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 wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 04:24:04 -0400 Karl 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-launderi...

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

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020, 5:40 PM Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:

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

you should, it's hilariously retarded and a perfect description of views that must be avoided....unless your aim is to further empower govcorp.

For transparency, I personally believe that open source surveillance technology would increase privacy. I'm trying to understand our disagreement, in emailing with you.

It

...

sounds like you need to know that the situation of people being monitored by others will not worsen, is that correct?

Do *I* need to know that? Shouldn't that be something very important for the people PROMOTING the idea?

So you are furious and need understanding and carefulness around how dangerous surveillance is? I mean, the technocratic saviours are selling this as 'good'...while

ignoring that increasing surveillance is bad. If they are really concerned about state power they would be careful to not play into the state's hands.

...

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,

yeah the kind of people who act without thinking.

...

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, 6:34 PM Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 18:25:25 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

For transparency, I personally believe that open source surveillance technology would increase privacy.

surveillance increases privacy. War is peace. And it's true because it's patently absurd.

When I think of making peace, I might consider acting to reduce conflict, as a great fight.

I'm trying to understand our

...

disagreement, in emailing with you.

then read what I fucking write.

...

So you are furious and need understanding and carefulness around how dangerous surveillance is?

I need 'understanding and carefulness'? wut?

I'm not being clear. I think I've been upsetting you too, something I do not want to do. I'm a little crestfallen over the difficulty communicating. I think I understand that you know surveillance is stimulating severe danger these days, and that you are very, very concerned around the idea of us building recording devices. We need to protect our privacy and safety, and we need to defend that those are protected. Am I on the right page here?

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 08:34:03PM -0300, Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 19:05:52 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

I'm not being clear. I think I've been upsetting you too, something I do not want to do. I'm a little crestfallen over the difficulty communicating.

don't worry about upsetting me. As far as communication goes though it seems you're ignorning my overall comments on 'technology' and political power. Anyway, I won't repeat them again. At least today...

...

I think I understand that you know surveillance is stimulating severe danger these days, and that you are very, very concerned around the idea of us building recording devices.

No, what 'concerns me' is the faulty reasoning.

...

We need to protect our privacy and safety, and we need to defend that those are protected. Am I on the right page here?

So there's an old adage (a saying, holding some truth and/or wisdom): Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) https://wisdomquotes.com/liberty-safety-benjamin-franklin/ and some variations from the same link: Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither. The simple technical issue here is the fact that surveillance is inherently destroying. And it is natural for folks to want safety - but heed the Franklin warning above! In principle, if our (as humans) default position when faced with threats to our safety is to clamour for "solutions" which remove or reduce one or another of our freedoms, then the likely (towards certain) outcome (at least over the medium term) shall be the loss each freedom so sacrificed, and quite likely also that coveted safety. To the extent we are able to obtain either the ability or means to protect ourselves, or to correct wrongs, withOUT giving up any freedom - THIS must be our first port of call! And further, every proposal by anyone, that we "ought give up freedom A, B and or C", must be treated with the greatest of suspicion, and in the very very least must be thoroughly evaluated and examined and tested from this perspectiv of "are we giving up, or even encroaching upon, any basic human right and/or freedom?" If WE do not uphold and protect our own basic human rights, then who will? For any who missed the memo, privacy is a basic human right, fundamental to our dignity. I don't have to be doing anything wrong, to want my privacy.

Sorry, I thought I was replying to an email from Punk-Stasi. I roughly agree with you that freedom is paramount and safety will come. We want the freedom to record what happens to us, and to stop others from recording us, both. On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 4:30 AM Karl wrote:

It is clear that surveillance by the powerful is deadly.

Do you also disagree with public records made by the weak, like mailing list archives? I would put personal black boxes in that category; I could be wrong.

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 12:49 AM Zenaan Harkness wrote:

...

...

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 19:05:52 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

I'm not being clear. I think I've been upsetting you too, something I do not want to do. I'm a little crestfallen over the difficulty communicating.

don't worry about upsetting me. As far as communication goes

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 08:34:03PM -0300, Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote: though it seems you're ignorning my overall comments on 'technology' and political power. Anyway, I won't repeat them again. At least today...

...

...

I think I understand that you know surveillance is stimulating severe danger these days, and that you are very, very concerned around the

...

...

us building recording devices.

