The Day We Fight Back • Hacker News Board

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#11

Post by aaronem » Fri, Jan 10, 2014, 5:22 PM UTC

pekk wrote: post #3

I am probably the only person who is bothered that this sounds like a deniable call to violent action. "BE CREATIVE" edit: to be clearer - the issue is that we have left violent action open as an option and it isn't hard for a few people to take that option. Is this what we want politics to be?

You're probably the only person who is bothered, because you are probably the only person who can see anything remotely resembling a "call to violent action" in something as milquetoast as the nonsense we're discussing.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#12

Post by jheriko » Fri, Jan 10, 2014, 5:25 PM UTC

Hmmm this is all well and good, but what do we expect NSA and GCHQ to do instead?

I don't especially like them or what they do, but we need them... I'm also surprised at the massive backlash and the revelatory nature of the Snowden leaks... I was expecting that NSA and GCHQ would engage in precisely these kinds of activities - its exactly what they are there for - I am surprised that anyone ever had any different expectations, but clearly a large majority did.

Are we suggesting that society has come far enough that we can do without espionage altogether?

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#13

Post by niuzeta » Fri, Jan 10, 2014, 5:27 PM UTC

No, it's not fighting back. Making clever memes online to earn a chuckle or two might help spreading awareness, but in reality changing an online avatar and posting memes online won't affect much in real life.

What I find strange is that(Please correct me on this one) there just doesn't seem to be a political group of technologist who lobby(the original meaning) against politicians. In truth, technology-related policies should be consulted and heard by people who use and develop the said technologies.

What's worse about this retaliation is that anyone participating it would have an illusion of having done something without actually having done anything(i.e., impact). At the end of the day, you might walk home feeling good about yourself for having fought for a cause, but some harsh reality check needs to be done.

Addendum:

As per the second paragraph, refer to one of the replies on this comment(https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7038058):

> An abbreviated list of groups who do that: EFF, Public Knowledge, Demand Progress, Engine Advocacy, CDT, OTI, Free Press. Many of these have multiple registered lobbyists walking the halls of Congress and taking meetings.

I stand corrected.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#14

Post by sinak » Fri, Jan 10, 2014, 5:28 PM UTC

redthrowaway wrote: post #8

Feb 11th is after the SOTU, where Obama will announce what will in effect be the only changes we're likely to see. Any attempt to influence policy should come before that.

We did consider this very, very carefully. Our conclusion was that any reforms that Obama announces are very unlikely to result in meaningful change, and that legislation will still be necessary. Had we set the date before the SOTU, our activism would have concluded with no way to respond to his proposals.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#15

Post by wanda » Fri, Jan 10, 2014, 5:31 PM UTC

I would "fight back" but I have a job.

Who am I kidding? I would not fight back even if I did have the time. Even if this were not horseshit. I would be dicking around with golang and flagging banal questions on StackExchange.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#16

Post by jlgaddis » Fri, Jan 10, 2014, 5:33 PM UTC

Yay, slacktivism!

-----

edit: I wrote the above because there was no clear "call to action" other than changing one's Facebook profile picture (seriously?) but, according to the "Open Letter" [0], I guess we're all supposed to call our legislators that day.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7037532

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#17

Post by rhizome » Fri, Jan 10, 2014, 5:34 PM UTC

aaronem wrote: post #11

pekk wrote: post #3

I am probably the only person who is bothered that this sounds like a deniable call to violent action. "BE CREATIVE" edit: to be clearer - the issue is that we have left violent action open as an option and it isn't hard for a few people to take that option. Is this what we want politics to be?

You're probably the only person who is bothered, because you are probably the only person who can see anything remotely resembling a "call to violent action" in something as milquetoast as the nonsense we're discussing.

I see what the GP is talking about though, and would probably explain it as "fight" being used as a malapropism, not as a rallying ethic. That is, calling something "fighting" which is pretty much the furthest thing from it, rather than exhorting people to fight in whatever way they deem fit.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#18

Post by herbig » Fri, Jan 10, 2014, 5:35 PM UTC

"If Aaron were alive, he'd be on the front lines, fighting against a world in which governments observe, collect, and analyze our every digital action."

While government surveillance and open access are both information issues, we definitely should not be construing what he would or wouldn't believe about revelations that were made after his death.

If we're taking a literal interpretation of his Guerilla Open Access Manifesto, he may well be on the front lines fighting for a world with zero privacy from anyone.

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#19

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jan 10, 2014, 5:35 PM UTC

niuzeta wrote: post #13

No, it's not fighting back. Making clever memes online to earn a chuckle or two might help spreading awareness , but in reality changing an online avatar and posting memes online won't affect much in real life. What I find strange is that(Please correct me on this one) there just doesn't seem to be a political group of technologist who lobby(the original meaning) against politicians. In truth, technology-related poli…

[deleted]

Re: The Day We Fight Back

#20

Post by nhangen » Fri, Jan 10, 2014, 5:36 PM UTC

Am I the only one bothered by how many people are invoking Aaron's ghost? The intent might be pure, but it really bugs me when people speak for the dead.

And let's not forget, Aaron didn't pass away, he committed suicide. Case related stressors may have caused this, but it's also not right to make him the poster child for every anti-government/anti NSA campaign on the Internet.