What would political campaigns be like if approval voting — in which a vote for X cannot cause Y to lose to Z — were the rule?
Candidates other than the frontrunners might do more “positive” than “negative” campaigning, in the hope of mutual coat-tailing.
The major parties, rather than putting all their eggs in one basket, might (at least when not backing an incumbent) put up several candidates.
if only you believed in miracles
Travis found a choice rant by Don Boudreaux at Cafe Hayek:
But the bluest blue-state left-“liberal” atheist oughtn’t be too quick with the self-congratulatory praise of his or her own rational faculties. Most left-liberals are pure creationists when it comes to society and social order. For them, government is the creator of order . . . .
there are things I’d rather have than WiFi
Matt Smith on confused telecoms policy in San Francisco. So that’s why I so often get bad connections there!
I[dentifying]D[ocument]s and the illusion of security, op-ed by Bruce Schneier.
Identification and profiling don’t provide very good security, and they do so at an enormous cost. Dropping ID checks completely, and engaging in random screening where appropriate, is a far better security trade-off. People who know they’re being watched, and that their innocent actions can result in police scrutiny, are people who become scared to step out of line. They know that they can be put on a “bad list” at any time. People living in this kind of society are not free, despite any illusionary security they receive. It’s contrary to all the ideals that went into founding the United States.