Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

25 years of mass surveillance is enough

schneier.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 384 posts

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#41

Post by voakbasda »

cik wrote: post #24
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a fellow trans woman, we've been the scapegoat for reactionaries, at least documented, since the rise of the Third Reich. And if we're honest, probably before that. Fixing society-scale problems is really hard. Being angry at people who make you feel a bit weird inside is easy. People reliably choose easy.

I'm not going to pretend to understand your stuggle, but I will echo it through my lens. I am not trying to hijack your point, inasmuch support it with my view. I uses to think that it was about fear of the unknown, or as you've said "Being angry at people who make you feel a bit weird inside". I now firmly believe that it's a modern form of tribalism. Having an "other", whether as a scapegoat, a fear inducing device…

One look no further than Vietnam for how the government learned to use intranational xenophobia to manipulate different slices of the public into identifying as separate groups that could then be played off of each other. Since then, there has never been as successful a political movement, because we have been turned against each other by state-driven manipulation. AFAIK, this is well-documented policy intended to “maintain civil order” (i.e. prevent the revolution that is so richly deserved).

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#42

Post by rickdeckard »

smallmancontrov wrote: post #31
rickdeckard wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, because by the new definition, the leader is "peak American", so everything in collision with his view is naturally "anti-American". The usage of the term "anti-American" by anyone in a public role should be rejected as insufficient definition and unfit for a representative to use. On the spot, immediately. Is it anti-American to brush your teeth after breakfast? or rather before? Is both American? Neither…

When Trump calls Democrats "enemies from within," that's anti-American. When Trump refuses to peacefully transfer power to his victorious opponent and instead plays "heads I win tails you cheated," that's anti-American. When Trump sends the FCC chair to suppress speech "we can do this the easy way or the hard way," or yucks it up with the president of El Salvador over suspending Habeas Corpus, that's anti-American. T…

While I understand the intention of what you're saying, you're still attempting a definition of the term "anti-American", which needs no definition as the term should be rejected as a whole.

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#43

Post by asaddhamani »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #39
asaddhamani wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn’t a problem to begin with. Meta studies recently showed trans women have no biological advantage over cis women after HRT, certainly nothing than cis women don’t have biological variation within anyway. All the rule updates did was exclude and further marginalise an already marginalised extreme minority. There are very few trans women to begin with, fewer of us still are competing in sports. Nothing was studi…

And as a fellow enjoyer of HRT, I assure you it didn't enhance shit for me, beyond what I was hoping to get: longer, more full hair, boobies, and smoother skin. My muscles are gone y'all. Like I've had to buy more breaker bars and larger tools so I can keep working on my cars, otherwise I simply could not break bolts anymore.

Btw, feel free to reach out to me I love connecting with fellow trans women in tech :)

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#44

Post by paimapi »

RajT88 wrote: post #13

> It says that the government “will prioritize the rapid identification and neutralization of violent secular political groups whose ideology is anti-American, radically pro-transgender and anarchist” and “will use all the tools constitutionally available to us to map them at home, identify their membership, map their ties to international organizations like Antifa.” So, Democratic candidates who are looking like the…

another important part isn't just the ideology targeting - it's the directive for local and national law enforcement for form Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs) targeting individuals and organizations in this vein. JTTFs are already mobilized and targeting people - see https://atlpresscollective.com/2026/06/12/federal-prosecutor...

I think of that poem, First They Came:

  First they came for the Communists
  And I did not speak out
  Because I was not a Communist
  Then they came for the Socialists
  And I did not speak out
  Because I was not a Socialist
  Then they came for the trade unionists
  And I did not speak out
  Because I was not a trade unionist
  Then they came for the Jews
  And I did not speak out
  Because I was not a Jew
  Then they came for me
  And there was no one left
  To speak out for me
replace 'Jews' with the current minoritized target demographic (ie immigrants of any stripe) and we're already fairly far down that list. see the case of David Huerta for the targeting of unions: https://www.courthousenews.com/los-angeles-labor-leader-arre...

