Self Preservation and Irreversible Decline [was: Electronic Freedom Foundation selective in support of freedom]

[grarpamp]

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 7:50 AM, coderman <coderman at gmail.com> wrote:
> this topic has been on my mind recently,
>
> "You know, It would be a lot easier you just didn't do X"
> "This wouldn't happen if you quit annoying Y"
> "If you accept, Z will pay nicely and protect you."
>
> where X is FOIA requests, security research, PET development, etc.,
>  Y is some powerful entity like FBI, NSA, Verizon, Intel, etc.,
>   and Z is some convenient but forever bound by position requiring a
> clearance and suspension of moral qualms.
>
> when you've got the world to loose (nothing more encompassing than
> your own family!) preservation is near irresistible.  simple fear of
> harm might be compelling enough for the majority to cower compliant,
> even.
> ...

If one goes into it with a fuck it attitude, then nothing can truly
touch them. And no matter what happens, their family will inherit
that ethos.
If one goes to beer and TV, that's what they inherit.
So the real question is, is a relatively blissful beer and TV
subsistance life the only, indeed natural, way of things?
Or is there an alternate reality in the offing?
The only sure way to find out is to say fuck it.
Otherwise just throw in the towel and embrace the bliss.
That's the easy, understandable, and certainly popular way.
Beyond that... tldr, sorta... the deepweb's a better forum,
but I feel ya bro.

If you do throw it in, you can always send some unspent fuckits
this way, if for nothing else, beer and TV, maybe some chickens,
and a barn, with a tractor...
bitcoin:1KJf6tkfs1GPHgyEqAENj9vvS6anYuU1nD