gang crime.. The audience wasn't having a bar of it.
Knives arent the problem, lack of law enforcement and accountability is the problem.
I always have my Victorinox knife with me. It's the most useful thing I own.
I feel sorry for the constabulary though, they must look at these policies coming down from on high and must think `Are you being serious, mate?`
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ch_NuUgvb7s "You can take my stick from my cold dead hands..."
I think it's stranger than fiction, It's almost certainly true...
Why isn't intent a thing, when it comes to those searches and seizures? Is that factored in?
Is there a Speight of bike tire stabbings I haven't seen?
Ive muted most of the channels and just leave the ones i use.. Man i still can't keep up.
@Arhiwolf Wow. Just when you think the tard cannot get more tard...
Nah, i want notifications from some channels, and not others.
Somehow, i've ended up with 2 sargon discords. I dont know which one is the legit one
That's not really a reason against Brexit. That's a reason against regressive politicians.
At least with Brexit, there's just one government screwing things up. Without Brexit, the EU and Germany can bring their incompetence to bear as well.
So by extension, Brexit means UK is reducing incompetence by 2/3.
They likely will. Most western countries are...
If you've ever had a DNA test, for any reason, it's almost certain they have your biometrics.
Case in point is having to identify yourself to watch porn in the UK.
The other, more concerning issue is there is no way that data is *not* going to get misused, stolen and exploited.
You're not the bost of me, Mee6.... <clicks link>
I wish teespring didnt charge me more for the shipping than it does for the shirt.
`"Damnit, why is my massive database of 25million citizens not being hacked yet!"`
If the Australian Census taught us anything, it's that the government shouldn't be responsible for protecting anything big-data related.
Sorry, no i mean I don't agree thats a fundamental job of the government...
The DNA record they collect is assigned to a number. Your Social Sec number.
Along with a metrick fuck-tonne of other metadata
It may be something they do, but I don't agree its a responsibility of the government..
A government's job is to protect its border, and defend citizens rights to property.
And i am coming from a position where I am okay with government delivering critical services like energy, health care and infrastructure... But i don't think the government should be unilaterally tracking its citizens.
I'm not saying the government doesn't need to have a record of its citizens. But i do think they don't need biometrics
biometrics just allows them to track citizens more easily
I don't think tracking citizens should be somethign that can be done easily
I have a friend who works for a multinational that sells facial recognition tech to government. They are throwing millions at this tech...
It's not enough to say that "I haven't done anything wrong, so i have nothign to fear...", knowing you are under constant surveillance can heavily influence behaviour of people who haven't done anything wrong.
All that's required to do facial recognition is a photo.
The company my mate works for, the system they deploy has >98% accuracy.
Granted, people have been matching faces for thousands of years, and are hard wired to do it...
A significant portion of the brain is dedicated to it
That doesn't make the risks of biometric tracking any less concerning
Why would the government keeping your data discourage identity theft?
When a govvernment entity verifys you... What do they ask for?
Once they have that info... they have ALL of your metadata
But i don't think giving the government access to ALL metadata is a balance.
Mostly because the vast majority of people don't understand just how much data is being collected on them
If they actually understood the scope of the machine at work, they would be horrified.
I didn't say they shouldn't have "some" data.. I just think they currently have too much.. And we certainly shouldn't be volunteering more.
The government doesn't need more metadata to determine that.
Your income statement is enough to calculate that.
`Is it paranoia if they really are out to get you?`
I'm not necessarily in favour of that sort of welfare
There is the debate over security vs freedom... I don;t necessarily agree that its a zero sum game
@Arch-Fiend that's not true any more.. Ive watched facial recognition systems track 30 people across an open square, and identify each of the people in the scene in real time, and the face doesn't even need to be facing the camera.
You can generate the hash from the fingerprint, but you cant generate the fingerprint fromt he hash
Oh neither do i. Fortunately the math behind it doesn't lie
That what makes cryptology such an important asset to protect
I'm certainly no expert in the math.. thats for sure.
They managed to solve crimes before mass surveillance...
If it's better for 100 guilty people to go free less 1 innocent go to jail... Surely the same should apply to privacy?
most murders are crimes of passion, not premeditated.
True; mass murders are generally premeditated...
but usually, they want noteriety.. they are looking for the fame..
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those two terms mutually exclusive?
I see.. It'd work if everyone in the group new and empathised with everyone else in the group. That wouldn't scale.
Doesn't sound like they have a plan for pulling that off, though...
The moment catching a murderer requires the impinging of civil liberties, including privacy, its a bridge too far.
There are compromises to make, but we shoudl always err on the side of privacy
I'm actively trying to avoid those. I'm rational enough to know there is legitimate call for some metadata retention.. And noone is really saying that tracking down a murderer can't be done with metadata... But My point remains is the bias should be toward the protection of liberty and privacy. not the increased power of the states surveillance machine.
That may not be off the cards for them, i would hazard a guess..
Could you imagine if the genders were reversed in that article?
217 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.