No, what 'concerns me' is the faulty reasoning.

...

We need to protect our privacy and safety, and we need to defend that

idea of those are protected. Am I on the right page here?

So there's an old adage (a saying, holding some truth and/or wisdom):

Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) https://wisdomquotes.com/liberty-safety-benjamin-franklin/

and some variations from the same link:

Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.

The simple technical issue here is the fact that surveillance is inherently destroying.

And it is natural for folks to want safety - but heed the Franklin warning above!

In principle, if our (as humans) default position when faced with threats to our safety is to clamour for "solutions" which remove or reduce one or another of our freedoms, then the likely (towards certain) outcome (at least over the medium term) shall be the loss each freedom so sacrificed, and quite likely also that coveted safety.

To the extent we are able to obtain either the ability or means to protect ourselves, or to correct wrongs, withOUT giving up any freedom - THIS must be our first port of call!

And further, every proposal by anyone, that we "ought give up freedom A, B and or C", must be treated with the greatest of suspicion, and in the very very least must be thoroughly evaluated and examined and tested from this perspectiv of "are we giving up, or even encroaching upon, any basic human right and/or freedom?"

If WE do not uphold and protect our own basic human rights, then who will?

For any who missed the memo, privacy is a basic human right, fundamental to our dignity.

I don't have to be doing anything wrong, to want my privacy.

Thank you Zenaan. Trying to memorize: keep discussions on-list, remove individual recipients Curious how you learned of the two or three personal and very short off-list messages I vaguely recall sending yesterday. On Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 1:01 AM Zenaan Harkness wrote:

Hi Karl, I am really appreciating your contributions to this list. Thank you.

Please keep your discussions on list unless requested by at least 2 un-opposed and public requests to 'please take it offline'.

There is a historical discussion on whether to create a " politico-punks@cpunks.org" mailing list, and the consensus ended up as "keep it in a single list, at least until otherwise discussed again and decided in some other way" - in this way, many can benefit from the discussions and tolks can filter, delete, or otherwise ignore as they wish.

(A minor request, if it is convenient enough for you to do so, please usually just reply to the list - then we do not have to take the extra time to manually delete the duplicate emails from you... this will be appreciated.)

Best,

...

It is clear that surveillance by the powerful is deadly.

Do you also disagree with public records made by the weak, like mailing list archives? I would put personal black boxes in that category; I could be wrong.

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 12:49 AM Zenaan Harkness wrote:

...

...

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 19:05:52 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

I'm not being clear. I think I've been upsetting you too, something I do not want to do. I'm a little crestfallen over the difficulty communicating.

don't worry about upsetting me. As far as communication goes

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 08:34:03PM -0300, Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote: though it seems you're ignorning my overall comments on 'technology' and political power. Anyway, I won't repeat them again. At least today...

...

...

I think I understand that you know surveillance is stimulating

severe

...

...

danger these days, and that you are very, very concerned around the idea of us building recording devices.

No, what 'concerns me' is the faulty reasoning.

...

We need to protect our privacy and safety, and we need to defend

...

...

those are protected. Am I on the right page here?

So there's an old adage (a saying, holding some truth and/or wisdom):

Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) https://wisdomquotes.com/liberty-safety-benjamin-franklin/

and some variations from the same link:

Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.

The simple technical issue here is the fact that surveillance is inherently destroying.

And it is natural for folks to want safety - but heed the Franklin warning above!

In principle, if our (as humans) default position when faced with

...

...

to our safety is to clamour for "solutions" which remove or reduce one or another of our freedoms, then the likely (towards certain) outcome (at least over the medium term) shall be the loss each freedom so sacrificed, and quite likely also that coveted safety.

To the extent we are able to obtain either the ability or means to

...

...

ourselves, or to correct wrongs, withOUT giving up any freedom - THIS must be our first port of call!

And further, every proposal by anyone, that we "ought give up freedom A, B and or C", must be treated with the greatest of suspicion, and in the very very least must be thoroughly evaluated and examined and tested from

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 04:30:10AM -0400, Karl wrote: that threats protect this

...

...

perspectiv of "are we giving up, or even encroaching upon, any basic human right and/or freedom?"

If WE do not uphold and protect our own basic human rights, then who will?

For any who missed the memo, privacy is a basic human right, fundamental to our dignity.

I don't have to be doing anything wrong, to want my privacy.

