Live data from Hacker News

Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

medium.com

91–100 of 181 posts

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#91
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious question: where do we start when we want to fight this? We made it through the industrial revolution because people stood up for their rights. I'm at a total loss for where to start. (Edit: grammar)

Like with many other causes, you start with yourself -- and that might be enough. These days, not participating in the latest electronics and social sites and whatnot is enough to make people ask you questions. If you think carefully enough about why you're making the choices you make, then you can give pretty reasonable answers. I don't own a smart phone, or have a Facebook or LinkedIn account. I still buy paper boo…

I was asking because that's exactly what I did last year on January 1st. I quit Facebook (500+ "friends"), Twitter (3Ksomething followers) & all social networks cold-turkey. Deleted my accounts, no recovery possible. My motivation was personal & not political/ideological (social media burnout) ... All it did for me was:

* give me more time for side-projects & a clearer frame of mind (good) * actually made me think & write MORE. not everything you think should be thrown on social media immediately. I appreciate having learned to shut up when you don't have anything to say (good) * made a bunch of people angry at first (good I guess if you want to provoke a mind-change) ... but that seemed to last only until the next cute cat picture came along. * I'm sure I made no one reconsider. Zero effect. So that's why I was asking.

"Changing the world by beginning with yourself" is not a valid strategy here. So what do we do instead?

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#92
I don't really buy the privacy paranoia anymore these days. It was the internet that first grew the distance between people so that we could pretend-anonymous say things about anything without repercussion an it will be the internet that shrinks that distance down to where you better be talking about what matters to you and putting your money where your mouth is.

In ten years I'll be sharing and leaking at least 10x as much information out of all kinds of devices. 90% of my engagement will happen inside programs will be automatically syncing data across cloud services. Security is inevitably a growing target in the networked world, and privacy requires security. Increasingly for the sake of productivity and collaboration, everything I use will be sharing and syncing more and more. The desire of most people to be connected and productive, not some autocratic slide in the worlds governments will be the death of privacy.

One of the features of Facebook I liked in the early days was just the slight exclusiveness that made it basically okay to talk about having a giant hangover without fear of looking like an alcoholic to an interviewer scratching up dirt (I think zero interviews I care about do this). When Facebook started making the defaults public etc without notifications, there was understandably some uproar about being unknowingly thrust out into the public. Eroding privacy causing blunders is not the same thing as not having privacy. For the most part anxiety about not being able to control your privacy or security really need to be analyzed in the context of just how hidden you really need to make your words (in the case of anti-dissent government) or actions (in the case of socially conservative laws) to be able to practice or advocate what it is you care about. To an almost absolute degree, very little of things you want to see in the world that don't exist yet are going to require going to war for the cause of security or privacy before your end goals can be pursued, so it's just not really worth it.

EFF does great work to defend people against stupid laws and to promote better laws with regard to IP etc. They protect anonymity for regular people that happen to cosplay and have very odd taste in character appropriateness. However, the area where the EFF pulled really hard to ensure that the future of the internet would be egalitarian in the United States was about Title II common carrier law, not about privacy. The 1st amendment protects what you say, not some mythical right to say it without consequences; you only get that when nobody cares about your opinion. Even in the case of socially conservative laws, stand up for respect for individual beliefs before you stand up for privacy as an extra-social cure.

Privacy is not close to as fundamentally important as the security that is required to achieve it, and privacy advocacy is to an extent like whining about how someone took your tree-house and you can't have any secret clubs anymore. Most privacy is not used to do productive things, and few productive things outside of already entrenched, authoritarian governments require privacy to pursue.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#93
post #2

Pretty alarmist writing. "I therefore can’t resist showing a new piece of Google technology: the military robot ‘WildCat’ made by Boston Dynamics which was bought by Google in December 2013". And goes on to show a video of something that was funded by DARPA well before Google purchased Boston Dynamics. Google has already said multiple times that it won't be pursuing any military contracts.

> Google has already said multiple times that it won't be pursuing any military contracts. And you so quickly trust one of the biggest corporations in the world to "keep its promise" over following whatever its biggest interest will be in the future? Google also said it won't deal at all with the military before they bought the robots, and a few months later it was selling them Google Glass...so yeah. And Google Glas…

That's not exactly the same thing though. Google glass wasn't made for the military, but of course Google isn't going to refuse to sell them a product that they have made publicly available.

Perhaps the military will want to buy more of Google's tech, but it sounds like Google isn't (currently) planning on building robots for the military.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#94
post #57

"One of the best artists in the world." Since when do people rank artists. For me, this ruins the whole article. Maybe successful artist or artist with a high media profile. But best? Seriously?

The article is a translation of a transcript of a speech originally given in Dutch.

Shift "best" to "renowned" if it helps you read it.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can go with yandex, but it's all very much a case of pick your poison.

Thank you for the suggestion throwawayaway, but I don't think Yandex is quite what I'm looking for. They might state that they don't share data with the NSA, but I wouldn't trust any company that relies on data mining for their profits with my email. I don't mind paying a small monthly fee for a secure email service. Does that expand my options?

qq also have a mail service, another flavour of poison!

I don't know enough about mail providers to recommend a commercial one.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#97
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You feel awful now, but what you've written is very encouraging. You're doing the right thing. Coding can be put to good use too. Perhaps there's an open-source project you can contribute to that has a positive benefit to offer society? What social injustices are you most passionate about? I also intend to leave Facebook (again) very soon. The only reason I haven't in the past is that I didn't want to lose contact wi…

You're right, we should use our skills in open source projects. I think decentralized technologies are the way to fix the problems with Internet. Speaking of Gmail, I also want to stop using Google services. I went back the good old times, just setup a mail server on a linux dedicated box and started sharing my new email address. It's going to be painful but there's no way around it. You can then setup POP or IMAP on…

I can reassure you it's not too late. If you wish to get involved in the decentralised web as a coder, could always participate in the technologies surrounding the Darknet Plan... http://www.reddit.com/r/darknetplan/

Personally I believe the Darknet Plan is doomed to fail on a large scale unless they tackle the downsides of decentralisation, but that's just my personal opinion. There's plenty of work to do, I'm sure you could find some tasks that interested you.

With email, you're right that POP/IMAP on a dedicated box is preferable from a security standpoint. Food for thought, thank you.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#98
For me as the author of the piece, it is wonderful to find an informed and critical discussion of the themes that I tried to discuss here in the comments. I will likely try and answer some of them here in the next couple of hours and am happy to answer any questions.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for the suggestion throwawayaway, but I don't think Yandex is quite what I'm looking for. They might state that they don't share data with the NSA, but I wouldn't trust any company that relies on data mining for their profits with my email. I don't mind paying a small monthly fee for a secure email service. Does that expand my options?

qq also have a mail service, another flavour of poison! I don't know enough about mail providers to recommend a commercial one.

Okay. Thanks anyway.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#100
post #2

Pretty alarmist writing. "I therefore can’t resist showing a new piece of Google technology: the military robot ‘WildCat’ made by Boston Dynamics which was bought by Google in December 2013". And goes on to show a video of something that was funded by DARPA well before Google purchased Boston Dynamics. Google has already said multiple times that it won't be pursuing any military contracts.

Google also said they wouldn't be evil.
Post reply on HN