About the age limits in the use of the Internet

https://kirjabloggaus.blogspot.com/

Kimmo Huosionmaa

Google has prohibited the use of its services from persons, who are under 16, here in Finland. 16 is the limit when people are responsible for their crimes in the eyes of the law, and they can put jail. The reason for choosing the age of 16 in Finland is probably, that other persons would make Google accounts in the name of people, who is under the age of criminal responsibility.


And maybe some hackers or other persons, who have used the Internet for the illegal purposes, like spamming the parliamentarians, are opened their accounts in the name of underage persons, whose names and pictures got from schools or neighbors. If some hacker can get the names of the pupils, this criminal can steal their identity by using their names and birthdays and then start the actions as the official supporter of the Russian Federation.


The telephone number can also be faked, or it can be prepaid, but this kind of things makes that suspicious. Use of underage person identity on the Internet is the very bad thing because the usage of those accounts is sometimes very different, what child's world should be, and the international politics and terrorism are the things, what should not be written by some 12 years, if that person is not some extreme intelligent youngster.


The thing, what makes the account suspected for use in illegal actions, is that some 12 years old probably would not support Vladimir Putin or show the pictures of assault rifles. This means that the actions of that account are different than the other that age person's accounts have. Another way to see the texts is that if the text would not fit the writer. The real prisoner would not probably like police, or homeless would not like to live on the streets. But if some prisoner starts to like the things, what is working against their benefits, the account would be stolen. Those accounts can be put under the surveillance, and if they are used by mobile devices, the person can be located quite easily.


And if in the table of the restaurant, where that device is located finds any children, but telephone sends messages, there is a reason to suspect that some other person than the marked user of the account is using that account. One thing, what makes the account suspicious is that is used only from the public hotspots. That means that the user would want to hide the existence of that account.

How can the law enforcement work with science?

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/how-can-law-enforcement-work-with.html

Kimmo Huosionmaa

Have you ever thought to go to the police station, and tell the officer, that somebody makes clones of humans? One reason for making those clones might be the attempt to get stem cells for some cancer patients. Or the mean for those clones might be growing organs for wealthy patients. Also, the reason for those actions might keep some military operations secret. In this case, military personnel might clone some special forces operators for the case that some of them would die. If there would be the clone as available that would hide the loss of some operator.

When we are thinking about laws and their relationship with laws and science, we must understand, that the laws are only texts in some book. Even if the laws prohibited some actions, that text is useless in the situation, that somebody wants to break the law. And the criminals are persons, who brake the law. Even if some country would deny something, would the law be only the text, if it would not enforce by authorities? Do you believe, that somebody would go to police station, and tells to some officer, that there would be suspected clone experiments in the area of those policemen and -women? In the laws of cloning is only one thing, what we always forget, and that is the enforcement.


In some clinics in the Far East can any person buy silicone implanted and maybe the making of clones is the same kind of thing as some silicone implanted. And those clinics do change the genres or fixing surgery without any juridical sanctions and talking with psychiatrists. So I sometimes think that those clinics might also the giving infertility treatments without a necessary talking with parents, and those treatments are more invincible and easier to give than some plastic surgery.


When we are thinking about the ethics of those clinics, they would not always care nothing else than money. The cloning humans are not more difficult than cloning some "Dolly" sheep, the same technology would work with humans. In that technique, the genomes inside the nucleus of the cell would replace by another genome. And if somebody wants, can those clinics make the clones. And then we must ask, who would control those clinics?


If the police don't control even the medicines, how it could control the cloning of humans? Have you ever thought, what kind reaction would you see in the local police station, if you would go there, and say, that somebody would make clones of humans? The problems of the laws, what purpose is to limit cloning, must we say that there are not many authorities, who would listen, persons, who make reports about this kind of things. This kind of things are only the conspiracy theory, and the persons, who would tell about this kind of actions to authorities will send to mental institute for taking little cure for their symptoms. And how normal police would control those things.

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/how-can-law-enforcement-work-with.html

The science of statistics can help to find criminals

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/the-science-of-statistics-can-help-to.html

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/the-science-of-statistics-can-help-to.html

How are the ancient gods made?

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/how-are-ancient-gods-made.html

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/how-are-ancient-gods-made.html

Why media will handle only a negative part of the life?

Kimmo Huosionmaa


The problem with media is that there will ever be introduced an average person's life. A person who is the main character in documents and movies is always some kind of ultimate version of people what represented of some lifestyle, what is introduced in those programs. Do you think that Pablo Escobar is some kind of an average version of the drug dealer? That man had billions of cash, but does some so-called “street level"'drug dealer that kind of money, or does he even dream about that, when that person hangs around some shopping center and sells some crack-capsules. What made Escobar so frightening person, was his money.


He could hire mercenaries to support his reputation. But I always thought that Escobar was only a shield man for some other actors in that dirty business. If people have money, he could do almost everything, but if he want’s to hire a mercenary, must he have the right relationships. Nobody wants to get smoked that the person has been worked as a mercenary. That’s why they take jobs only from agents who they trust. And being mercenary in somewhere Africa is the little bit different than making murders in normal western State. If a person will smoke that he is an assassin, will he or she punish by the court of law? The line of that kind of people is extremely tough. Those prisoners ever get out from prison.


But in those cases like Escobar, we might see what is the direction, where media sometimes goes. I don't know why they are not writing about guys who were in gangs and after that, they began to live a normal life without any problems. Why the objective of those documents is always so negative? They always begin that kind of problems with interest, but soon after intros, the journalist really begins to show really bad attitude for that case. They just are beginning to find some errors in that case, and sometimes the information what has been given to people is very grotesque.


They bring in front of the public eye some that targets friends, who might be in jail. But they never tell to people, why those people were arrested and what was a crime, where convictions came. And of course, they never tell to people, how long those "criminals" were been in jail. Only thing what is mentioned, has been that those persons are convicted for some crimes. If we see that kind of journalism realistic, we must be naive.


There is always news where drug user brutally killed the people who helped them. But when we are taking a focus in those stories, we must realize that narcotics users might be very dangerous and unpredictable because they have hallucinations. But when we are talking about those cases, there have been only a couple of that kind of cases in the Europe. And didn't anyone told those people, that if somebody uses drugs, he might be blackmail by his fellows to let them in?


And why reporters only take this kind of crimes on the front pages of newspapers? In here I must ask, is the help what came to those persons so altruistic at all? Why they bought a cell phone to that guy? I know that these are the most brutal worlds, what anybody can write, but didn't anybody tell to those people, that money should ever give drug user or alcoholics. They just buy more drugs with that money. When narcotics control the person, he or she might not able to control his or her actions, and that's why those people might be dangerous. But why media tells stories about only those cases, what ended sadly way?

https://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/