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 05:15:14AM -0400, Karl wrote:

Thank you Zenaan.

Trying to memorize: keep discussions on-list, remove individual recipients

Curious how you learned of the two or three personal and very short off-list messages I vaguely recall sending yesterday.

I didn't - just saw your on-list discussion about having off-list discussions :)

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 02:48:10PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 08:34:03PM -0300, Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:

...

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 19:05:52 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

I'm not being clear. I think I've been upsetting you too, something I do not want to do. I'm a little crestfallen over the difficulty communicating.

don't worry about upsetting me. As far as communication goes though it seems you're ignorning my overall comments on 'technology' and political power. Anyway, I won't repeat them again. At least today...

...

I think I understand that you know surveillance is stimulating severe danger these days, and that you are very, very concerned around the idea of us building recording devices.

No, what 'concerns me' is the faulty reasoning.

...

We need to protect our privacy and safety, and we need to defend that those are protected. Am I on the right page here?

So there's an old adage (a saying, holding some truth and/or wisdom):

Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) https://wisdomquotes.com/liberty-safety-benjamin-franklin/

and some variations from the same link:

Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.

The simple technical issue here is the fact that surveillance is inherently destroying.

"inherently -privacy- destroying" sorry about that

And it is natural for folks to want safety - but heed the Franklin warning above!

In principle, if our (as humans) default position when faced with threats to our safety is to clamour for "solutions" which remove or reduce one or another of our freedoms, then the likely (towards certain) outcome (at least over the medium term) shall be the loss each freedom so sacrificed, and quite likely also that coveted safety.

To the extent we are able to obtain either the ability or means to protect ourselves, or to correct wrongs, withOUT giving up any freedom - THIS must be our first port of call!

And further, every proposal by anyone, that we "ought give up freedom A, B and or C", must be treated with the greatest of suspicion, and in the very very least must be thoroughly evaluated and examined and tested from this perspectiv of "are we giving up, or even encroaching upon, any basic human right and/or freedom?"

If WE do not uphold and protect our own basic human rights, then who will?

For any who missed the memo, privacy is a basic human right, fundamental to our dignity.

I don't have to be doing anything wrong, to want my privacy.

On Wednesday, June 10, 2020, 02:40:34 PM PDT, Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote: On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:17:54 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

Punk, it sounds like you might be very concerned around this project.         Not about this project in particular. The project is just another example of the uncritical worship of 'technology' that people engage in.

    Were you already subcribed when Jim proposed to use retard phones to 'anonymously' track people because of the FUCKING FLU SCARE? Self-parody can't get any better (or worse). Jim proposed more fascist surveillane based on an infinitely idiotic government lie, the very same thing that govcorp is doing 

No, you sleazy liar.  Here is what I said: jim bell To:CypherPunks Fri, Feb 21 at 4:43 PM I am surprised that when I do a Google search for 'COVID-19 "google timeline" ', I see essentially no results. We all know now what COVID-19 (nCov, Coronavirus) is.  From the reports I see, this virus has the unusual characteristic of being very contageous for up to periods of weeks prior to a person's feeling symptoms.  That is presumably how a large fraction of a cruise ship became infected.  This is quite ominous.  If epidemiologists were to ask a patient, "tell us where and when you've been each minute over the last 15 days"  the vast majority of these victims wouldn't have a prayer of providing that information.  And even worse, finding the other people who were "in that AM/PM at 5:07-5:21 10 days ago" would be essentially impossible.   Or potentially dozens of other involved locations, over those 15 days.   Before one of you accuses me of "advocating" the use of Google Timeline to track potential cases of COVID-19 by means of Google Timeline, I don't need to "advocate" it.  Rather, I simply point out that there are a lot of people out there scared of this virus, and probably be looking for a way to determine if their paths have crossed with a victim, even if that victim wasn't symptomatic for 1-2 weeks after the contact.  So at some point, I think there will be discussion of this possibility.   The data is already being collected, in all Android phones (is there an Apple equivalent?)  In principle, if a new infectee is identified, it would be technically possible to work backwards, figure out where he has been over the relevant period, and find anybody who was close to him during a multi-week period.   One reason this could be important is that there may be a drug which might reduce (or, hopefully, eliminate) a person's contageousness if it taken during this pre-symptomatic period.   One possibility is an old anti-malarial drug, chloroquine, which I have mentioned before.   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32074550     But if people only begin taking chloroquine when they begin exhibiting symptoms  of this new flu, that means that they will be spreading that virus for as much as two weeks, or even more.  In principle, hundreds of people could be infected, directly or indirectly, merely because there is no early warning.    Suppose you receive a text or email notification that you were in a small store, 5 days ago, with a person who just developed symptoms of COVID-19.  You MIGHT be infected.   So, you MIGHT want to take a chloroquine pill.  (The half-life of chloroquine is 45-55 days).  Or some other pill that could assist if taken long before symptoms were likely to appear.  Not only might you not get sick, maybe you'd be able to avoid transmitting the virus to many others.  (My speculation...)   And maybe you'll live, when you otherwise wouldn't.    We Cypherpunks are SUPPOSED to be more concerned, than average, about the privacy and freedom implications of technologies.  What I have described, above, might be handled in a completely-voluntary fashion.  But, we want to ensure that this doesn't turn into a permanent form of tracking.  So we should debate the implications of all this, ideally before everyone else is talking about it. I would be surprised if Google isn't already considering something like this.  They have much of the data to do so.   They might hesitate to announce such an idea, for fear that people would think this is some sort of generalized people-tracking system.   [end of quote]

