I am not advocating this in the US or anywhere, but how would one disable a surveillance balloon as an act of civil disobedience if necessary (without ending up in jail)?
Movies Contact and Arrival had few good ideas.
Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
261–270 of 315 posts
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reminds me a bit of the "Harriet Tubman Sarah Connor brigade" (actual name). They were opposed to GPS satellites and knew they couldn't get them after they went up... so they successfully attacked them while they were on the ground (prelaunch) with wood axes. Did quite a bit of damage too. https://theatlantic.com/article/386656/
Are you comparing the surveillance balloons to GPS or are you saying it's best to disable before launch?
I'm not sure I would say "best", but tactically it's a lot better play to destroy a thing on the ground with an axe than develop whatever high-powered laser was being discussed elsewhere on the thread.
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
See the Black Panthers in the 1960s. Mind, I don't generally disagree with your premise, and I'm not a guns advocate. There do exist (as is typically the case) counterexamples to the general rule.
The past 50-60 years strengthened the positions of governments vs. their people. These days such a movement would find it a lot harder (or impossible) to go that far.
Again, what's happened is that vulnerabilities and strengths have shifted, as they're prone to do. I do tend to agree that power's hand (government, but also other empowered establishments) have largely strengthened, but the shifts are not entirely one-sided.
Some of those are based on informational vulnerabilities (see the #MeToo movement, and accusations against numerous power icons), some are based on data and information leaks. Some are based on backlashes -- Google's employee revolt against Dragonfly, and Edelman's against Geo[1] come to mind.
Physical sabotage against either very-high-value or very-exposed point or linear exposures (aircraft safety post-9/11, Stuxnet attacking Iran's uranium-enrichment centrifuges, pipeline and marine chokepoint vulnerabilities) expose the weakness of very-high-technology systems often having immense fragility.
What open resistance seems to rely on most profundly, as Gandhi and King noted, was the appeal to other sources of allegiance and sympathy. In truth virtually no power struggle is a naked encounter between two groups, but rather of consortia, with a high level of awareness of just how haywire things might go if one party presses its point too far. There's some evidence that reluctance to move against, e.g., right-wing extremist movements within the US is due to perceptions of high levels of support for those groups, including infiltration of institutions including law enforcement, military, and courts. I don't know for certain that this explains reluctance to act more decisively by the previous US administration, though I have a feeling it's at least part of the reason.
At the same time, open massed armed resistance does tend to be met with overwhelming force or opposition, though even that is often tempered. And in less democratic nations, the more so, as has been the case in, say, Saudi Arabia and Hong Kong over the past weeks and months.
________________________________
Notes:
1. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/business/edelman-geo-bord...
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article is about surveillance, the STASI were known for their insane levels of surveillance. The last time I checked there was a huge number of security cameras in the UK, maybe more than any other country. Also the UK has put people in prison for the nebulous crime of "hate speech". There are seven hate speech convictions per day, though I suspect most of these are fines and a criminal record. So the UK is going…
Totally agree and when a crime cant be proved successfully in court, you'll get locked up under the mental health act. In my case I was labelled as delusional despite having witnesses to some of the events which the medical professional would not entertain. The spooks are very good at this and Edward Snowdon has confirmed some of the things myself and customers have seen, which happens to be called the Martha Mitchel…
Seems the no1 Soft Power in the world aka the UK is downvoting anything negative about it on this forum. In 2006/7 you used to be able to copy a comment from some forums, put it into the search bar of Google and find the exact same conversations taking place with different avatars on different forums. Fast forward to 2011 and this becomes public. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-op...
Are the US the only Govt/Military involved in this sort of behavior? No, but you can be sure that many are involved in citing violence to justify their existence in secret. Keeping the deep state wheels greased with money and people in fear.
