Schoolgirls who defied the Stasi

As interesting is that English language Wikipedia chooses to pick out that minority, but more US-typical, view - I suspect German language Wiki may emphasise it differently, whilst being equally neutral. :)

The Abwehr and SiPo, later Stasi and NKVD/KGB habit of adding people to lists - of elites, of jews, of defectives that are to be corrected, reformed or exterminated may be thought far more responsible than the current generation. As someone who was thought privacy conscious even prior to Snowden, I'm astonished the Dutch, Poles, British etc haven't turned out as strident on privacy as the Germans. There was a SiPo list, and Gestapo list of British elites and trouble makers to be eliminated on invasion, the Poles and Dutch had their lists actioned etc. All the former Eastern bloc had their own oppressive security apparatus just as long as the GDR.

> Whilst it is possible to learn from both, only one is a reinforced lesson.

As an aside that is why I am vehemently against the modern trend for professional politicians - that gave us mainly wealthy elites playing at it. Even if still young I want politicians with experience of a stint of war or at least in the military, of extreme poverty, of manufacturing, or healthcare etc. Those types of things used to be the reason one went into politics.

You are projecting your personal framing of a particular problem space onto all other people and then further framing it as some kind of objective and irrefutable truth.

I spent a lot of time in therapy, so I don't suffer a lot of existential guilt. I've generally walked the walk on things I believe in, so I don't have a lot of guilt of the type you are describing.

I'm not unaware of the fact that anyone can potentially find themselves tossed in jail over basically bullshit reasons. This happens at times to tourists who are doing nothing wrong according to the law of their country, but it's a serious offense in the country they are visiting.

My last boyfriend spent three years in prison in his youth for his political activism. He also was trying to talk me into illegal activities that would have benefitted him and not particularly endangered him. He tried to justify this with reasoning similar to yours.

So I've had plenty of opportunity to think about such things and my mental framework is likely not anything I can adequately explain in a single comment on HN.

But perhaps an anecdote will have a modicum of value.

I had food stamps for part of the time that I was homeless. Food stamps cannot be used for non food items and it is illegal to convert them to cash by, for example, offering to buy groceries for someone in exchange for cash for a portion of the value.

There is one loophole that I know of: food stamps cover the CRV, a charge on cans and bottles in California. You can then take the cans and bottles back for a cash refund after consuming the contents.

A lot of homeless people break the law regularly as a matter of course merely to survive or merely by existing. I no doubt was breaking the law every single night by sleeping someplace I wasn't supposed to be.

But I didn't use that as an excuse to justify doing any damn thing I wanted and to hell with the law. I did my best to find legal ways to get my needs met to the best of my ability.

While homeless, I was repeatedly offered money for sex in a state where prostitution is illegal. I have zero moral qualms about the idea, but was celibate for medical reasons, so wasn't tempted to take the money. I also had it hinted to me that I could potentially get scads of money from some guy I knew if I would launder some of his money. I ended our so called friendship.

Among other things, I run several blogs to put out useful info for homeless Americans. I do this in part to try to point them to practical legal solutions that have some hope of actually working.

I also do my best to put out good information on what we can do to actually improve things in a way that will help address the issue of homelessness. I'm aware that it is a genuinely hard problem. I have done a lot of research and I try to educate people while keeping the information accessible in a way that conceptually simplifies a complex issue without distorting it or watering it down.

I believe the solution to the issue you are wrapped around the axel about is twofold:

1. Educate people about what they can do to get their needs met that is legal.

2. Increase the availability of viable, legal solutions.

I do my best to walk the walk on that conceptualization of the problem space. I'm aware I'm only one person and there is only so much I can do, so either the road rises up to meet me or I'm doomed anyway.

I'm plenty frustrated at the fact that the road mostly does not appear to be rising up to meet me when it comes to certain things. But that's not on me. That's mostly on other people and their shit.

My websites don't get a lot of traffic, nor do they make much money. Other people mostly are not promoting nor supporting my work.

In fact, I get actively stonewalled. For example, I was thrown off of Metafilter, nominally for "promoting my websites." It's basically a cesspit of classist asshats, so my real crime is probably something more like "having the ridiculous expectation of being treated like a human being."

The world has hung plenty of it's baggage on me already, thank you. I have no plans to agree to accept more of it. That includes yours.

If you worked on your framing, you might find that we agree on a lot of things. Of course, you aren't obligated to do that. I am equally not obligated to agree with how you choose to frame it.

Well, I for one, never even knew the backstory. I wouldn't assume most do.

Could be a few that have grievances against you or something.

I've noticed that some people, on online forums, get an obsession with another they had a dispute with (and felt wronged or whatever), and follow them from post to post, gather intelligence, and act like stalkers. Then again, some people are cuckoo with no personal lives and compensate in all kinds of bizarro ways online. Best to ignore those kind of people...

>I would thank you to stop trying to police my participation here.

I'm not policing anyone, I'm offering my opinion. Likewise, I would thank you to stop being paranoid, and either respond to what I said or ignore it. Not respond on some imagined "intentions".

>You have something of a history of treating me like an idiot.

Actually, I have absolutely no recollection of who you are, and of having treated you like anything. I don't even remember the name "DoreenMichele" or having had a history of discussing with you, or whatever.

If I indeed have a history of treating you like an idiot, it's not because I go out of my way to treat that particular username (which I don't recognize and don't follow across threads) as an idiot.

It's either because I treat almost everybody like an idiot (which I might tend to), or because your individual (non-connected as belonging to a single person to me) comments over threads pushed the same kind of buttons on my responses (e.g. because you tend to make comments that I tend to disagree with and respond in a certain way to).

In any case, I don't go around keeping tabs. For most people I talk with on HN, I only ever remember the names/opinions of a few frequenter commenters which tend to commend often and on the same things so end up as identifiable, e.g. pjmlp has a soft spot for older languages, research compilers and so on, dang is one of the moderators, tcpatec is a security boffin, and so on. I only recognize as specific people on HN something like 10 persons or so, the majority are just opaque aliases that tell me nothing when I see them, even if I have engaged in threads with them at various times.

>If you are not consciously aware of doing that, well, consider yourself notified that I have noticed a pattern of behavior here and it's something I don't like and don't want done to me.

Well, the problem is I seldom ever check who I respond to. I mostly check what's written in their comment and whether it triggers a "somebody is wrong on the internet" / "I must respond to this" sentiment. I might glance at their username, but in most cases I wouldn't even remember it.

I could do some effort to check for your name and not respond in the future. In fact, if there's something like "block" I could use that and spare us the drama.