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 2:25 AM Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:

On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 05:21:39 +0000 (UTC) jim bell wrote:

...

On Wednesday, June 10, 2020, 02:40:34 PM PDT, Punk-Stasi 2.0 <

punks@tfwno.gf> wrote:

...

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:17:54 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

...

Punk, it sounds like you might be very concerned around this project.

...

Not about this project in particular. The project is just another

example of the uncritical worship of 'technology' that people engage in.

...

...

Were you already subcribed when Jim proposed to use retard phones

to 'anonymously' track people because of the FUCKING FLU SCARE? Self-parody can't get any better (or worse). Jim proposed more fascist surveillane based on an infinitely idiotic government lie, the very same thing that govcorp is doing

...

No, you sleazy liar. Here is what I said:

yes, I dealt with your 'voluntary' fascist garbage in previous messages. It's all archived. You proposed the very same thing that google-nsa proposes - 'anonymous' 'voluntary' surveillance because of the flu. Get a fucking a grip.

as to liars, that is you, parroting the lie that the flu is some kind of terrible threat requiring even more 'voluntary' fascism.

It is clear surveillance can be deadly. We need to discuss how to act on that. It may be hard to read through such a long post of jim's when the post considers designing tracking software, but it looks to me like jim was discussing ways of _reducing_ the harm of google's behavior, not of making worse surveillance overall. It sounds like you are aware of community projects being used in a way that is not actually voluntary?

I have schizophrenia. Could you remind me what we are talking about? On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 2:58 PM Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:

On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 04:21:55 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

It sounds like you are aware of community projects being used in a way that is not actually voluntary?

ok karl, you had your chance.

Let's make an open source plan for a wearable box that records and publicizes where all surveillance cameras are. What do you think? On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 3:35 PM Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:

On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:59:49 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

I have schizophrenia.

really?

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 3:56 PM Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:

On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 15:38:53 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

Let's make an open source plan for a wearable box that records and publicizes where all surveillance cameras are. What do you think?

seems rather pointless given the fact that surveillance cameras are EVERYWHERE.

now, what are the problems caused by your proposal? I don't want to know what the alleged benefits of what you're selling are. I want to know its real costs and what harm it causes.

I want to "harm" the most powerful dictators by making widespread public unerasable evidence of their most embarrassing violence against peacemakers. The cost of this is the lives of the people who work on it. Money is unneeded, always has been.

I have schizophrenia.

so you believe the lies of 'scientists' regarding the fascist flu scare. And you believe the lies of the worst scumbags on the planet, the psychiatrists, when they tell you that you're crazy? Well I guess, why would any sane person believe what his enemies tell him?

Because they are struggling to tell him the truth, stuck behind a language of persistent harm, and are the only ones who know why that language is used?

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 4:29 PM Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:

On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 16:13:49 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 3:56 PM Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:

...

On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 15:38:53 -0400 Karl wrote:

...

Let's make an open source plan for a wearable box that records and publicizes where all surveillance cameras are. What do you think?

seems rather pointless given the fact that surveillance cameras are EVERYWHERE.

now, what are the problems caused by your proposal? I don't want to know what the alleged benefits of what you're selling are. I want to know its real costs and what harm it causes.

