A half a MEEEEELLION dollars bail seems ridiculous unless the judge really thought the kid was a flight risk, but IMO that would need to be substantiated by more than "ZOMG 9/11 + he was mean on teh intarwebz".
As you point out, the idiocy of the North American penal system, which tends to brutalize and criminalize people, is an MCF (Mongolian Cluster Fuck).
Even if one puts aside the rights of the incarcerated (not advocating such, but for sake of argument), society is benefited by rehabilitation rather than the Lord of the Flies stuff that happens now.
Being selfish for a minute, having this kid brutalized and making him more likely to arm himself and lash out since he (correctly) perceives that his world is a fucked up and dangerous place, is worse for ME, and doing countless times to people indicted for non-violent offenses is significantly worse for me. My point is that the "law & order" stumping for "tougher penalties", when criminal "justice" is as it is actually begets crime.
The complaint in the article is more that it's too easy to get a Grand Jury to indict (the indictment every 52 seconds part summarizes this). The goal, per the article, is not to route around or skip the Grand Jury, rather to increase rigor so that the Grand Jury process is less inclined to result in indictment.
Please note this is not my opinion (I'm nt close enough to criminal justice procedures to really form an opinion on this), rather I'm trying to clarify the article.
I don't think they lack for funding. I think the problem is more fundamental.
If your job consists of security theatre plus Operation Intimidate the Brown People, you're essentially a self important bullshit artist.
Software, on the other hand, deals exclusively in hard facts. It doesn't matter how awesome you think you are, how many Medals of Freedom you've been awarded, or how great a bureaucratic political operative you are, if you're in charge of a software project and you're full of shit, the project will fail.
I've seen it countless times. Software cannot be dazzled, cajoled, double-talked at, massaged, convinced, etc... You either know the methodology and push towards delivery or you're in the way.
The whole undesireables thing is a means to an end though. Fascism is about control and the will of the state.
The state needs a bogey man to blame problems on. They pick a minority group which the broader population is already uncomfortable with (typically for irrational reasons), and demonize and dehumanize them. Once they do it to the Jews/Gays/Arabs/whoever, it's much easier to get away with it for others. Slippery slope, etc...
“Think about when you listen to a song on the radio,” he explained. “You are not paying for it, it’s not illegal to do it, because the rights have been paid for on top, beforehand, by the radio station, by the network."
No, the em spectrum, the manufacturers of radio broadcasting and/or receiving hardware do not pay.
The BROADCASTER pays. They pay from ad revenue, which is earned by having tons of people listening.
If the content creators had not by and large(not entirely, granted) been so beholden to idiotic legacy distributors, they could have monetized content in this fashion from the get go online. They were late to the table, someone else ate "their" lunch, and now they whinge. As they say in the Russian Army, "tufki shitski".
The notion that "content creators" need a handout is idiotic. The money made via spotify, youtube, netflix, etc... is huge.
“We should never forget that in the smartphone, the smart part is us creators.”
Define "us", shitbag. If I wanted to listen to idiotic beeps and whistles, I'd put an R2-D2 sound bite on a loop. I use my smartphone to read (techdirt and wikipedia being my two favs), to use facebook and email to interact with friends, family and colleagues.
I have very little music on my phone (all of it purchased) and all the pics and movies on their are taken by me. So am I creator? I suppose I should get the $300-$400 tax levied against my phone, then, since I'm the primary creator of content I consume.