Is the revolution over?
Honestly, I'm back to this list shell-shocked. I left this civilization, thinking things were on track, but coming back, I see the information revolution has turned into another glam and sham celebration. What happened to John Perry Barlow? What's the value of cryptography if everyone's content with facebook, jabbascript login portals, and the same old commerce now 100 times easier? Are there any revolutionaries? Is the soul for real change dead? Is everyone medicated, over-eaten, touch-screen hyper-media and everyone is PERFECTLY CONTENT? I still have a complete revolution in my pocket, but I guess I'll have to chuck it, if there's no one here... Marcos
On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 00:05:09 -0500 "\\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
Are there any revolutionaries? Is the soul for real change dead? Is everyone medicated, over-eaten, touch-screen hyper-media and everyone is PERFECTLY CONTENT?
so it seems...
I still have a complete revolution in my pocket, but I guess I'll have to chuck it, if there's no one here...
Marcos
Just because under tyranny good men fear to speak their minds in public, does not mean there are no good men around. On Mar 5, 2017 12:06, "\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
Honestly, I'm back to this list shell-shocked. I left this civilization, thinking things were on track, but coming back, I see the information revolution has turned into another glam and sham celebration. What happened to John Perry Barlow?
What's the value of cryptography if everyone's content with facebook, jabbascript login portals, and the same old commerce now 100 times easier?
Are there any revolutionaries? Is the soul for real change dead? Is everyone medicated, over-eaten, touch-screen hyper-media and everyone is PERFECTLY CONTENT?
I still have a complete revolution in my pocket, but I guess I'll have to chuck it, if there's no one here...
Marcos
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/05/2017 12:05 AM, \0xDynamite wrote:
Honestly, I'm back to this list shell-shocked. I left this civilization, thinking things were on track, but coming back, I see the information revolution has turned into another glam and sham celebration. What happened to John Perry Barlow?
He appears to be on the boards of EFF and the Freedom Of The Press Foundation.
What's the value of cryptography if everyone's content with facebook, jabbascript login portals, and the same old commerce now 100 times easier?
Cryptography is a tool, not a magic cure-all. There is a time and place to lock adversaries out of your comms channels, and a time and place to be very visible. To tell the difference on a case by case basis, ask yourself: "Does my use of wide open public comms do more harm to my interests or to those of my adversaries?" It's a piss poor pitiful Anarchist, who refuses to use an adversary's infrastructure to harm that adversary's interests. Those who insist on trying to conceal their identities and/or activities from hostile actors at all times take themselves out of the influence game. If you have a protocol for broadcasting a persistent, responsive, influential political message without being identified by well funded surveillance actors, do please share it: That would be a fundamental and unexpected breakthrough. Otherwise, such an effort only starts a count-down timer - when will a well funded surveillance actor take the trouble to find out who you are, and trace your movements backward through time? When they do so, which of the actions you took because you believed they were "off the record" will justify the allocation of billable hours to shut you down?
Are there any revolutionaries? Is the soul for real change dead? Is everyone medicated, over-eaten, touch-screen hyper-media and everyone is PERFECTLY CONTENT?
Judging by the "social media" channels, practically no one is content; nearly everyone seems to believe that their ideological adversaries are presently in power and need to be stomped down. I see more people who either call themselves "revolutionaries" or publicly bemoan the fact that there "are no revolutionaries" all the time lately. Of course, they don't know what the word means - they accept self defeating definitions provided to them by a lifetime of exposure to counter- revolutionary propaganda. As expected, the Internet does amplify human intelligence and mobilizes distributed "smart mobs" in response to perceived problems and challenges. But the Internet also amplifies human stupidity, and some factions among our rulers have learned how to raise armies of morons in cyberspace. The result is a hotly contested information battle space where multiple factions compete to influence both ephemeral swarms and more durable herd movements. I have never seen anything like the intensity and variety of influence and disinformation projects in progress right now in U.S. broadcast and online media. As expected, the future arrives sooner every day as the rate of change continues to accelerate. I see signs of panic and/or desperation everywhere I look at any well established economic power block's publicly visible activities. What if there was a revolution and nobody noticed? The answer to that question is all around us right now.
