Skrymions: Data storage breakthough

juan juan.g71 at gmail.com
Thu Apr 13 18:43:27 PDT 2017


On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 10:59:22 -0400
"\\0xDynamite" <dreamingforward at gmail.com> wrote:

> I said it before.  Heavy industry amplifies human will.  High
> technology amplifies the mind.  They can amplify virtue or vice.

	True, but not really what I am getting at. 

	It seems to me that 'you guys' the cypherpunks/technology 
	optimists have a naive or shallow understanding of the very 
	technology you are selling or promoting. 




> Neither care.
> 
> Marx0s
> 
> On 4/12/17, juan <juan.g71 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:04:47 +0000 (UTC)
> > jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>> From: juan <juan.g71 at gmail.com>
> >>> >better technology, better mass surveillance
> >
> >> That's a rather limited way to look at things.
> >
> >
> > 	Maybe limited, but do you think what I say is incorrect?
> >
> > 	Perhaps technology in general could be 'neutral' but it
> > 	is a fact that technology the way it is being implemented
> > right now shifts the balance of power away from individuals and
> > 	towards the military-industrial-government organizations.
> >
> >
> >> Let's consider:  Are
> >> we better off due to (computer and information) technology than,
> >> say, 1980?
> > 	
> > 	Better off, regarding what? Has the ability of the
> > 	corporate-governmnet mafia to track its subject decreased,
> > or wildly increased?
> >
> >
> >> In 1980, home computers were little more than toys, and the
> >> Internet as the public now knows it was 15-20 years from existing.
> >>  News was provided by four national networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS)
> >> and local newspapers, with no effective competition.  People,
> >> generally, found it hard to talk (type) to each other, other than
> >> face-to-face speaking.
> >
> > 	Political activism has been carried using printed media for
> > a (long) while. Of course that same printed media has been mostly
> > 	subverted by  corporate-government madia. The fourth state
> > is a branch of government.
> >
> > 	But at least printed media technology could be used against
> > the government and it didn't allow the government to track people.
> > 	Books don't spy on you. The intershit does.
> >
> >
> >> If you simply accept all of the positives of the
> >> subsequent 37 years as a given, and then ignore them, and focus
> >> solely on what you see to be the negatives, yes, you will get
> >> conclusions like "better technology, better mass surveillance".
> >
> > 	No I don't think that's how the reckoning works.
> >
> > 	Do the current systems allow waaay better surveillanece of
> > 	subjects by the corporate-government mafia? The answer is
> > yes. Whatever alleged 'positives' there are (I don't think there are
> > 	any), the fact of better surveillance remains.
> >
> > 	It is a fact just like it is fact that central banks
> > 	counterfeit trillions and trillions of pseudo currency and
> > that enriches the government and corporate mafia.
> >
> >
> >> But
> >> one of the results of that technology was and is that we, the
> >> public, are far better able to monitor the actions of governments,
> >
> >
> > 	Where's the evidence for that claim?
> >
> >
> >> which
> >> ostensibly act in our name(s). OUR 'mass surveillance' of the
> >> governments is very, very valuable.
> >
> > 	It might be useful, if it existed. But it doesn't.
> >
> >
> >> I have no doubt that, for
> >> example, the Bush 43 administration got far more pushback on their
> >> actions than did the LBJ administration 1963-1969, in regards to
> >> the Vietnam war.
> >
> > 	I don't think there's any evidence for that sort of claim.
> >
> >
> >  And even more pushback in regards to Syria.  As, I
> >> think, it ought to be and needs to be. Jim Bell
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >



More information about the cypherpunks mailing list