If you were to go back even 30 years from now, you would have a hard time convincing anyone that in the future we would all be carrying around personal surveillance devices at all times. It is too late to convince the public to stop, and it is but another step on the road to absolute tyranny of the human race through technology.
In the future, all human beings will be physically networked. There will not be a single moment, a single breathe, a single thought had that will not be catalogued in detail.
Human beings have very short spans of attention; even shorter when they are in groups. People are more than willing to trade away their own freedom and agency in exchange for "features", for eyecandy, because that is what the pack is doing. If you were offered to have medical sensors installed into your body for the purposes of ensuring your own health, would you do it? Any personal objections you might have to this are a product of our era. Future humans will be willing to stand for ever less, and less of their own agency.
Economic systems of control have been outmoded. Political systems of control have been overthrown, or modified. There is no such solution to the technological systems of control that we face now. The personal weaknesses of your fellows, and the innate human compulsion to seek ever increasing convenience will inevitably lead to this future. Just as now there are companies that will refuse to hire a candidate with no social media accounts to review, so too will future Orwellian technologies become de facto necessary to survive.
The few who will not allow themselves to be controlled and exploited will mean nothing in the face of the lemming masses, who will drive the final nail into the coffin of human freedom and remove any illusion that any one person can positively change anything; for every socially unacceptable detail, every socially unacceptable action, even every socially unacceptable thought of every human being will be held by the powers that be.
Even now with technologies like Tor, the age of the free internet has ended. Almost all power over it has been centralized in the hands of a few american companies in bed with the american government, and all the nations powerful enough to exist outside that sphere of control have their own spheres of control that serve the same nefarious purposes.
The modern man still has control over certain details of his life, but not of his own destiny. What before was left to his discretion because of the technological inability to micromanage him is now being taken from him, piece by piece. His control over his financial security is at risk because of automation (including automation of traditionally intellectual jobs); his control over his familial security is at risk because of the legal incentivization of divorce and the technologically-driven ease of cheating; his control over his own mind is at risk as he is constantly bombarded with disinformation and distractions to quell his growing discontent to the point that fact cannot be determined from fiction in an endless sea of muddied waters, as controlled opposition factions pretend to wrestle control from each other; his nation's borders are intentionally left porous to sew ethnic and national divisions, making it even easier to exploit him, his fellows, and the migrants all at once.
Even one that manages to dodge all these pitfalls and avoid dependence upon this sytem cannot avoid associating himself with those that care not. Even if you would not personally use a one-night-stand app, its mere existence reduces the quality of a large majority of the potential partners that you have. Even if you do not personally carry a mobile tracking device, associating with one who does may negate whatever privacy you were seeking to gain. Your own personal choice to reject any one or more of these things that seek to exploit and control you is not enough to avoid the control and exploitation. The only solution is destruction of this system, but the system cannot be destroyed; organizing to try and destroy it cannot be accomplished using modern backdoored technology, which future humans will be ever more reliant upon.
>>7322 Honestly I think all you say is not that different from ages or, optionably, decades ago.
People have been controlling each other for eons. Be that a small community or a big ancient civilization like Egypt, Rome or China and India - it all has been controlled by the same principles that are used today. Namely, misinformation, manipulation, divide and conquer, intimidation, morality etc.
Likewise, if we look at the 20th century, then we have propaganda, controlled mass media with varying degrees of control, numerous state records of every citizen etc.
What IS different though, I believe, is that it becomes increasingly harder to escape that. Though honestly it can be tied into the rapid urbanization of the 20th century. Most of the WORLD moves from the country to the city, and city actually REQUIRES a surveillance system to function. Without that, policing becomes vastly impossible, and citizens themselves don't have that much power over random fucks scheming them, as they are disorganized and divided.
blackpill fags will hang. surveillance isn't total. Even though they could spy on anyone, that was always true: they could show up at your door on a manufactured excuse, and you would never see daylight again. It still remains the case, and will for some time, that if they aren't specifically pursuing you, then you will slip under the radar. That means that kidfuckers, people who pirate new movies, and drug dealers get caught, and the rest of us get ignored.
