The consequence of small government is small, primitive nations. If you like the benefits of infrastructure, e.g. drinkable water,safe food, maintained roads and electricity, then you like the benefits of big government.
But corruption and purpose drift are not inevitable outcomes. We just have to find means to correct when they occur. This begins with not pretending the legal system is infallible
The problem with law enforcement is that we believed they were adequately overseen and regulated. It is only with the prevalence of personal cameras that we're seeing how wrong that presumption was. But plenty of people still don't look or still like to pretend those are exceptions to the rule.
We're getting to the point where apathy to public demands for redress are going to result in violent reprisal. Much like the anti-vac crowd who had to suffer measles outbreaks before they realized the consequences of their delusions.
Yeah, but that will encourage future responses of we know it's a problem and we have top men on it, when they don't.
I'm not sure the solution in this clime.
If these companies can be forced to do a product recall since an easily hackable lock can be reasonably inferred to be a flawed product, that might force them to fix the problem or withdrawal the product from market, whether or not they're honest about their intentions.
I remember reading an article that observed Wrigley Field used to have a short right field which contributed to Babe Ruth's amazing home-run records, and that while we should stay vigilant about curbing cheating and exploits, because the game continues to change in a myriad of ways, we shouldn't say a given cheat (or its respective fix) invalidates the game, because the clime is always changing.
The same should apply to eSports, especially since there are always going to be cheats and exploits (not just bugs, but often game imbalances), some of which are disregarded as problematic by the overseeing adjudicators who can be really quite arbitrary when it comes to deciding what is or isn't fair play.
As for the cheaters themselves, admonishing them with litigation (let alone litigation based on copyright) isn't going to change anything, but sacrifice some players and make the company look disinterested in maintaining the game. A better response would be to fix the game so that the cheat or exploit no longer works.
There are two specific problems (I see) with IoT devices.
One is that they are often vunerabilities into the rest of a network, for example, the refrigerator that logs into a local router that will reveal to hackers the password to the router. So the IoT device makes your array less secure just by its presence.
The other is that IoT devices often are controlled remotely though their IoT-ness, thus a car can be shut down (or forced to accellerate) in the middle of a freeway. A thermostat can be set to the highest setting or shut off. While the incidents with airplanes in which pilot controls are connected to the passenger-access wifi (yes really) pretty much counts as an IoT once a passenger can drop the oxygen tanks or adjust the trim.
Someone's going get written into the history books as the first person to be murdered by IoT hack before this gets fixed.
"Law enforcement agencies have long felt no one should need more evidence than an officer's word"
Yeah, at this point they've demonstrated how much they like to abuse that privilege. Not only do they commonly lie (at the stand, no less) but cannot even be trusted with their own monitoring.
At some time in the past, a forgotten camera might have been an honest mistake. Now, it's evident that any camera negligence is willful and malicious. We can also assume that any edit by law enforcement is censorship of officer wrongdoing, is not for protection of the people but protection of the precinct.
That also goes for any good faith exception used by a police officer to circumvent forth amendment protections. Law enforcement agents don't ...can't act in good faith. Benefit of doubt for law enforcement is a benefit of doubt against the people, and against the state.
And any judge that gives them that benefit of doubt is complicit in their misfeasance (or in the case of failing to turn on a camera, nonfeasance.)
Law enforcement has come to regard the people as enemies, and have made themselves enemies of the people.
One of the benefits of media piracy (for me) has been the necessity of preloading content, which has forced me to be more selective of the content available, which has encouraged me to actually look at what I'm about to view / read / listen to / play.
As Sturgeon observed (in response to someone else saying 90% of sci-fi is crud) 90% of everything is crud, and our content creators (professional or otherwise) are only guessing at what makes something good, or not.
The habits developed by media piracy actually lead to a better chance of picking out the non-crud from the crud, or at least some introspection as to why a given non-crud appeals.
What's important is which officials filed the legal suits in the names of North Carolina and Tennessee, because I bet the lawsuits against the FCC were not demanded by referendum of the people of these respective states.
As has been discussed recently, The United States is no longer a nation of laws. And we've only been pretending it was for some time. Instead, it is a nation of titles with power without oversight (or at best with dubious oversight). The responsibility for these protectionist challenges to FCC regulation rests neither on the state as an entity, nor the people represented by the state, but the officials that hold the power, who really answer to no-one.
Doubtless these officials have been enriched by those interests best served by protectionist laws, namely cable and AT&T.
The DoJ is going to push for convictions through the least amount of work. If it's easier to frame innocent civilians than it is to find real criminals, we can expect they're going to go for the low hanging fruit while high-ranking producers and distributors continue their work unmolested.
If we want them to catch upstream operators, we're going to have to change entirely how they get rewarded.
Really, I can't imagine a sting operation bagging a producer or a distributor. These sound like large police operations for small-potatoes busts, grossly inflated by mandatory minimums.