I want to "harm" the most powerful dictators

The cost of this is the lives of the people who work on it.

that would be the development cost. It's not the only one. And I'm not asking about that one because that cost is obvious. I'm asking about the unintended consequences and hidden costs of using such a 'wearable box'.

Since I see the project as incredibly helpful, I see all the harm as paired with good that balances or outweighs it. I'm desperate here. I'm desperate about other things, too. But it is likely to begin collapsing the casual surveillance industry by outcompeting them a little. It may make it harder for people unaware of such a project to hide harm of those who are. And there are a lot of chaotic results, both good and bad, from any new addition to culture, especially in such a volatile space. Involving fear, hope, blame, validation, slavery, retribution, freedom, terror, unbelievable resolution and understanding ... These can all be prevented or supported if prepared for, but software engineers don't tend to worry or think about such things. If I knew the boundaries of others, I would be better at thinking of defending them.

notice that a map showing the location of surveillance cameras can be done without using any 'open source' fancy gadget...

Most need military training to feel confident they have found all the hidden ones. Or a $20 radio can scan for pixel clock emissions.

...

Money is unneeded, always has been.

money is two-steps barter. It's quite useful.

You're assuming that everything happens soon.

...

...

I have schizophrenia.

so you believe the lies of 'scientists' regarding the fascist

...

...

scare. And you believe the lies of the worst scumbags on the planet,

flu the

...

...

psychiatrists, when they tell you that you're crazy? Well I guess, why would any sane person believe what his enemies tell him?

Because they are struggling to tell him the truth,

So you believe the worst kind of technocratic lies used to control you? And you're asserting that those patent lies are "the truth"?

well I guess, again, in that sense, you are detached from reality. If you believe what your masters tell you, you are insane. Now, how can you oppose your masters if you believe their propaganda?

I guess I need to wrap my head around people saying the opposite of what is true?

...

stuck behind a language of persistent harm, and are the only ones who know why that language is used?

I'll try to think on that a little before countering with the idea of holding belief of multiple viewpoints without conflict. On Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 1:39 AM Zig the N.g wrote:

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 04:48:08PM -0400, Karl wrote:

...

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 4:29 PM Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:

...

...

...

...

I have schizophrenia.

so you believe the lies of 'scientists' regarding the fascist flu scare. And you believe the lies of the worst scumbags on the planet, the psychiatrists, when they tell you that you're crazy? Well I guess, why would any sane person believe what his enemies tell him?

Because they are struggling to tell him the truth,

So you believe the worst kind of technocratic lies used to control you? And you're asserting that those patent lies are "the truth"?

well I guess, again, in that sense, you are detached from reality. If you believe what your masters tell you, you are insane. Now, how can you oppose your masters if you believe their propaganda?

I guess I need to wrap my head around people saying the opposite of what is true?

The Z.g approves!

Such may be at times challenging, confronting, liberating, enlightening and a bit of a wild ride.

But, the alternative is to never doubt "your superiors" ... and more fundamentally, to suffer the consequences of never doubting "your superiors" ...

surveillance advocate jim bell wrote:

Fri, Feb 21 at 4:43 PM I am surprised that when I do a Google search for 'COVID-19 "google timeline" ', I see essentially no results.

We all know now what COVID-19 (nCov, Coronavirus) is. 

No 'we' don't. 'covid' is a global fascist PSYOP, but you prentend to not know it.

From the reports I see, this virus has the unusual characteristic of being very contageous for up to periods of weeks prior to a person's feeling symptoms.

"very contageous" : government terrorist bullshit.

  That is presumably how a large fraction of a cruise ship became infected.  This is quite ominous. 

"quite ominous" : more terrorist bullshit.

If epidemiologists were to ask a patient, "tell us where and when you've been each minute over the last 15 days"  the vast majority of these victims wouldn't have a prayer of providing that information.  And even worse, finding the other people who were "in that AM/PM at 5:07-5:21 10 days ago" would be essentially impossible.   Or potentially dozens of other involved locations, over those 15 days.  

so first Jim has parroted the fascist propaganda premise to a tee.

