It bothers me that otherwise intelligent people are taking so long to realize that ubiquitous surveillance is never going away.
I would have exterminated humanity in the 80's if it hadn't been for ubiquitous surveillance.
The Day We Fight Back
131–140 of 192 posts
Re: The Day We Fight Back
#132We can't forget the corporate culpability in this matter...
Re: The Day We Fight Back
#133So, something like this: People: "Stop spying on us!" NSA: "Well, we kind of want to, but if you insist.." People: "Alright then, cool." (NSA calmly continues doing whatever they damn well please) Here's an alternative version: People: "Stop spying on us!" NSA: "Fuck you, peasants." People: "No, fuck you! We'll write to some thoroughly corrupt sociopaths and they'll stop your spying because they care about our well-b…
>The actual problem is the existence of the NSA >and governments That escalated quickly.
Sure, but it's true.
Think about it for a moment. They operate in complete secrecy behind the scenes. You have no power over them, but they have massive power over you. Clearly, neither the NSA nor the government are accountable to you or people in general because you simply have no recourse against any injustice they commit against you. If the government imprisons you without due process, for example, you're effectively supposed to complain about it to the very same government, which will then.. punish itself?
In what alternate universe is this a good arrangement?
Re: The Day We Fight Back
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The actual problem is the existence of the NSA >and governments That escalated quickly.
Sure, but it's true. Think about it for a moment. They operate in complete secrecy behind the scenes. You have no power over them, but they have massive power over you. Clearly, neither the NSA nor the government are accountable to you or people in general because you simply have no recourse against any injustice they commit against you. If the government imprisons you without due process, for example, you're effecti…
>They operate in complete secrecy behind the scenes. You have no power over them, but they have massive power over you.
We vote these people into office. We have the power. The government is people - just people we've decided get extra power so they can get things done.
Please, please, please don't ever forget this. The moment you start thinking of the government as some impenetrable adversary, you've already lost. Being politically active is how change happens, not falling into the dems-vs-republicans-vs-whoever trap of "the other guy is bad".
The government is us.
Re: The Day We Fight Back
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some things in the constitution apply only to citizens, most don't. When it says person, it means person, not citizen. Educating people that this prevalent view is false would already go a long way.
However, this definition of "person" requires them to be subject to US law (typically by residing in the US) which foreign residents of a foreign country are not. That is part of the reason we have a detention facility at Guantanemo.
It is not sufficient that the person acting on someone else is subject to US law? That seems kinda broken. Do you have a link that elaborates on this? From the 14th Amendment for example:
> No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Note how it mentions citizens, any person, and persons within the jurisdiction as three separate things... ?
Re: The Day We Fight Back
#136The often mentioned quote from B. Franklin (reproduced in the linked site) about "any society" giving up a little liberty for a little security and deserving neither is I think quite funny, because giving up liberty in exchange for security is the very definition of society.
Society is not about liberty; it's about control, surveillance, obedience, in exchange from keeping aliens at bay.
If everyone's my brother I don't need "society", because there are no aliens.
On the other hand, if every brother is a potential or covert alien, then I need a very intense system of control.
I'm not sure it's possible to have society without surveillance; they are sides of the same coin.
Re: The Day We Fight Back
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but it's true. Think about it for a moment. They operate in complete secrecy behind the scenes. You have no power over them, but they have massive power over you. Clearly, neither the NSA nor the government are accountable to you or people in general because you simply have no recourse against any injustice they commit against you. If the government imprisons you without due process, for example, you're effecti…
>They operate in complete secrecy behind the scenes. You have no power over them, but they have massive power over you. We vote these people into office. We have the power. The government is people - just people we've decided get extra power so they can get things done. Please, please, please don't ever forget this. The moment you start thinking of the government as some impenetrable adversary, you've already lost. B…
When you vote, you actually give credibility to, and thus your implicit acceptance of the results, whether or not they are in your favour.
You play the game that is stacked 100% in their favour, and you cannot expect to win. Your vote or that of even 1 million (or even 10 million) other people will not change 1 single micron of the overall outcome. Think of all the well-intentioned people in the past, say 100 years or so, that in all good conscience cast their vote, just hoping to make that change. Did that positive change happen? Of course not, look where we are.
Bow out and make other changes to protect yourself; voting is the least effective use of your time.
Re: The Day We Fight Back
#138The often mentioned quote from B. Franklin (reproduced in the linked site) about "any society" giving up a little liberty for a little security and deserving neither is I think quite funny, because giving up liberty in exchange for security is the very definition of society. Society is not about liberty; it's about control, surveillance, obedience, in exchange from keeping aliens at bay. If everyone's my brother I do…
I think it's quite funny because like so many quotation-on-image internet memes, it's not what Franklin actually wrote.
This is the actual line:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
http://franklinpapers.org/franklin/framedVolumes.jsp?vol=6&p...
Some other misattributed variations are here:
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin#Misattribute...
Re: The Day We Fight Back
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason Aaron gets so much sympathy (EDIT: for what he did as well as for how he was treated) is that 1) a substantial portion of the JSTOR data is public domain , 2) a substantial portion of the rest is work funded with public money where it is controversial that it is only available under copyright. But even disregarding that, I don't get why you are baffled: The GPL is a hack intended to spread freedoms. Many w…
Without IP, what stops people incorporating GPL code in their closed source proprietary products? See you can't have your cake and eat it. Either you believe there is a thing called a license which travels with your product and binds the user as to how they can use it, or you don't, there isn't really any middle ground there. The alternative is "everything is public domain!" in which case, no GPL.
> Without IP, what stops people incorporating GPL code in their closed source proprietary products?
Nothig. But then, a company wouldn't have the entire governemnt's power to persue and extract money from people using their software. It's a completely different equilibrium, you can't just look at one side of it.
And I'm not saying it's a good thing either. Altough I defend that it's not smart to depend ("depend" excludes games, by the way) on proprietary software, I never tought it was immoral to create it, until the NSA scandal. Now I don't have any firm opinion about it.
Re: The Day We Fight Back
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Can you think of even one GPL product that has been successful through sales of GPL licenses? " Actually yes, I can think of a quite a few. Redhat is a good example of a huge industry built around GPL software. That really isn't the point though, and allow me to summarize your misconception. "nobody else needs to purchase it because the first customer can simply give it away to everyone for free and you have no reco…
Red Hat don't sell software, they sell support contracts.
That is patently not true: This Agreement establishes a framework that will enable Red Hat to provide Software and Services to Client. “Software” means Red Hat Enterprise Linux, JBoss Enterprise Middleware and other software programs branded by Red Hat, its Affiliates and/or third parties including all modifications, additions or further enhancements delivered by Red Hat.