Punk, it sounds like you might be very concerned around this project. It sounds like you need to know that the situation of people being monitored by others will not worsen, is that correct?

Me, I am very scared around what can happen to me, and what can happen to others, and I need to know I will have belief and support around these things happening, after they are over. I do not find that belief and support without reviewable evidence, at this time. That's roughly where I come from.

Obviously the engineering work will happen anyway by people who care to do it rather than discuss it, but it is nice to make sure we are making good choices, because we can influence that process a lot.

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020, 3:02 PM Punk-Stasi 2.0 <punks@tfwno.gf> wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 04:24:04 -0400
Karl <gmkarl@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Punk-Stasi said:
>
> *Keep preaching surveillance technofascism Jim, you're doing a great job.*
>
> I reply more below, but it seems the second half of this sentence is
> the truth. A commonly-available tool is not fascim, and this is
> already a technocratic list.

is it? technocracy means tyranny enabled by 'technology'. I thought cpunks were against tyranny.

> Jim is discussing empowering common
> people to _fight_ surveillance technofascism via community
> "souveillance" which is where masses are empowered to observe and
> share evidence of authorities.

that's the alleged theory. In practice he's promoting more surveillance using the already existing technofascist infrastructure that he can't actually control.

where I live ordinary joe-sixpack fucktards are putting cameras everywhere because they are afraid of ordinary thieves (whle cheering the government). The end result is that there are arpanet surveillance cameras everywhere. Same thing is of course promoted by the likes of ammazon-mosad-nsa-gchq and other 'private' facades for the state.

surveillance is surveillance, no matter who is doing it.

> We have leaders right now, we
> don't want them, and the balance of technological privilege recently
> swung toward them.

recently? The 'balance' of power by definition is always on their side(so there's no 'balance' actually). And 'technology' has always 'empowered' the rulers.

>
> Punk-Stasi said:
>
> *journos have been using 'technology' for a while...to serve and
> proptect the private-government mafia.
> The sort of propaganda you're trying to peddle here is infinitely
> ridiculous. You pick ONE event that suits your 'narrative' while
> IGNORING A MILLION*
>
> Punk, it sounds like you know of a lot of suffering at the hands of
> technology that may not have been included in this discussion.

Yeah, what I'm saying is based on facts that are widely known

1) there's a global surveillance state run by the western nazis (including all the 'private' companies that ayn rand loves so much) and accomplices

2) historically 'technology' has never ever led to an increase in political freedom.

> In america, we still believe we have a huge majority of hackers who
> distrust the government: although it is true we are all misled by our
> media and culture.

so hopefully you realize that the "huge majority of hackers who distrust the government" exist only as a pentagon propaganda meme. In reality the vast majority of 'hackers' are sellouts working for the pentagon.

> Could you be more precise about what we need to
> know, or are you maybe looking for understanding that technology tends
> to cause undiscussed genocide? The million events you describe may
> have never reached our news.

I'm comparing the number of times that surveillanec helped govcorp like this

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intelligence-laundering

to the number of times that it helped 'the masses'. Jim has so far named 2 cases where filming cops allegedly...changed nothing actually.

have you ever read this piece of self-parody or govt propaganda, or both?

http://nakamotoinstitute.org/static/docs/from-crossbows-to-cryptography.pdf