Before one of you accuses me of "advocating" the use of Google Timeline

now you're 'preempting' the obvious critique of your bullshit by denying in advance that you're "advocating" when that's exactly what you're doing. advocacy : the act of pleading for, supporting, or recommending; active espousal: you are RECOMMENDING and SUPPORTING surveillance.

to track potential cases of COVID-19 by means of Google Timeline, I don't need to "advocate" it. 

it's exactly what you are doing.

Rather, I simply point out that there are a lot of people out there scared of this virus, and probably be looking for a way to determine if their paths have crossed with a victim, even if that victim wasn't symptomatic for 1-2 weeks after the contact.  So at some point, I think there will be discussion of this possibility. 

surveillance already exists and you're RECOMMENDING that it be used to deal with a non-existent 'threat'. You are SUPPORTING surveillance by pathetically lying about its 'usefulness'.

 The data is already being collected, in all Android phones (is there an Apple equivalent?)  In principle, if a new infectee is identified, it would be technically possible to work backwards, figure out where he has been over the relevant period, and find anybody who was close to him during a multi-week period.  

yes, fascist surveillance.

One reason this could be important is that there may be a drug which might reduce (or, hopefully, eliminate) a person's contageousness if it taken during this pre-symptomatic period.   One possibility is an old anti-malarial drug, chloroquine, which I have mentioned before.   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32074550  

now another lie on top of the first lie.

  But if people only begin taking chloroquine when they begin exhibiting symptoms  of this new flu, that means that they will be spreading that virus for as much as two weeks, or even more.  In principle, hundreds of people could be infected,

more terrorist propaganda

directly or indirectly, merely because there is no early warning.  

early warning" : military jargon.

 Suppose you receive a text or email notification that you were in a small store, 5 days ago, with a person who just developed symptoms of COVID-19.  You MIGHT be infected. 

terrorist propaganda.

 So, you MIGHT want to take a chloroquine pill.  (The half-life of chloroquine is 45-55 days).  Or some other pill that could assist if taken long before symptoms were likely to appear.  Not only might you not get sick, maybe you'd be able to avoid transmitting the virus to many others.  (My speculation...) 

 And maybe you'll live, when you otherwise wouldn't.   

believe the fascist garbage that mr Bell writes or you'll die!

We Cypherpunks are SUPPOSED to be more concerned, than average, about the privacy and freedom implications of technologies.

yeah, notice the totally and completely orwellian twist of Jim's advocacy of fascist surveillance. He's advocating it while denying doing so and now underscoring the fact that he should be 'more concerned' while doing the OPPOSITE of what cpunks should do.

  What I have described, above, might be handled in a completely-voluntary fashion. 

nothing is 'voluntary' in the current fascist system. Especially the use of US military 'technology'. There is no 'informed consent' AT ALL. this twist about 'voluntary' totalitarianism is of course quite common with dishonest retards from both the left and the right. You have the 'libertarians' literally supporting 'voluntary' slavery while the leftists claim that the state is 'voluntary'(like virtually all right wingers do).

But, we want to ensure that this doesn't turn into a permanent form of tracking.  So we should debate the implications of all this, ideally before everyone else is talking about it.

I would be surprised if Google isn't already considering something like this.  They have much of the data to do so.   They might hesitate to announce such an idea, for fear that people would think this is some sort of generalized people-tracking system.  

that's why you have helpfully lied about it multiple times and used governmnet propaganda-terrorism techniques to 'convince' people that surveillanec will literally save their lives.

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 02:59:30PM -0500, \0xDynamite wrote:

...

...

Fri, Feb 21 at 4:43 PM I am surprised that when I do a Google search for 'COVID-19 "google timeline" ', I see essentially no results.

We all know now what COVID-19 (nCov, Coronavirus) is.

No 'we' don't. 'covid' is a global fascist PSYOP, but you prentend to not know it.

That is a very real working hypothesis I've been working on. I tend to see that Satan is behind it, but it is effectively indistinguishable.

OK Marxos, a jot of homework for ya, please do tell us where the word Satan comes from, and don't chicken out on us either.

...

you are RECOMMENDING and SUPPORTING surveillance.

...

to track potential cases of COVID-19 by means of Google Timeline, I don't need to "advocate" it.

it's exactly what you are doing.

What the punk-stasi is saying is that by looking for cases you provide legitimacy to it. And legitimacy in a propaganda campaign is advocacy, for that is what the propagandist seeks.

