71–80 of 94 posts
Here's hoping that the free time slots are now filled with talks that discuss ways to escape the surveillance state. Particularly how systems for the use of masses could be erected.
Even if the "feds" aren't officially invited to run a booth and take applications, they're gonna show up anyways probably three weeks before the event to install facial recognition cameras and audio recording bugs in all the hotel rooms (;
Wouldn't you want to hold a conference like this in a place where all surveillance equipment were not standard so you can spot them as anomalies in the surroundings?
I would imagine that every single person that has attended is on the list of people whose communications are stored indefinitely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Government loves to really up the public with the us vs them rhetoric so they definitely deserve a dose of their own medicine. That sounds like it would increase the us-vs-them rhetoric, not decrease it.
No pill can heal that wound. Imagine you're a Government worker with 15y of experience. You would automagically think about the public as "them". If you're an Admin or IT-Guy, you "already" do that, by separating you from the "Common User". And guess what, there is nothing wrong with this. It doesn't produce bad habits or bad intentions, because this is totally dependant on the persons character.
>It doesn't produce bad habits or bad intentions, because this is totally dependant on the persons character.
Science:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have no respect for the NSA and its apologists, period. Do you lack respect for those people, or their arguments?
Your comment made me think of something.. Let me ask you: THe NSA in specific and the intelligence community in general clearly believes that the information about, opinions of and actions by equate to "a person" -- if they did not, they would not be surveilling what they are. Your question of whether I respect the "people" or their "arguments", appears to me, to be loaded. It's as if you're attempting to determine i…
How about the janitor who sweeps the bathroom floor at the NSA? Is he or she an enemy of humanity?
Hopefully you would conclude otherwise for both, but now you run into the situation where you have to judge individual actions and not just collective membership when assessing who is, or is not, an enemy of humanity. Note that I haven't even had to try to stick up for those 'just following orders'.
By all means, judge people on what they do; judge ideas on their own merits; that's all I've ever asked for myself. Just remember that sometimes good work may come from organizations that you consider evil. Imagine how we would have thought of the infamous Nazi Oskar Schindler, before we knew the real story of his factory.
Likewise, good people may have bad ideas, and those with good ideas are not necessarily good people trying to lead you to a good goal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ugh this fear mixed with cynicism is so gross! Ordinary Citizens have always been the driving force behind every major change in this country. Talk to everyone you can about this and for Christ's sake try a little positivity!
> Ordinary Citizens have always been the driving force behind every major change in this country Sooo cute.
DEC CON is trying to retain some aspects of the community it cares about in order to prevent it from completely evolving into a pentagon pony show. You missed the point completely, your post is a contradiction and way off base.
P1) This is a place for those who believe in openness, sharing, and mutual gain.
P2) Feds have been hiding the fact that they've been screwing us all along.
Conclusion: This isn't a place for Feds.
The blog posts states: "...but rather a continuation of openness that this event has always encouraged." But this is exactly why the Feds aren't allowed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with your sentiment. It's worthwhile to note that people have often stated that the Constitution is not a "suicide pact". We are free (as a people) do what needs to be done to preserve our union. Whatever your political persuasion, it cannot be denied that bad actors are trying to coordinate and plan attacks against "soft" targets inside the United States and abroad. This is not a theoretical problem. It's re…
"The Constitution is not a suicide pact" is a quote from Abraham Lincoln, as the civil war really was an existential threat to the union itself. Similarly, the cold war was clearly an existential threat to the union itself, the most obvious example being the hundreds of nuclear ICBM's in Cuba. Terrorism of the Boston Marathon sort is now an unfortunate reality, but is in no way comparable to these two events, and I s…
Non-state terrorism is an evolving and emergent threat that's been amplified by the interconnected global world we live in.
9/11 spawned two wars and countless societal changes.
The geopolitical landscape has changed and we would be foolish to ignore it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with your sentiment. It's worthwhile to note that people have often stated that the Constitution is not a "suicide pact". We are free (as a people) do what needs to be done to preserve our union. Whatever your political persuasion, it cannot be denied that bad actors are trying to coordinate and plan attacks against "soft" targets inside the United States and abroad. This is not a theoretical problem. It's re…
"The Constitution is not a suicide pact" is a quote from Abraham Lincoln, as the civil war really was an existential threat to the union itself. Similarly, the cold war was clearly an existential threat to the union itself, the most obvious example being the hundreds of nuclear ICBM's in Cuba. Terrorism of the Boston Marathon sort is now an unfortunate reality, but is in no way comparable to these two events, and I s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comment made me think of something.. Let me ask you: THe NSA in specific and the intelligence community in general clearly believes that the information about, opinions of and actions by equate to "a person" -- if they did not, they would not be surveilling what they are. Your question of whether I respect the "people" or their "arguments", appears to me, to be loaded. It's as if you're attempting to determine i…
So the mathematician at NSA who developed the SHA-1 algorithm that underlies a lot of higher-level crypto primitives... is he an oppressor or an individual making a positive contribution to the collective good? How about the janitor who sweeps the bathroom floor at the NSA? Is he or she an enemy of humanity? Hopefully you would conclude otherwise for both, but now you run into the situation where you have to judge in…
Your question about the "janitor" is ridiculous. While he's the lowest on the pawn totem, I am specifically talking a out those who know that they have created the systems designed to spy on every man woman and child on the planet.
If you cannot separate these people from those in a janitorial position, then you're clearly attempting to sideline the discussion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The Constitution is not a suicide pact" is a quote from Abraham Lincoln, as the civil war really was an existential threat to the union itself. Similarly, the cold war was clearly an existential threat to the union itself, the most obvious example being the hundreds of nuclear ICBM's in Cuba. Terrorism of the Boston Marathon sort is now an unfortunate reality, but is in no way comparable to these two events, and I s…
And you're wrong about the quote sourcing.
It's more interesting in the context of Lincoln's suspension of Habeus corpus in the Civil War than as an unpopular dissenting opinion in a free speech case, though.