Maybe an unpopular opinion, but it's not enough. The threats are real and active.
25 years of mass surveillance is enough
331–340 of 384 posts
Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough
#332Surveillance and totalitarian control is a downward spiral of misery and suffering for everyone, even those in power. It reminds me of some quotes from the Tao Te Ching - Restriction breeds the disorder it's meant to prevent (ch. 57) The more prohibitions there are in the world, the poorer the people become. The more sharp weapons, the more the state falls into confusion. The more laws and edicts are posted, the more…
Will add Chapter 46.
"When the Tao is present in the universe, The horses haul manure. When the Tao is absent from the universe, War horses are bred outside the city."
I would consider surveillance weapons against the people. I think this reflects all manners of international governance nowadays.
Also Chapter 17.
" When the Master governs, the people are hardly aware that he exists. Next best is a leader who is loved. Next, one who is feared. The worst is one who is despised."
If you don’t trust the people, you make them untrustworthy."
Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough
#333Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The ultra wealthy are entrapped by their own minds & machines of wealth that have tight demands. But only within their minds. They could change their minds, donate or pay enough taxes that their billions would be distributed far and wide. Then they'd no longer be trapped. Plenty of people make the choice to stop acquiring, stop increasing their wealth, and stop having more everything (kids, houses, cars, pets, hobb…
Isn't it like that old story about catching monkeys. You hollow out a gourd with a small hole, tack it to the ground and put a nut in it. The monkey can get its hand in but not out with the nut in their fist. The human can walk over and leisurely whack the monkey because the monkey can't let go. They act just like drug addicts. More's the pity. They can change but they don't seem to understand that rock bottom is a t…
The Monkey trap is a very powerful analogy.
It is looking like we are venturing into harder times these new few years for various reasons, as such one has to wonder what things you are still clinging to that can be let go and what is still worth handing on to. Hopefully we don't have to make those choices but it is always handy to keep in mind.
Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know why Trump's existence is evidence the US does not have a "real" democracy. As a group, we voted for him, and he went to the Oval Office. That's democracy. There are certainly governments outlawing political opponents in the first world, but that's not the US.
When the same guy wins when he gets the popular vote, and wins when he doesn't, that may technically be "democracy" in the sense that a vote occurred and votes were counted, but it clearly isn't fair (and it isn't, it isn't designed to be. If it were fair, the people might do something crazy like vote in a populist demagogue...) And yes, I would say that regarding the other side too.
That's just the way the US system is set up. You can't win the presidency by doing really well in the five largest states.
Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
Im not quite following. Things can be mislabeled as anti American, but everyone has some idea of whats anti-American in principle. Anti free speech for example is anti American. How that gets applied is a matter of debate. But I think all public officials should agree with that. Its kind of a fundamental thing to have an idea about the nation’s values. If that’s too taboo for someone then they are quite literally ant…
I'm Muslim. Born in the US. I've seen politicians and right wing public figures call my entire faith anti-American. One of them just had a nice memorial for their one-year since their death. The term may have had an agreed upon meaning at some point, but not anymore. Edit: it seems like most right-wing people conflate "non-Christian" with "anti-American". i don't know what's worse; the fact that these people say and…
I’m as atheist as they come and I see the tenets of Islam — as widely practiced throughout the world, and self-reported in a litany of surveys — to be clearly anti-woman, anti-freedom, anti-free speech, pro blasphemy-law, et al … and as a result, anti-American.
Charlie Hebdo was not that long ago. Anti-women practices are the predominant norm. The list of regressive and oppressive political norms is practically endless.
Nothing here absolves Christianity or any other religion of its crimes either, but (1) the sexism is on another scale entirely, and (2) we’ve been far more successful as a global society of separating those religions from their political aspirations.
Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
Porch pirates are not stealing because they're hungry. They're antisocial asshole criminals.
Yes. Inequality creates antisocial asshole criminals at a far greater rate than more equal societies. But even if you disagree, you must still agree that antisocial asshole criminals will find ways to steal and get away with it, cameras or no.
In a just and equal society, criminals would be prosecuted and convicted for the economic violence of theft.
Inequality is a useless measurement used to excuse antisocial behavior. The inequality between Bill Gates and I has increased exponentially in the past 20 years, yet I'm significantly better off than I was then back then. Inequality is a feel good measurement thats fundamentally the wrong target.
Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough
#337Great essay. The Patriot Act may have been the obvious turning point but the FBI had public data collection programs even earlier. The goal was keyword watching of all network traffic. The desire for more collection is baked into government. It is hubris that leads powerful people to think if they only had more control they could stop all ills. The deceit of power makes people believe it doesn't matter what the outcome is if the goal is noble. That is why the founding fathers put restrictions on government power. The people that run it will always fall for the same traps of power because they are just like everybody else.
So yes, it is high time to discuss how our rights apply in a digital age and put some reasonable restrictions on the power available to government.
Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
When the same guy wins when he gets the popular vote, and wins when he doesn't, that may technically be "democracy" in the sense that a vote occurred and votes were counted, but it clearly isn't fair (and it isn't, it isn't designed to be. If it were fair, the people might do something crazy like vote in a populist demagogue...) And yes, I would say that regarding the other side too.
That's just the way the US system is set up. You can't win the presidency by doing really well in the five largest states.
Yes, it was set up that way to keep slave-owning states in the union, which one assumes should no longer be an issue.
I don't think you should be able to win the presidency by doing really well in the five largest states necessarily, but I definitely don't think you should be able to win the presidency by only doing well in a couple of swing states.
Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
Poor people door all the same shit, just on a smaller scale.
The scale is the problem; their money is orders of magnitude more damaging.
Poor people do it at scale too. Millions of pockets of poor people doing the same shit on a smaller scale adds up.
Re: 25 years of mass surveillance is enough
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there's no power then why did so many line up to bring gifts and kiss the ring of a certain vindictive, convicted felon turned President?
Just because no one is in charge, it doesn't mean favors disappear and it doesn't mean no one can throw a wrench in your system.
It really sounds like you're trying hard to define a square circle. Your argument isn't even self consistent because what you described sure sounds like someone has power...