this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2025
92 points (97.9% liked)

politics

25368 readers
2460 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The United States, stepping boldly into the 19th century...

What a contrast between the glorious race to the moon in the 60's, and medicine by leeches under RFK Jr's HHS and congresscritters wanting to bring back privateering in 2025... The Roman empire took centuries to collapse, and it only took the US 50 years. Quite stunning.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

First of all, there are better ways to deal with anything than privateering. There’s a reason why all countries in the world have abandoned it.

I mean, mostly that is because speed of communication increased significantly and most of the major powers increasingly formed alliances that were mostly to enhance trade. So having Captain Ron murder all the cargo ships on behalf of England would not only hurt England's pockets but also get out really fast.

Secondly, everybody is operating under the assumption that cybercrime is something that happens and there’s no way around it. I contend that if software vendors were penally responsible for vulnerabilities in their software, you’d see a dramatic reduction in hacks very, very quickly.

A dedicated blackhat is like someone who is dedicated to getting into your house. You can take precautions but if they want in, they'll get in. Which is why there is so much emphasis on threat detection and policies to react to them.

Probably closer to twenty years ago than not, there was a pretty fun show on Discovery (?) called "To Catch a Crook" or something. The premise being that two brothers used to be burglars but now help families improve their security by selling name branded security systems. Every episode would begin with them breaking in, explaining how, and the security system would be installed. Then they would try again and always get in because the family didn't turn it on or they left an upstairs window open or whatever. Except for one episode where the family DID actually follow all best practices... so they just smashed a window and stole shit before the cops got there.

As in, if a piece of software is exploited, the engineers who worked on it, their managers and the CEO of their company had better come up with extensive documentation proving how they did their best to implement security before releasing the unfortunate piece of code

This already exists. And much of the software that the world actually runs on has regular security audits from third parties and even governments. They suck but they are also what lead to "We are going to make damned sure every merge request has a detailed review" and so forth.

This is why "supply chain hardening" is such a big deal and why Canonical and Redhat exist.

or all of that bunch gets to spend time in the slammer. (...) If this was implemented into law, I guarantee you software would become very secure across the board in no time flat.

If this was the law, I guarantee you that every software company subject to these laws would shut down instantly. And the ones that are left would be structured as a series of shell companies to minimize liability and flee the country.


Don't get me wrong. I don't think (official) letters of marque are at all a good idea for the same reasons we migrated away from them as a people: They are just a way to trace liability and trigger a war. But basically giving hackers the PMC treatment (which russia, china, north korea, etc already publicly do) and sending them after enemy infrastructure? Welcome to the cold war of the 21st century... assuming we don't just go hot in the next year or two.

[–] stringere@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 hours ago

So having Captain Ron murder all the cargo ships on behalf of England would not only hurt England's pockets but also get out really fast.

Not to mention the impact on Kurt Russel's free time.