I still have a complete revolution in my pocket, but I guess I'll have to chuck it, if there's no one here...
You say you want a revolution? Congratulations! Radical changes in the physical world - economic, technological and geophysical - are now rendering previously stable political systems obsolete and unmaintainable. New institutional templates adapted to new conditions emerge because people adapt their social and economic behavior to new conditions; not because Great Visionary Leaders issue a call to arms. The political agitation and violence we call a "revolution" is only the last stage of the actual revolutionary process, terminating it and establishing a new institutional stability for the benefit of a new set of power players. We all want to change the world. But if you have a real solution, we all need to see the plan. Restricting its distribution to "secure and anonymous" channels only guarantees it won't reach an audience that can implement it. Where and as surprise actions provide strategic advantage, do use cryptographic technology - IF your co-conspirators are also up to it, which almost never happens in real life. When physical meetings where all electronics are banned are practical, they can facilitate useful goal setting, coordination and planning. The surveillance networks will follow most of your group to and from the meeting place, but otherwise moles and unwitting informants will be the only security risks affecting the meeting itself. A proposed revolution in communications security that would have blinded State and Corporate actors to "private" network comms never got off the ground and so could be said to have failed. But a real, naturally occurring revolution is in progress anyway: Come back in 50 years and you will hardly know the place. :o) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYvFymAAoJEECU6c5Xzmuq9bgH/R2CijTqoezRjynaGCJTnM9G phF4jkv+9s7tT9lqrdzmsLap61F1R/flmhNgy1QQEiuR+Y+BjYSNZdQLE7HCb/i/ 2tbDLazjadWqLJCUfoJv0qAlrXW4N9lmAg4UxS8Tb8HxbAhzoNpgy17JPFalFoDG ONZy1xq8D6S1zQsjE38kI67iV9wNFM20MZiMR6ciEE+OZ3HD4RArf9L5iRp9c/nm 6jOAfg6+CUXCtiFRFmSYr86OEJjNqw/zdMlQNfbp03/KMB1RddOkg+8bCEjHiqRX aVh5R4U/6GwKGEBq8tE2Bmp6VSELVezATWkrXPDKGwHj/M/dBX4m9LvxbzXJXyA= =SdE3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 13:44:55 -0500 Steve Kinney <admin@pilobilus.net> wrote:
It's a piss poor pitiful Anarchist, who refuses to use an adversary's infrastructure to harm that adversary's interests.
Of course. But I hope you don't believe that using facebook harms the establishment?
Those who insist on trying to conceal their identities and/or activities from hostile actors at all times take themselves out of the influence game. If you have a protocol for broadcasting a persistent, responsive, influential political message without being identified by well funded surveillance actors, do please share it:
well, obviously crypto is supposed to be used for stuff you want to keep private, not for broadcasting...
Are there any revolutionaries? Is the soul for real change dead? Is everyone medicated, over-eaten, touch-screen hyper-media and everyone is PERFECTLY CONTENT?
Judging by the "social media" channels, practically no one is content;
Right. They want more fascism. Just look at people like quinn and his advocacy of fascist 'progressive' 'health care'.
nearly everyone seems to believe that their ideological adversaries are presently in power and need to be stomped down. I see more people who either call themselves "revolutionaries" or publicly bemoan the fact that there "are no revolutionaries" all the time lately. Of course, they don't know what the word means - they accept self defeating definitions provided to them by a lifetime of exposure to counter- revolutionary propaganda.
As expected, the Internet does amplify human intelligence
If by intelligence you mean stupidity, yes it does.
and mobilizes distributed "smart mobs" in response to perceived problems and challenges. But the Internet also amplifies human stupidity,
=)
and some factions among our rulers have learned how to raise armies of morons in cyberspace. The result is a hotly contested information battle space where multiple factions compete to influence both ephemeral swarms and more durable herd movements. I have never seen anything like the intensity and variety of influence and disinformation projects in progress right now in U.S. broadcast and online media.
Whereas the sane voices are virtually non-existent.
As expected, the future arrives sooner every day as the rate of change continues to accelerate. I see signs of panic and/or desperation everywhere I look at any well established economic power block's publicly visible activities.
I think that's called wishful thinking.
