Academics Against Mass Surveillance • Hacker News Board

Re: Academics Against Mass Surveillance

#11

Post by plg » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 5:35 PM UTC

pdkl95 wrote: post #10

plg wrote: post #3

Is anyone else thinking that this is like signing up for a no-spam list? In other words, an invitation for spam?

As several of the recent 30c3 talks mentioned, the concept of "being a target" doesn't really apply when the goal is ubiquitous surveillance.

I'm not so sure about that. Isn't there an argument that goes like this: if there is indeed ubiquitous, mass surveillance, in other words if "everyone is a target", then doesn't that just move the problem back to a sort of baseline, where authorities still need to identify targets? (or sub-targets, if you like)

In any case I'm glad to see so many people signing this petition. It would be great if it had more populist support.

Re: Academics Against Mass Surveillance

#12

Post by MofR » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 5:46 PM UTC

pdkl95 wrote: post #7

f_salmon wrote: post #5

Shouldn't the US list be much, much longer taking into account the size of the various countries?

Yes, it should be. Instead, we see an example of chilling-effect created by surveillance.

OR - Most academic never heard of 'acedemicsagainstmasssurvalence' and know form bitter experience that signing a petition from some unknown group could end up with them claiming to speak on your behalf in the future.

Re: Academics Against Mass Surveillance

#13

Post by dobbsbob » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 6:04 PM UTC

I don't agree with petitions. Not only do they get ignored but here they use it against you in politics later when public opinion changes, plus it's a list for marketers. Instead harass your local representative mercilessly with letters and espcially angry phone calls those get noticed eventually.

Re: Academics Against Mass Surveillance

#14

Post by yodsanklai » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 6:11 PM UTC

I suppose pretty much everybody is against mass surveillance, academics or not. But what choice do we have? I think the problem is that we don't really live in democracies. It's not only mass surveillance, but also wars, inequalities and so on...

Re: Academics Against Mass Surveillance

#15

Post by twoodfin » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 7:26 PM UTC

f_salmon wrote: post #6

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #2

While I agree in principle, opposing surveillance is like pissing into the wind. Privacy is becoming extinct. Soon devices and technologies will be impossible to regulate - specks of dust that record sound and location; recorders that stick to clothing, hair, skin; phones and tablets that come pre-infected in their OS and hardware. We can oppose it, and maybe stave off for a few years, but inevitably we are all going…

> Better to design new social mechanisms to protect against misuse of the data, than try and prevent its collection. The only way to achieve this, is to eliminate EVERY kind of asymmetry in society (which we should have achieved a long time ago, since we all always pretend that every life has the exact same value). If you keep any kind of asymmetry within society and accept mass surveillance, democracy is dead becaus…

which we should have achieved a long time ago, since we all always pretend that every life has the exact same value

I don't think we've ever pretended this. We've "pretended" that all men are created equal, but what anyone does from there has a great impact on how society will value them. And why not? Two guys created equal: One spends his life on his parents' couch, the other becomes Bill Gates or Michael Jordan. Which one should we value more?

Re: Academics Against Mass Surveillance

#16

Post by herbig » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 7:34 PM UTC

yodsanklai wrote: post #14

I suppose pretty much everybody is against mass surveillance, academics or not. But what choice do we have? I think the problem is that we don't really live in democracies. It's not only mass surveillance, but also wars, inequalities and so on...

I don't know, I've been surprised by just how many of the people I know either don't know anything at all about this, or simply don't care.

Re: Academics Against Mass Surveillance

#17

Post by BrownBuffalo » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 7:42 PM UTC

herbig wrote: post #16

yodsanklai wrote: post #14

I suppose pretty much everybody is against mass surveillance, academics or not. But what choice do we have? I think the problem is that we don't really live in democracies. It's not only mass surveillance, but also wars, inequalities and so on...

I don't know, I've been surprised by just how many of the people I know either don't know anything at all about this, or simply don't care.

This also plays out in the turn-out of voters on election day - its just a disconnect in community. Not saying its bad -or- good, but its reflective of how diluted our outlets are and the lack of trust we all have in everything and it becomes a culture of indifference.

Re: Academics Against Mass Surveillance

#18

Post by javajosh » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 7:45 PM UTC

Anyone who throws their hands up in the air (and I'm talking to you yodsanklai and JoeAltmaier, dobbsbob...and basically 80% of the people on this thread) but YOU are a big part of the problem. It doesn't matter even if the petition is totally ineffectual to change things on it's own: it's value is in it's very existence, and it signals a strong position against something that is very, very wrong with our society at the moment. No movement ever started fully formed like Aphrodite from the head of Zues - they all must start somewhere.

So please, if you agree with the desired outcome, why would you naysay ANY attempt to change things, no matter how "naive" or "ineffectual" or "pointless"? Is it not better to have good people speaking truth to power, even if they are not listened to?

All I ask is that you consider this question before criticizing someone else's attempt to advocate for positions that you yourselves agree with.

Re: Academics Against Mass Surveillance

#19

Post by lectrick » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 8:17 PM UTC

yodsanklai wrote: post #14

I suppose pretty much everybody is against mass surveillance, academics or not. But what choice do we have? I think the problem is that we don't really live in democracies. It's not only mass surveillance, but also wars, inequalities and so on...

Any country in charge of its own currency can always fund a war without a vote by simply printing more of it for itself (debasing the currency of course via "invisible tax"), which is why I support cryptocurrencies.

Any person who is OK with mass surveillance has clearly never seen the movie The Lives of Others ("Das Leben der Anderen," yes it's German with English subtitles, deal with it) http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_lives_of_others/ because to watch that movie is to watch the fall of a country which was destroyed by "too much introspection," as it were.

Re: Academics Against Mass Surveillance

#20

Post by JoeAltmaier » Fri, Jan 03, 2014, 8:34 PM UTC

salient wrote: post #9

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #2

While I agree in principle, opposing surveillance is like pissing into the wind. Privacy is becoming extinct. Soon devices and technologies will be impossible to regulate - specks of dust that record sound and location; recorders that stick to clothing, hair, skin; phones and tablets that come pre-infected in their OS and hardware. We can oppose it, and maybe stave off for a few years, but inevitably we are all going…

Of course we can oppose surveillance. We can build anti-surveillance systems, and then we can demand companies to support them. Companies like Google could even use data mining in a way that doesn't infringe on user privacy. But their thinking will be "why change the status quo?". That's why it's so important to fight for such changes, and not get trampled by the corporations and governments wishes for complete knowl…

For internet surveillance, sure. For a while. But when the internet is a network of wireless devices, not all of which you own or even know exist, it becomes a swim against a waterfall.