Didn't I put a reference to Chuck Hamill's From Crossbows to Cryptography into my Assassination Politics essay?

[Punk - Stasi 2.0]

On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 03:18:44 +0000 (UTC)
jim bell <jdb10987 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> >    I'm quoting. Where's the strawman? 

> You quoted, and then you misinterpreted.

	I've been reasonable so far. Now I'm done, and I'll call your bullshit straight out. I am misinterpreting FUCK. 

	And there isn't any room for 'interpretation' actually. Hamill believes that govt is too stupid and burreaucratic to use 'technology'. That is what he clearly says, and he is pathetically wrong. 

	

> 
> 
> >>Government can employ technology for those purposes, and you can then notice that, but that doesn't mean that the net effect of technology favors non-freedom.
> 
>  >   Except it does. Technology favors non-freedom. That is my postion and I can easily argue it. And half the argument is simply looking around at what's happening. We live in a fuckign global police-surveillance state. Thanks to cheap microelectronics.


> Technology CAN 'favor non-freedom'.   But that doesn't mean it does so in each and every case.

	Yes it does. You of course haven't provided any single counter example. And even if you could find say 10% of counter examples (and Im being generous), there remains the other 90% of cases where technology favors the govt and the 'private' mafias that are govt's accomplices.


	Look at the fucking world around you. And read a fucking history book. The 'technological' 'progress' is NOT MATCHED, AT ALL, by any similar moral and political progress.

> 
> 
> > Further, 'Government' buys technology using money robbed from the public, robbery that I have long argued would be prevented using an implementation of the AP system.  
> 
> 
>     Government develops 'technology' in partnership with the corrupt-to-the-core, pseudo-private sector.
> 
> Again, you are abusing statistics.  Quantify your claims.  Percentages.  You won't be able to do that.

	I'm not abusing fuck. I'm stating the nature of reality. And I don't need to provide any exceedingly detailed report for you. I'm not going to go through every single example of corporatism in the modern world. Check the archives. But I will do post this again 

	https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikecollins/2015/07/14/the-big-bank-bailout/

	17  FUCKING TRILLIONS DOLLARS to prevent the americunt fascist economy from collapsing. 


> 
>  >And that's one of the main reasons why 'technology' works AGAINST freedom. Technical development requires technical infrastructure, and that infrastructure is in the hands of govcorp.

> I keep saying that occasionally, that is true.  But not in every case, or even most cases.
> 


	In all cases. Or else feel free to list all the cases where technology isn't controlled by the governme


	
	"Quantify your claims.  Percentages." "Quantify your claims.  Percentages." 

	I'm all ears. 

> 
> 
> >>Please try to explain why "government", the major form of "unfreedom", would remain capable of doing its work if any of its employees to try to tax were targetable with a functioning AP-type system.
> 
>  >   The problem looks rather simple, and I say this as an open sympathizer to the assassination program. For example, in order for AP to work 'we' need good anonimity. And as 'we' know, good anonimity is nowhere to be found. And that's because the whole telecomms infrastructure is controlled by the enemy, aka govcorp.


> To say, "the WHOLE telecomms infrastructure is yet another strawman of yours.
> 


	Haha. Are you delusional, or what? 





>  >   AP might work IF the technical requirements, like secure communications, were there. So how are you going to 'bootstrap' AP? Yes, in an 'AP world' there may be secure communications. But you can't get to an AP world without secure communications...And today, of course we don't have them.

> This matter has never been competently discussed, at least not on the CP list.  In the mid-1990's, I think people simply couldn't imagine that an AP-type system could be constructed.  Now, we've seen TOR, Bitcoin, and Ethereum/Augur. I'm not referring to them as if they currently could be used to implement AP.  But they show how the tools akin to them could be constructed.


	Where are those tools? Oops. They DO NOT FUCKING EXIST. 

	Isn't this hilarious. Aren't 'you guys' engineers? WHERE is your cypherpunk anonimity network THAT ACTUALLY WORKS? You couldn't get it working AFTER ALMOST 30 FUCKING YEARS? 


	At some point Jim your 'optimism' is just being detached from reality.