What if there was a revolution and nobody noticed? The answer to that question is all around us right now.
I still have a complete revolution in my pocket, but I guess I'll have to chuck it, if there's no one here...
You say you want a revolution? Congratulations! Radical changes in the physical world - economic, technological and geophysical - are now rendering previously stable political systems obsolete and unmaintainable.
any evidence for that claim?
New institutional templates adapted to new conditions emerge because people adapt their social and economic behavior to new conditions; not because Great Visionary Leaders issue a call to arms. The political agitation and violence we call a "revolution" is only the last stage of the actual revolutionary process, terminating it and establishing a new institutional stability for the benefit of a new set of power players.
We all want to change the world. But if you have a real solution, we all need to see the plan. Restricting its distribution to "secure and anonymous" channels only guarantees it won't reach an audience that can implement it. Where and as surprise actions provide strategic advantage, do use cryptographic technology - IF your co-conspirators are also up to it, which almost never happens in real life. When physical meetings where all electronics are banned are practical, they can facilitate useful goal setting, coordination and planning. The surveillance networks will follow most of your group to and from the meeting place, but otherwise moles and unwitting informants will be the only security risks affecting the meeting itself.
A proposed revolution in communications security that would have blinded State and Corporate actors to "private" network comms never got off the ground and so could be said to have failed.
Yep.
But a real, naturally occurring revolution is in progress anyway: Come back in 50 years and you will hardly know the place.
Yep. Well, actually, it will look a lot like Brave New World or worse. So it would be pretty easy to recognize or know the practical implementation of Huxley's musings. With a good deal of outright brutalism a la Orwell mixed in, probably.
:o)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYvFymAAoJEECU6c5Xzmuq9bgH/R2CijTqoezRjynaGCJTnM9G phF4jkv+9s7tT9lqrdzmsLap61F1R/flmhNgy1QQEiuR+Y+BjYSNZdQLE7HCb/i/ 2tbDLazjadWqLJCUfoJv0qAlrXW4N9lmAg4UxS8Tb8HxbAhzoNpgy17JPFalFoDG ONZy1xq8D6S1zQsjE38kI67iV9wNFM20MZiMR6ciEE+OZ3HD4RArf9L5iRp9c/nm 6jOAfg6+CUXCtiFRFmSYr86OEJjNqw/zdMlQNfbp03/KMB1RddOkg+8bCEjHiqRX aVh5R4U/6GwKGEBq8tE2Bmp6VSELVezATWkrXPDKGwHj/M/dBX4m9LvxbzXJXyA= =SdE3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Honestly, I'm back to this list shell-shocked. I left this civilization, thinking things were on track, but coming back, I see the information revolution has turned into another glam and sham celebration. What happened to John Perry Barlow?
He appears to be on the boards of EFF and the Freedom Of The Press Foundation.
Yes, those seem to be silos of activism aimed at us: those who believe in the internet revolution. The only internet "cyber"activism that seems to have been successful at achieving its aims is GNU. EFF is a great organization, but what use is freedom if all they want is Facebook?
What's the value of cryptography if everyone's content with facebook, jabbascript login portals, and the same old commerce now 100 times easier?
Cryptography is a tool, not a magic cure-all. There is a time and place to lock adversaries out of your comms channels, and a time and place to be very visible. To tell the difference on a case by case basis, ask yourself: "Does my use of wide open public comms do more harm to my interests or to those of my adversaries?" It's a piss poor pitiful Anarchist, who refuses to use an adversary's infrastructure to harm that adversary's interests.
Nice quote. I agree cryptography is not a cure-all. In fact, it could be argued an indicator: that society is going against it`s own aims and people are actually taking the time to counter-act it.
Those who insist on trying to conceal their identities and/or activities from hostile actors at all times take themselves out of the influence game. If you have a protocol for broadcasting a persistent, responsive, influential political message without being identified by well funded surveillance actors, do please share it: That would be a fundamental and unexpected breakthrough.
I might. I call it "security through obscurity". The idea is to be SO transparent, that you are (practicallly) invisible. There's a lot of noise you can use on the internet. That makes only the people who are already "in" find your material. Much like a squirrel can hide their nuts away for the winter without doors and locks -- there's simply too much chaff.
