The expression "this is why we can't have nice things" comes to mind. Like their FISA powers, spying on communications of journalists with surveillance powers, political abuses within the IRS, etc the government has massively abused asset forfeiture as well and we should return to a liberty centric mindset. No forfeiture without conviction by a jury.
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."
The government has proven they aren't angels we can trust.
The anarchic aspect comes from the void in accountability that comes with large bureaucracies like states.
It is this dysfunctionionality that makes free market oriented societies that place greater limits on the power of the state generally more prosperous than societies with significant government intervention, despite the latter theoretically being better able to address a litany of collective action problems.
I get what you're saying and agree. But even theoretically a corporation is much better at dealing with collective action problems. Setting up a new entity that looks a lot like a corporation is the standard approach to moving a needle.
The government doesn't have the bandwidth to move on collective action problems that people don't already have figured out by some other means, voting isn't a great tool for doing more than the really basic stuff like keeping a military and police force functional. And even for things like the military, private sector institutions are better at building all the components.
We have corporations (using a very wide definition that includes non-profit entities that are legally similar) that tackle every problem under the sun. You can't expect beat an entity that exists for the sole purpose of addressing a problem with a general purpose schizophrenic institution like a government.
Anarcho-tyranny means a government that doesn't enforce any of the laws that protect people, only enforces laws that protect itself. So it's like the absence of a government in the sense that a government is supposed to be tasked with protecting people's life and property.
Well that's objectively poor phrasing, then. 'Anarcho-' as a prefix refers to Anarchy, which refers to a society being in a state of not having authorities.
You could argue that having authorities that abuse their authority to self-serving ends renders that authority illegitimate, but by the admission of Anarcho-tyranny's own proponents (as a theory), they still recognize the existence of these "authorities", and just contest the governance decisions made by those authorities.
That's certainly a bad government, but to call it anarcho-anything is just downright confusing.
If you want a real understanding of a word, look to its etymology.
Anarchy
1530s, "absence of government," from French anarchie or directly from Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek anarkhia "lack of a leader, the state of people without a government" (in Athens, used of the Year of Thirty Tyrants, 404 B.C., when there was no archon), abstract noun from anarkhos "rulerless," from an- "without" (see an- (1)) + arkhos "leader" (see archon).
From 1660s as "confusion or absence of authority in general;" by 1849 in reference to the social theory advocating "order without power," with associations and co-operatives taking the place of direct government, as formulated in the 1830s by French political philosopher Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809-1865).
The buzzword bingo management "Deliver on a integrated streamlined customer experience with inline analytics to deliver sharedholder value" culture strikes again.
I don't understand this result. How would this experiment be able to detect the "antigravity" of antimatter? If the Earth is curving space time in one direction and then antimatter is curving space time in the opposite direction, would not relative impact of the antimatter be so negligible to be undetectable? We are talking about the ability to "unbend" space time of what a particle or two relative to the mass of the earth? So what if it falls, that just means its barely unbending space time.
To use an analogy, Let's say I am on the Amazon river (fastest river according to google). You want to detect which way I was swimming. Would you even be able to detect the marginal effects of me swimming upstream relative to the massively more impactful force from the river?
I am sure the problem here is me, so if someone can correct my thinking.
You're making a very interesting distinction between the experimental result, which is that antimatter follows the same space-time curve as normal matter, and the dashed hope of warp drives, which is that antimatter causes the same space-time curve as normal matter.
However, if antimatter were to create a negative curvature but follow positive curvature, then you would be able to put a lump of normal matter next to a lump of antimatter, connect the two together, and the whole mechanism would spontaneously accelerate forever, breaking the laws of conservation of energy and momentum. For that reason, I think this experiment also gives us high confidence that antimatter causes exactly the same space-time curvature as normal matter, even though we haven't gathered enough antimatter to see it creating a normal space-time curvature. In essence, gravity is symmetrical.
To my understanding, the researchers released antimatter particles with detector plates above and below them. The particles started out traveling in random directions. Some of the particles hit the top, some hit the bottom. They saw that more particles hit the bottom than the top.
If the particles had "anti-gravity", they'd be repulsed by the large mass of the earth (instead of attracted), and you'd have expected more to hit the top plate than the bottom plate.
The researchers also added a magnet to the top designed to cancel out the downward force from gravity, and they hit the top and bottom plate at even rates.
Positrons react with electrons to produce a distinctive pair of 511 keV photons travelling in opposite directions in the frame of reference of their collision.
There's also a much more complex mess that happens when protons react with antiprotons.
> To use an analogy, Let's say I am on the Amazon river (fastest river according to google). You want to detect which way I was swimming. Would you even be able to detect the marginal effects of me swimming upstream relative to the massively more impactful force from the river?
Definitely yes! If you're even a reasonably competent swimmer you should be able to outswim the Amazon and make headway upstream at most points.
I'm not sure what this says about your analogy, but I would think the measurement devices are millions of times more sensitive than needed to detect which way you were swimming.
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."
The government has proven they aren't angels we can trust.