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article is about surveillance, the STASI were known for their insane levels of surveillance. The last time I checked there was a huge number of security cameras in the UK, maybe more than any other country. Also the UK has put people in prison for the nebulous crime of "hate speech". There are seven hate speech convictions per day, though I suspect most of these are fines and a criminal record. So the UK is going…
Totally agree and when a crime cant be proved successfully in court, you'll get locked up under the mental health act. In my case I was labelled as delusional despite having witnesses to some of the events which the medical professional would not entertain. The spooks are very good at this and Edward Snowdon has confirmed some of the things myself and customers have seen, which happens to be called the Martha Mitchel…
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a future administration ever has the political power to implement totalitarianism we're stuffed. The lack of a mass surveillance system will not stop them as they will build one. Horrible totalitarian regimes have existed in the past with quite low-tech systems (e.g. East Germany, USSR).
I lived in a totalitarian regime similar to the ones you mentioned (Ceausescu’s Romania back in the ‘80s) and if his bad guys had had access to today’s surveillance tools we would have been really, really stuffed. As things were you “only” had to watch out for people who would rat you out to Securitate or to Stasi (in East Germany), not an ideal situation but manageable from a certain point on, one could live a decen…
> you can see that in today’s China where every form of political jokes (even in private online conversations) is prohibited and actively acted against.
I wonder how you managed to “see” that, since it’s not true at all. If you know Chinese you’ll be able to find political jokes pretty much everywhere on Chinese language websites, especially forums. Some words may be banned by forum software but people just use homophones. Also not surprisingly, no one actually gives a shit about political jokes in private conversations, unless you’re a foreign journalist or known troublemaker or something, I guess (source: done that multiple times within Chinese borders).
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
Split yes, down the middle or remotely evenly who knows. A confounding factor is that both the US and UK militaries have been fighting extended insurrection 'policing' actions for much of the last two decades, so you have an army that is used to been an occupying force. All that said a smart military commander would never use local troops in their own backyard anyway.
>All that said a smart military commander would never use local troops in their own backyard anyway. Is why the local regiments were confined to barracks, the last time the UK felt the need to put tanks on the streets of Glasgow. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_George_Square
Funnily enough that was what I was thinking about when I wrote my post.
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
We need a new deal here. If everyone with power is allowed to just follow their incentives, we end up with an awful place for everyone. What is the contract between people, government and corporations that we can make that allows for the freedom in society that we value? It seems like both the corps and gov are teaming up against team people here.
In France we have a contract: if people are unhappy they rise against. If there's no risk of revolting, the fox is fearless in the chicken hen.
We have a saying in the US, which I don't think anyone follows anymore:
"There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order."
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? The chinese are slowly removing democratic institutions away from the people. The people are rising up to protect them without guns. Democratic norms are slowly being eroded from the US as well. Extreme gerrymandering, electoral college / popular vote, overt foreign interference, requested foreign interference, voting irregularities, voter purges…
> does it protect the constituion? Or is more likely they become a paramilitary wing of a corrupt government? Good point, but you are lumping all gun owners into one mindset. I could definitely see that happening, but it would not be all gun owners, just a percentage. And of the many gun owners I know, the percentage that would support any government and impose anything on others would be really low.
Guns are necessary but not sufficient. Guns + independent, civil society groups are what make a healthy democracy.
The idea is to back civil society with an implicit, but never used, question of force.
If things break down into shooting, that's civil war. And who knows what happens next, but it's not likely to be good for anyone or the country.
Re: Pentagon testing mass surveillance balloons across the US
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why many Americans won’t give their guns away. Imagine (not saying it would be a good outcome), but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? Well maybe the whole thing wouldn’t have even started. But wow, it would be a very different scene. Instead it’s more a case of if the military wants to walk in and shutdown the place, it’s going to be a lot easier. Not entirely a gun rights advo…
> but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? The chinese are slowly removing democratic institutions away from the people. The people are rising up to protect them without guns. Democratic norms are slowly being eroded from the US as well. Extreme gerrymandering, electoral college / popular vote, overt foreign interference, requested foreign interference, voting irregularities, voter purges…
A good example would be the YPG (People's Protection Units of Rojava), where the defensive power of guns is equally distributed and rotated through the population so that everyone shares in the responsibility. It's hard to over use your power when you know that someone else's grandma will later have that power.