Are there any revolutionaries? Is the soul for real change dead? Is everyone medicated, over-eaten, touch-screen hyper-media and everyone is PERFECTLY CONTENT?
Judging by the "social media" channels, practically no one is content; nearly everyone seems to believe that their ideological adversaries are presently in power and need to be stomped down. I see more people who either call themselves "revolutionaries" or publicly bemoan the fact that there "are no revolutionaries" all the time lately. Of course, they don't know what the word means - they accept self defeating definitions provided to them by a lifetime of exposure to counter- revolutionary propaganda.
Well, most people have the power to challenge their opponents. The real problem seems to be a lack of solidarity. One person just doesn't get traction and get's called a "nutcase". I've been victimized by this tactic myself. And before all the other nutcases jump on me: OF COURSE I've considered that my well-researched, educated, unfunded opinion might be WRONG.
As expected, the Internet does amplify human intelligence and mobilizes distributed "smart mobs" in response to perceived problems and challenges. But the Internet also amplifies human stupidity, and some factions among our rulers have learned how to raise armies of morons in cyberspace. The result is a hotly contested information battle space where multiple factions compete to influence both ephemeral swarms and more durable herd movements.
Information technology related to amplifying the human mind, like artillery amplifies the human will. One could argue that neither are inherently bad or good, but can also argue that neither are inherently *effective* at creating any particular desired effect of social change. And without some desired effect, they only increase volatility, through their power. Presently, all desired effects at social change are being co-opted by individuals` weaknesses to have a path of least resisitance along with hedonism. The rest is co-opted by some yet-unseen force (medical establishment) and has created apathy. The end result of all this is nothing but the same consumerism and media noise. There's no need for cyptology, per se, because everyone's happy and aren't even looking for subversives. I have never seen
anything like the intensity and variety of influence and disinformation projects in progress right now in U.S. broadcast and online media.
You've not seen it because IT IS NOT THERE. They are simply inept. Do not confuse empowered incompetence with societal evil.
As expected, the future arrives sooner every day as the rate of change continues to accelerate. I see signs of panic and/or desperation everywhere I look at any well established economic power block's publicly visible activities. What if there was a revolution and nobody noticed? The answer to that question is all around us right now.
YES IT IS. Perhaps, in fact, we are being too academic and concealed. For my part, I have to conceal my passion and interests, lest they be taken as spam, a hyper-personal obsession, or conspiritorial nuttery. These foregone conclusions all effect the individual wanting to create social change just as much as the threat of force. Instead I have provided links to material of which I continue to curate and perfect that QUANTIFIES the value of the internet for social change, so that it can be communicated to influencers as well as PLANS on how to implement said change. So far, there has been no interested party.
I still have a complete revolution in my pocket, but I guess I'll have to chuck it, if there's no one here...
You say you want a revolution? Congratulations! Radical changes in the physical world - economic, technological and geophysical - are now rendering previously stable political systems obsolete and unmaintainable.
Rendering, no. Threatening them, yes. It all still in DEFCON 4, perhaps 3. or Homeland security level BLUE: GUARDED. I think people know the inherent power of these tools, and they get caught up in overestimated the amount of ACTUAL influence they've had in affecting the world towards those visions.
We all want to change the world. But if you have a real solution, we all need to see the plan.
wiki.hackerspaces.org has been collecting by far the best material, so far. Because it can be implemented easily, cheaply, and has been worked out in several dimensions. It is also a public, editable wiki. Since you mentioned a "real:" plan: check the Business Plan.
A proposed revolution in communications security that would have blinded State and Corporate actors to "private" network comms never got off the ground and so could be said to have failed. But a real, naturally occurring revolution is in progress anyway: Come back in 50 years and you will hardly know the place.
You may not even need it. I don't know if it's published, but the FCC has told me that we can broadcast on one-directional channels up to 5mi on non-licensed frequencies, for non-profit, personal use. 2.5mi for bi-directional comms. Anyway, I appreciate the response from someone who is invested in the field and a better world. Marxos Gothenburg, Nebraska
participants (5)
-
\0xDynamite -
grarpamp -
Jason McVetta -
juan -
Steve Kinney