>Almost all power over it has been centralized in the hands of a few american companies in bed with the american government
Look up ARPA, who created the ARPAnet. Or IANA, until recently. The US has always owned the internet. Actually, the really dangerous thing is when they cede power to other governments. If you think the US government is dystopian, you're in for a real surprise.
>>7327 >surveillance isn't total
It isn't total now, but it will be. It will become more and more total, arguably very soon as there are projected to be many thousands of IoT devices for every human being alive.
>Even though they could spy on anyone, that was always true
It was once the case that to intercept communications, physical lines had to be tapped. Now all internet communications are passively collected (made possible by technological advances which are the real problem), which is far worse.
>you will slip under the radar
You may slip under the radar now, but your grandchildren will not.
A short term solution is to embrace part of the botnet, in particular the parts that you need to stay in touch with family, and at the same time using this against glowers. How? By exploiting the biggest weakspot in mass surveillance, false negatives. If you look like a normalfag on the outside you are gonna be overlooked by the glowers, cause there is just too much people to track and there are not enough resources to do in-depth surveillance for every person in the planet. Compartmentalization is also really important, i keep my two lives completely separated(different devices, different identities, different way of writing(yes i go that far), different ideas on stuff).
Be like Dr.Jekill and Mr.Hide.
A long term solution is to redesigning tech from the 70s up. If you were to redesign tech in last 50 years how would you do it nanons?
>>7328 If we have until our grandchildren are born to solve this problem, then it is wholly tractable. Don't make the mistake of Tim Berners-Lee, of suggesting that we need to "re-decentralize" the web. For the vast majority of people, who's first real introduction to the web was facebook, the web was never decentralized. They started using the web because of Facebook, and (in large part) because it was centralized. If all we needed to do was "re-decentralize" the web, or otherwise take it back to its former glory, the task would be quite easy. Since the web has never been decentralized for the majority of people, decentralizing it will require a host of new innovations and new technologies. We should expect this to be hard, but that means that the failure of existing efforts speaks to a technical failure, not a fundamental social failure, not of normal-cattle rejecting the decentralized alternative. In fact, normal-cattle cannot reject or accept anything, they can only follow where they are lead. That they haven't moved to a given technology means we, who are in charge of creating that technology, have not done a sufficiently good job of leading them.
The second mistake you might make is in assuming it is only us who care about solving these problems. In fact, there is a coalition of individuals from across political aisles, divided on their opinion of free speech, opposed in their acceptance of anons, but fundamentally united in their rejection of government spying. Technologists like Berners-Lee are part of that coalition. As are twitter trannies who broke off to make mastodon. As are the antifags who run riseup. As are the academics who make Tor. If you want to join that coalition remember: you can make a difference, and it is not too late.
>>7336 >redesign tech from the 70s up
This is not the way. You cannot forget or ignore the lessons of the last half-century. Whatever the technical value of those innovations, they have the social value of being the best known way to get normal-cattle to follow you. To replace them, we must identify what those lessons are, and build on them in any new tech. To ignore them is to handicap ourselves by 50 years, when we might not have 50 years until it's too late.
>>7356 there are _no_ good ideas in the web. thus we can safely build an alternative from the ground up without even looking into the current web at all
>>7356 >Since the web has never been decentralized for the majority of people, decentralizing it will require a host of new innovations and new technologies.
Indeed, and it's called Edge Computing. The pro-centralization crowd realized the downsides to piping all information to one point, congestion and the ever increasing complexity (and cost) of infrastructure needed to handle it. In a way, there is a re-decentralization happening, but it's not decentralizing control, that is still centralized. The plan is to split up "The Cloud" into compute and control nodes, with the compute nodes being decentralized and placed at ISPs or the base of cellphone towers. The control nodes will remain at corporate HQ and distribute directives/policy to the compute nodes.
Don't let the "re-decentralization" fool you into thinking that this is advancing web freedom, it is quite the opposite. This is merely an optimization of the current path we're on.
