Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • Enough? They're just getting started...
    by coldtea
  • At this stage I'd settle for echelon era surveillance and consider it a win...

    Ad tech/tiktok has proven its possible to deduce what people are think at scale from subtle signals, now sifting info at scale is possible thanks to LLMs and a large portion of everyone's online history is likely to become vulnerable to store now decrypt later attacks. Get rid of cash, force identity verification for every online service, sprinkle some flock cameras on top and you've got a complete surveillance state. Oh and of course you need some goons to scare people into compliance & later in some self-censorship for good measure. We could call the group "Frozen water".

    ...and we're basically already there on all of it except perhaps the "decrypt later" on https (and even that has rumours).

    Genuinely don't think this is stoppable anymore.

    by Havoc
  • how not? All of this is "soft" control, if tomorrow 75% of the people in any country decided "this can't keep on going on", all relevant public buildings would be occupied everywhere and the relevant government imprisoned promptly.

    On a more positive note, the fact that this doesn't happen indicates things aren't that bad right now. No amount of KYC or age verification can stop large amounts of angry people who want one thing.

    People sometimes bring up China - which isn't relevant because people still remember being extremely poor, thus being grateful to the Party - or one of those dictatorships as counterexamples for this, but see the Arab Spring (food got more expensive -> revolutions), Nepal recently... etc.

    by Pannoniae
  • No need to decrypt https, the other end of your connection does that and hands the info over to governments
    by krupan
  • I think we have to face the fact that we cannot unring this bell. There will be holding actions against things like Flock but in the end they will fail, and at best we will have a loosening of the laws that Flock is being used to enforce and more draconian enforcement of the laws that remain.

    Like many on this site I'm in violent agreement with Schneier and have been ever since "security theater" entered the lexicon. But this is a hopeless fight.

    by andrewla
  • I am from the UK and we are quite far down the surveillance and control mentality (Flock actually seems a greater system of surveillance then what we have here but if such a system was created, the push back would be less). But a lot of people here are slowly beginning to see the benefits in self defense and gun laws that mean you are not dependent on the police, this kind of logic where people have want autonomy and policing becomes less popular as the inevitable abuses or neglect happen is something that creates change.

    I don't think it inevitable that this continues.

    by kodoman
  • Im sure people thought the same thing among all the different power structures and technology and cultural norms throughout history, and yet how many of them still stand today?
    by AngryData
  • Are you advocating for inaction? If so, what do you wish to achieve?
    by feanaro
  • “Temporary” surveillance powers are never temporary.
    by brandon272
  • I’d venture it was enough the first day.
    by OddMerlin
  • NSPM-7 is about to make mass surveillance magnitudes more oppressive and ever-present.
    by Varelion
  • It isn't going to stop until it becomes a national security issue. If your can spy on your citizens , your enemies can potentially gain access to the same surveillance and hit high profile targets.

    We live in war times and will soon see it happening

    by seydor

  •   > your enemies can potentially gain access to the same surveillance
    Which has already happened. Though it is less obvious if high profile targets have been blackmailed or coerced. There's at least signs that some have. Even if not foreign governments, Epstein certainly had leverage
    by godelski
  • When those in power regard the people as the enemy their natural allies are other governments with similar attitudes. So you don't need to wait until another government gains access, you offer it instead.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

    by ninalanyon
  • Proposal: limit access of these camera networks to local jurisdiction. Just like rip-stop fabric and cell walls, boundaries are required for stability, and making it where federal agencies have eyes everywhere is far too dangerous.
    by calebm
  • Orwell is claimed to have written his books directed at the other side of the Curtain, but in fact, he was merely predicting the effect of power at the hands of the few self-elected (due to randomness -> wealth --> power).

    "All animals are equal, some animals more equal than others."

    by jan_m_savage
  • It's a great write up thankyou. I propose we build and distribute easy to use services designed to run on our own devices, in our own homes, to take full advantage of 1st and 4th amendments, then distribute these services widely with billboards so that people have alternatives and can take advantage of these protections.
    by smalltorch
  • You mean the 3rd amendment, right?
    by Joker_vD
  • How about this, but also send them usb sticks with loads of data available on them that they thought was "private" including surveillance footage taken from flock cameras etc. That might be good motivation to be more aware. Not sure about the legality of this though lol
    by module1973
  • We are trying, but the interop of these self hosted services currently suck. Fediverse is hard to get in to unless you have many users or you just have to join a popular instance. Who knows what they do in this instance, and it turns back into a loop.
    by tacomagick
  • Great essay. The Patriot Act may have been the obvious turning point but the FBI had public data collection programs even earlier. The goal was keyword watching of all network traffic. The desire for more collection is baked into government. It is hubris that leads powerful people to think if they only had more control they could stop all ills. The deceit of power makes people believe it doesn't matter what the outcome is if the goal is noble. That is why the founding fathers put restrictions on government power. The people that run it will always fall for the same traps of power because they are just like everybody else.

    So yes, it is high time to discuss how our rights apply in a digital age and put some reasonable restrictions on the power available to government.

    by tastyfreeze
  • Surveillance and totalitarian control is a downward spiral of misery and suffering for everyone, even those in power.

    It reminds me of some quotes from the Tao Te Ching -

    Restriction breeds the disorder it's meant to prevent (ch. 57) The more prohibitions there are in the world, the poorer the people become. The more sharp weapons, the more the state falls into confusion. The more laws and edicts are posted, the more thieves and bandits there are.

    The world isn't a thing to be managed (ch. 29) The world is a sacred vessel; it cannot be manipulated. Whoever acts on it ruins it; whoever grips it loses it.

    by N_Lens
  • Yet there's incentive structures that push it forward.

    It's a classic example of us being dragged along by incentives and emergent patterns against our individual wills and better judgement.

    People think it's a conspiracy of the elite, but the last part of your message is true and it makes me wonder to what extent everyone is being dragged along by everyone else and nobody can stop because nobody can stop.

    I mean if I were a multi-billionaire, I'm not sure I could do anything. I could piss into the wind with a somewhat larger amount of piss.

    I've come to believe that our lack of agency over emergent behaviors in our own societies and economies is a central problem of the human condition.

    by api
  • The world is not a thing to be managed huh?
    by onesandofgrain
  • Will add Chapter 46.

    "When the Tao is present in the universe, The horses haul manure. When the Tao is absent from the universe, War horses are bred outside the city."

    I would consider surveillance weapons against the people. I think this reflects all manners of international governance nowadays.

    Also Chapter 17.

    " When the Master governs, the people are hardly aware that he exists. Next best is a leader who is loved. Next, one who is feared. The worst is one who is despised."

    If you don’t trust the people, you make them untrustworthy."

    by FlowingRiver