25 years of mass surveillance is enough • Hacker News Board

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#381

Post by int_19h » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 4:19 AM UTC

Havoc wrote: post #224

Pannoniae wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how not? All of this is "soft" control, if tomorrow 75% of the people in any country decided "this can't keep on going on", all relevant public buildings would be occupied everywhere and the relevant government imprisoned promptly. On a more positive note, the fact that this doesn't happen indicates things aren't that bad right now. No amount of KYC or age verification can stop large amounts of angry people who want…

>if tomorrow 75% of the people in any country decided No kings protests was a very respectable effort....peaked at 2.3%. Even the current administration inept as it is is basically home free on this one. Senate neutered, Courts sidelined, Treasury subjugated, loyalist in charge of military, JAG core silenced, secondary personal goons squad established and lavishly funded, Social media captured, Stats department disma…

The thing about most US protests is that they are almost entirely performative by now. Marching with a sign simply doesn't do anything.

Actual serious protests would involve stuff like massive strikes, for example, and other disruptions that actually hurt.

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#382

Post by int_19h » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 4:24 AM UTC

maerF0x0 wrote: post #81

I suspect that Mass Surveillance is here for good, and the real project is to regain control of who gains the power and benefits. There are dozens if not 100s of ways that mass surveillance can improve human life. There are also as many where it can be abused to create suffering. I think the real issue is we're trending to the latter. In order to safely continue down this path we (USA) need: 1. EU style governmental…

There's no good ending to this, and you're probably correct that we're likely heading that way anyway, but the only rational choice at this point is to resist as much as possible - best case, it buys us time for some way out to appear; worst case, it delays the shitshow.

Anything that can be done to frustrate both the government and the private companies pushing for it should be done. Every lever should be pulled. No compromise should be accepted, because it's just setting up the stage for the next compromise where the other side stays where it is and the "middle point" just gradually moves toward them.

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#383

Post by int_19h » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 4:26 AM UTC

nonethewiser wrote: post #270

abustamam wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm Muslim. Born in the US. I've seen politicians and right wing public figures call my entire faith anti-American. One of them just had a nice memorial for their one-year since their death. The term may have had an agreed upon meaning at some point, but not anymore. Edit: it seems like most right-wing people conflate "non-Christian" with "anti-American". i don't know what's worse; the fact that these people say and…

It doesn’t have to have an agreed upon meaning. My point is its not inherently bad to think something is anti-American. In fact, treating the very idea of judging something as “anti-American” as inherently illegitimate is quite literally anti-American. Its saying Americans shouldn’t be allowed to have opinions about what their country stands for.

"Enemy of the people" is also not inherently illegitimate - I mean, the people can surely have enemies, right?

But words and phrases like that have a history of actual use and the resulting connotations.

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#384

Post by int_19h » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 4:39 AM UTC

asaddhamani wrote: post #228

hax0ron3 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the trans acceptance movement's main problems comes, as is often the case in politics, from some of its most militant and passionate activists. To put it simply, those extreme activists overreached and annoyed people. That's not the fault of trans people in general, but it explains some of the backlash and the focus on niche cases. Basically, the activists I'm talking about overreached by: - Pushing for speech…

“Militant” trans activists? How is just using someone’s pronouns “speech control”? It’s no different than using a name. If trans people tell you who they are, just believe them, it’s not that hard. There’s nothing mythical about the ongoing trans genocide. Genocides don’t just happen in gas chambers. https://translegislation.com/ I am not going to say much more here because I’m fairly certain none of this will get th…

One example that I had personally run into is when the person was offended when they were referred to as "them" because being gender neutral is, apparently, "erasure" (I didn't get a chance to ask what they think about languages with no gendered pronouns).

Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough

#385

Post by philipallstar » Thu, Sep 17, 2026, 6:40 AM UTC

int_19h wrote: post #380

philipallstar wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try seeing how much net tax a government employee pays. It's in the negatives. Or a benefits recipient.

The government employee at least earns their salary by actual labor. Whereas anyone on the "top N richest" list is a parasite on all the people who produce wealth.

> The government employee at least earns their salary by actual labor.

They may or may not do much useful - government tends to grow regardless of output, because it doesn't need to earn its money. All you know for sure is a government employee pays no taxes, and so contributes nothing to anything like roads, public services, etc etc, and takes taxes away from the people who are net contributors.