>[Image lifted from the Amazon "Echo Glow" product page.]
>>7336 You can also not be truthful when some entity is requesting information that you're not legally obligated to provide. For example, when a corporation requests a phone number, and they don't need it to actually contact you, give them a fake one.
You can't effectively blend into a crowd of lemmings about to run off a cliff. They'll take you with them, which is the goal of integrating the botnet into social structures. It creates momentum and uses social norms to punish those that "don't go with the flow".
>>7361 >there are _no_ good ideas in the web
- people use the web
- people don't use the non web
if you care about getting people to use your thing, then you will think hard about why this distinction exists.
>>7528 >they don't need it to actually contact you, give them a fake one
Problem is when they "verify" the phone number by sending you a text message. I think twitter and google do this.
It also is not hard to understand why: they don't want people to be able to create endless accounts to spam with. So if we want to beat them, we need a way to deal with spam that doesn't require deanonimizing yourself.
>>7529 >sending you a text message
That sounds like they are actually trying to contact you, for dual authentication purposes.
Many places in the meatspace will ask for a zip code, phone number, email, etc. This is not being done to contact you, it's being used to link the transaction to you.
>>7527 >localized cloud compute
That is just nasty. They are essentially ripping off the good parts of the personal computer revolution that let people have freedom to do what they wanted and replacing it with (((corporate))) control.
In the future, all human beings will be physically networked. There will not be a single moment, a single breathe, a single thought had that will not be catalogued in detail.
Human beings have very short spans of attention; even shorter when they are in groups. People are more than willing to trade away their own freedom and agency in exchange for "features", for eyecandy, because that is what the pack is doing. If you were offered to have medical sensors installed into your body for the purposes of ensuring your own health, would you do it? Any personal objections you might have to this are a product of our era. Future humans will be willing to stand for ever less, and less of their own agency.
Economic systems of control have been outmoded. Political systems of control have been overthrown, or modified. There is no such solution to the technological systems of control that we face now. The personal weaknesses of your fellows, and the innate human compulsion to seek ever increasing convenience will inevitably lead to this future. Just as now there are companies that will refuse to hire a candidate with no social media accounts to review, so too will future Orwellian technologies become de facto necessary to survive.
The few who will not allow themselves to be controlled and exploited will mean nothing in the face of the lemming masses, who will drive the final nail into the coffin of human freedom and remove any illusion that any one person can positively change anything; for every socially unacceptable detail, every socially unacceptable action, even every socially unacceptable thought of every human being will be held by the powers that be.
Even now with technologies like Tor, the age of the free internet has ended. Almost all power over it has been centralized in the hands of a few american companies in bed with the american government, and all the nations powerful enough to exist outside that sphere of control have their own spheres of control that serve the same nefarious purposes.
The modern man still has control over certain details of his life, but not of his own destiny. What before was left to his discretion because of the technological inability to micromanage him is now being taken from him, piece by piece. His control over his financial security is at risk because of automation (including automation of traditionally intellectual jobs); his control over his familial security is at risk because of the legal incentivization of divorce and the technologically-driven ease of cheating; his control over his own mind is at risk as he is constantly bombarded with disinformation and distractions to quell his growing discontent to the point that fact cannot be determined from fiction in an endless sea of muddied waters, as controlled opposition factions pretend to wrestle control from each other; his nation's borders are intentionally left porous to sew ethnic and national divisions, making it even easier to exploit him, his fellows, and the migrants all at once.
Even one that manages to dodge all these pitfalls and avoid dependence upon this sytem cannot avoid associating himself with those that care not. Even if you would not personally use a one-night-stand app, its mere existence reduces the quality of a large majority of the potential partners that you have. Even if you do not personally carry a mobile tracking device, associating with one who does may negate whatever privacy you were seeking to gain. Your own personal choice to reject any one or more of these things that seek to exploit and control you is not enough to avoid the control and exploitation. The only solution is destruction of this system, but the system cannot be destroyed; organizing to try and destroy it cannot be accomplished using modern backdoored technology, which future humans will be ever more reliant upon.