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#45

Post by pc86 »

smallmancontrov wrote: post #31
rickdeckard wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, because by the new definition, the leader is "peak American", so everything in collision with his view is naturally "anti-American". The usage of the term "anti-American" by anyone in a public role should be rejected as insufficient definition and unfit for a representative to use. On the spot, immediately. Is it anti-American to brush your teeth after breakfast? or rather before? Is both American? Neither…

When Trump calls Democrats "enemies from within," that's anti-American. When Trump refuses to peacefully transfer power to his victorious opponent and instead plays "heads I win tails you cheated," that's anti-American. When Trump sends the FCC chair to suppress speech "we can do this the easy way or the hard way," or yucks it up with the president of El Salvador over suspending Habeas Corpus, that's anti-American. T…

> When Trump refuses to peacefully transfer power to his victorious opponent

When did this happen? I didn't realize Biden wasn't inaugurated. I could have sworn he was the President for 4 years.

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#46

Post by smallmancontrov »

pc86 wrote: post #45
smallmancontrov wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Trump calls Democrats "enemies from within," that's anti-American. When Trump refuses to peacefully transfer power to his victorious opponent and instead plays "heads I win tails you cheated," that's anti-American. When Trump sends the FCC chair to suppress speech "we can do this the easy way or the hard way," or yucks it up with the president of El Salvador over suspending Habeas Corpus, that's anti-American. T…

> When Trump refuses to peacefully transfer power to his victorious opponent When did this happen? I didn't realize Biden wasn't inaugurated. I could have sworn he was the President for 4 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_January_6_Unit...

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#47

Post by pc86 »

rickdeckard wrote: post #42
smallmancontrov wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Trump calls Democrats "enemies from within," that's anti-American. When Trump refuses to peacefully transfer power to his victorious opponent and instead plays "heads I win tails you cheated," that's anti-American. When Trump sends the FCC chair to suppress speech "we can do this the easy way or the hard way," or yucks it up with the president of El Salvador over suspending Habeas Corpus, that's anti-American. T…

While I understand the intention of what you're saying, you're still attempting a definition of the term "anti-American", which needs no definition as the term should be rejected as a whole.

I mean, to pick what is perhaps the easiest example, wanting to abridge speech is anti-American by its very definition.

It is possible to have a thing that is anti-American. So I'm not sure what good it is to reject the term altogether.

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#48

Post by parineum »

rickdeckard wrote: post #42
smallmancontrov wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Trump calls Democrats "enemies from within," that's anti-American. When Trump refuses to peacefully transfer power to his victorious opponent and instead plays "heads I win tails you cheated," that's anti-American. When Trump sends the FCC chair to suppress speech "we can do this the easy way or the hard way," or yucks it up with the president of El Salvador over suspending Habeas Corpus, that's anti-American. T…

While I understand the intention of what you're saying, you're still attempting a definition of the term "anti-American", which needs no definition as the term should be rejected as a whole.

Not really. America stands for something, they wrote a whole document about it.

There is a big difference between being "American" and being something like "German" because Germany has existed for so long as different governments and the thing that ties it together is not an ethos, but an ethnicity. Being American is different, there's no ethnicity that makes one American, there is only it's ethos. The ideals written in the declaration of independence are American values.

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#49

Post by pc86 »

smallmancontrov wrote: post #46
pc86 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When Trump refuses to peacefully transfer power to his victorious opponent When did this happen? I didn't realize Biden wasn't inaugurated. I could have sworn he was the President for 4 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_January_6_Unit...

I'm skimming the "Aftermath" section and I'm not seeing where Biden's inauguration was cancelled or Trump retained power or anything else? If Trump "refused to peacefully transfer power" how was power peacefully transferred to Biden exactly on schedule the same way it's happened in every other election?

I do see this happened on Jan 7th though:

> 7:10 p.m.: Shortly after Twitter unlocked Trump's account, Trump released a video statement condemning the violence at the Capitol, saying that "a new administration will be inaugurated" and that his "focus now turns to ensuring a smooth, orderly, and seamless transition of power" to the Biden administration.

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#50

Post by datsci_est_2015 »

N_Lens wrote: post #33
api wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet there's incentive structures that push it forward. It's a classic example of us being dragged along by incentives and emergent patterns against our individual wills and better judgement. People think it's a conspiracy of the elite, but the last part of your message is true and it makes me wonder to what extent everyone is being dragged along by everyone else and nobody can stop because nobody can stop. I mean if…

I mostly agree with your take. The ultra wealthy are entrapped by their own minds & machines of wealth that have tight demands.

And yet they still hold immense power to make our lives shittier. It is far easier to destroy a functioning system than it is to build one from the ground up
Post reply on HN