[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Skrymions: Data storage breakthough



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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>