Live data from Hacker News

Can We Avoid a Surveillance State Dystopia?

antipope.org

61–70 of 81 posts

Re: Can We Avoid a Surveillance State Dystopia?

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not like that in all countries, though. If the technology was inevitably reaching everybody, then guns would be readily available independently of cultural and political frame.

Well no, guns aren't as ubiquitous around the world as they are in the U.S, but they're pervasive enough that every single despot around the world employs guns to the effect of realizing modern dystopias for the unlucky humans who are born into violent oppression. The "inevitability" phase of guns has long passed.

The fact that guns are ubiquitous in the US means that an oppressive regime cannot use their monopoly on guns against the people. I'll take that side of the bargain any day.

Re: Can We Avoid a Surveillance State Dystopia?

#63
This article misses the main thrust of mass surveillance, in my opinion, and touches on something I've heard few people ever express.

Someone that lived in my building believed in some aspects of conspiracy theories. For example, he believed that Facebook was backed by the CIA. Why? According to him, if you thought about it, all of that information that they had to spend months digging for was now given to them for free, by upfront admission.

The point is that we are willingly giving up our rights to privacy. We are openly using, and promoting to our friends, various sites that expressly user our data for their own means. We are the ones who are printing free copies of the keys to our castle.

We are already halfway there. This trend will only get worse, in my opinion, and at the end of the day, we will blame the government, but really it was only us to blame because by openly publishing a large part of our private lives, we imply permission for anyone and everyone to have that information for free.

Re: Can We Avoid a Surveillance State Dystopia?

#64

This article misses the main thrust of mass surveillance, in my opinion, and touches on something I've heard few people ever express. Someone that lived in my building believed in some aspects of conspiracy theories. For example, he believed that Facebook was backed by the CIA. Why? According to him, if you thought about it, all of that information that they had to spend months digging for was now given to them for f…

Another argument that goes across this one is wether we can prevent at all essentially having all our lives "deducible" without sacrificing technological progress with two things in mind:

a) Demanding better answers or better functionality ultimately relies on surrendering information (information problem)

b) Computing power will allow machine-learning algorithms to deduce a lot from very little (computing power problem)

Novel crypto may eventually produce solutions to this, but it's unclear. An example, regarding location privacy: http://crypto.stanford.edu/~dabo/pubs/papers/locpriv.pdf

Re: Can We Avoid a Surveillance State Dystopia?

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, I get the feeling that whining isn't the solution; trying to get out in front of it is. As a bit of a social experiment, I acually built this just a couple days ago: http://whereis.lelandbatey.com/ My location is updated via GPS every two minutes, and the last checked in location is marked on the map. I'm curious what will happen, if anything.

You should make it leave a line of where you have been.

As well as which locations are unusual behavior, given your past behavior - there's no hiding a quick trip to in the haystack.

Re: Can We Avoid a Surveillance State Dystopia?

#67
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should make it leave a line of where you have been.

As well as which locations are unusual behavior, given your past behavior - there's no hiding a quick trip to in the haystack.

These are all excellent suggestions. I initially built it to just gather data about where I am, but these are great ways I can use this data.

Gonna have to learn a lot to make this real.

Re: Can We Avoid a Surveillance State Dystopia?

#68
post #49
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is an economic inevitability. Even if lawmakers passed rules preventing the government from doing it, you can bet the private sector would fill the market gap. The value of the data is quickly outstripping the cost of obtaining it. Better to focus on safety than on prevention.

"...you can bet the private sector would fill the market gap." Not if doing so was a felony. Sometimes, safety IS prevention (see toxic waste / dumping of).

There's lots of felonies the private sector commit anyway. Industrial espionage is already a major market in the world.

Re: Can We Avoid a Surveillance State Dystopia?

#69
post #20

I think super accurate mass surveillance is inevitable. It goes with expanding technological capabilities, both government and civilian. I think the real question needs to be focused at how it's applied, whether it's used solely for good or evil. Fretting over whether or how it's coming is simply illogical, focusing efforts on making sure it's used properly is the only forward thinking, reality accepting solution.

Mass surveillance isn't inevitable, it's a political decision and a decision which is reversible. PRISM and Xkeyscore didn't invent themselves - they took money and manpower and above all political will to come to fruition. We have nuclear weapons, but nuclear proliferation isn't inevitable. Dismissing people who are opposed to the abuse of technology for purposes which are fundamentally anti-democratic as "illogical…

I'm not supporting shit, I'm just saying whether you like it or not, the technologies eventually going to get to the point where you can't prevent it.

Whether it's incredibly small drones, nanotech or your own cellphone, operated by either the private or public sector. Public sector information surveillance is just a small part, a minuscule part of what's possible.

Re: Can We Avoid a Surveillance State Dystopia?

#70
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well no, guns aren't as ubiquitous around the world as they are in the U.S, but they're pervasive enough that every single despot around the world employs guns to the effect of realizing modern dystopias for the unlucky humans who are born into violent oppression. The "inevitability" phase of guns has long passed.

The fact that guns are ubiquitous in the US means that an oppressive regime cannot use their monopoly on guns against the people. I'll take that side of the bargain any day.

I've never quite understood this argument. I hardly think a Colt and a Wingmaster are going to help stop trained soldiers, drones, jets, tanks etc. It is ridiculous and ignorant of reality.
Post reply on HN