That is true, and further, that somewhere high up, some smallish number of actual humans actually discussed and at one point actually decided to run this massive virus drill, and to run it as realistically as possible. In other words, because it's a drill, it's largely a hoax or actual conspiracy. Now some might say that 'saving' the West from China is a good enough, and indeed highly important and eminently justifying reason for this 'valid' drill to ultimately hold China to account for some of their many many outpoints.... but that does not (unfortunately) remove the fact that this virus has as yet failed to mutate into something biologically very significant, though I am very grateful for this fact, since the political significance of China's many failures and outright blights, is entirely sufficient to the cause of holding China to account, so ultimately win win win :)

...

surveillance already exists and you're RECOMMENDING that it be used to deal with a non-existent 'threat'. You are SUPPORTING surveillance by pathetically lying about its 'usefulness'.

While there might be a case for surveillance in some benevolent society, it is WAY too much power to the governors in a cracked society like this. But IF THERE IS SURVEILLANCE, give access to the People to balance and check the power being given to government.

Hard to disagree that folks have a right while in public, to make recordings of what they see and hear...

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 5:24 AM grarpamp wrote:

...

...

But IF THERE IS SURVEILLANCE, give access to the People to balance and check the power being given to government.

You don't check govt by giving it photo ops, you revoke and reclaim what your dumbass ceded to it. No more govt, no more access to give it either. Govt is a fiction, a non-natural non-sentient being, it, and its people on the clock, has no right to privacy. Especially noting govt is soley responsible for all murderous warfare in history.

It sounds like you know of a way to resist an organization that has military spy technology, without producing reliable recording? You also mention the importance of resolving any conflicts with people who don't want to be recorded, which I agree is important to do.

It sounds like you are discussing how to repair world culture, and none of us are on the same page. On Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 10:44 AM \0xDynamite wrote:

...

...

...

...

We all know now what COVID-19 (nCov, Coronavirus) is.

No 'we' don't. 'covid' is a global fascist PSYOP, but you prentend to not know it.

That is a very real working hypothesis I've been working on. I tend to see that Satan is behind it, but it is effectively indistinguishable.

OK Marxos, a jot of homework for ya, please do tell us where the word Satan comes from, and don't chicken out on us either.

It likely comes from the shibboleth named "GOD" produced by Christians and their errors,

...

...

What the punk-stasi is saying is that by looking for cases you provide legitimacy to it. And legitimacy in a propaganda campaign is advocacy, for that is what the propagandist seeks.

That is true, and further, that somewhere high up, some smallish number of actual humans actually discussed and at one point actually decided to run this massive virus drill, and to run it as realistically as possible.

Such people are real people we can talk to. And when they go away they may be replaced by something more extreme, because of the trackable, understandable, enumerable cultural pressures making the situations. You see here one of the merits of the coronavirus scare: you are thinking about why it is was made, and asking others to. Well, there is one other possibility. It was witnessed by myself:

the "cabal" at the top of the "illuminati" and the all-seeing-eye was actually a machine (hence the term shibboleth) ran by prophesy that had already been circumvented and co-opted, yet still intact. This was holding the right side of the thing. After liberals erected gay men as superior to GOD, the media machine was held by them (for the servce of MAN, perhaps, yet still....).

...

...

...

surveillance already exists and you're RECOMMENDING that it

be used to deal with a non-existent 'threat'. You are SUPPORTING surveillance by pathetically lying about its 'usefulness'.

While there might be a case for surveillance in some benevolent society, it is WAY too much power to the governors in a cracked society like this. But IF THERE IS SURVEILLANCE, give access to the People to balance and check the power being given to government.

Hard to disagree that folks have a right while in public, to make recordings of what they see and hear...

Except, that the tech used to do so (including the optics) is beyond most men and women's abilities to produce or explain. That means that it is a higher force that they're using to get those capabilities.

Your phrase "higher force" is misleading for readers here who believe they understand or could understand the workings (which we all could but is unwise to do). I'm imagining people upset at having someone give or teach them to build a device that shows where all the tech is and offers a way to disable it, because they are so scared of tech already. In my area so many people have cellphones they would have no qualms about implanting a nanitegrenade in their children and their brains if a trusted source said to. For technodominant cultures, natural intuition and experience, which can be enumerated, tracked, and understood, but are disregarded, seem like magic. But many more people get hurt when technodominant people are scared.

marxos