In most instances, “authoritarianism” is a more rigidly defined term than simply meaning “exercises authority.”

E.g. Wikipedia defines it as

a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, civil liberties, and the rule of law.

What do I think?

I think anyone who claims to know and understand every aspect of the world as it truly is resides at the top of Mt. Stupid on the Dunning-Kruger graph (yes, I know it’s a disproved theory, but it’s still a useful descriptor of the way some people behave).

I also think anyone who believes in phenomena with little to know evidence can never actually end up on the right side of the bell curve meme (a curve that is also the result of faulty science, but still illustrative of some humans’ experiences).

I also think that terms like “ghost” or “magic” or “miracle” have so many connotations and interpretations, that it’s easy for miscommunication to happen if people don’t spell out exactly what they mean when talking about them.

I think ghosts are real in the sense that I believe people experience things they can’t explain, and so resort to blaming invisible sentiences, and I believe those experiences are real; I have many doubts over their explanations of those experiences.

I also think that anyone who enters into a discussion holding my stance, but framing it as “ghosts are real,” is looking more to start an argument than have an actual meaningful discussion.

Time and again, across years and product categories, Amazon has reached out to its vendors and instructed them to increase retail prices on competitors’ websites, threatening dire consequences if vendors do not comply.

Yes, buying from alternative websites is the bare minimum and the bar is so low it’s underground. But that’s beside the point: Amazon is price fixing across the internet.

Credit to Existential Comics

Consumerism! AHHHHH!!!

Stoat and it’s been mostly fine, but they’re already implementing age verification.

Can you elaborate on this? I can’t find anything about it online

Con Te Partirò - Andre Bocelli
遙か彼方 - ASIAN KUNG-FU GENERATION
アイワナビー - Stance Punks
I Samma Bil - Bo Kaspers Orkester
A 67-Es Út - Republic
Papaoutai - Stromae

What white paper?

First and foremost: about 10-20 Exabytes worth of storage space, or roughly 4 Petabytes per day.

That’s 4,000,000 Gigabytes of new video per day.

And of course you’d need an efficient way of loading all that video data and streaming it to the end users, so they don’t experience major interruptions, even when hundreds of thousands of people are all watching the same video at the same time. Youtube does this with caching servers/proxies, and highly optimized data delivery algorithms.

Once you have all that infrastructure, just make sure it’s free and ad-free for all the watchers and uploaders. It’s not like you need to pay for all those servers and storage… right?

Mildly Infuriating

Nope, that’s just full-on despicable and the people that wrote that should get serious therapy and not something unspeakable done to them

Because privacy is a spectrum, and it makes a good stepping off point for the people that still use text messages and social media chat clients to stay in touch. I can’t convince half of my nerd friends to leave Discord for literally anything less shit, but I can convince even my tech-averse mother to use Signal instead of FaceTime.

A few answers say “they aren’t private by design,” but don’t really go into the “why.” There’s the obvious “it’s an electronic tracking device, duh” reason, but there’s also a more nuanced reason:

Airtags are able to be picked up almost anywhere because they connect to the nearest bluetooth-enabled Apple device, and then send location info across the internet to you. Without this functionality (the ability of any and every Apple device to locate it), they wouldn’t have any way to send their location back to the owner.

Your best “privacy respecting” alternatives are something that uses meshtastic (and hoping there’s enough repeaters near you), something that uses cellular data and GPS (which is about as privacy-respecting as Airtags are), or just a key finder/beeper (which only works within a small radius)

This article was more constructive (suggesting alternatives) than destructive (leveraging critiques), but it did link to several critiques/vulnerabilities with OpenPGP.

Unfortunately, half are about implementation issues (granted, it’s made more difficult to implement something correctly when it’s as convoluted and all-encompassing as PGP)—which are hopefully not applicable to Delta due to their 3rd party, applied cryptography audit—and the rest are obsolesced by the 2024 updates to the standard—RFC 9580, the so-called “crypto-refresh.”

Do you have any critiques that address the current state of the PGP protocol’s security?

The worse the product is, the more desperate they get to shove it in your face. Good products don’t need to pay others to pretend it’s good, you just find out via word-of-mouth or free trials

I couldn’t find any criticiques of OpenPGP aside from LibrePGP’s. Do you have sources I could look into?

I think it’s Jeff Goldblum as Dr. Ian Malcolm just saying “never eating, ahh, again” with the same cadence as “life, ahh, finds a way”

I agree with your main point, but I do want to criticize

I think he was a bit off the rails and a leftist hater.

This is an understatement. He was an ecofascist in all except name. In Industrial Society and Its Future, his critiques of the right basically boil down to “they’re bad at optics” and his critiques of the left basically boil down to “they care about animals, [slurs], and women.” He was the archetype of “claim to be centrist because I know how unpopular my actual opinions are.”

That being said, I also want to shed light on a little glimmer of hope hidden inside the surveillance state:

if there were to be a socialist revolution in a 1st world country any time soon, just how much of an advantage the state has over the people due to it’s surveillance network.

A few counterpoints to this:

1. A point I learned from a movie of all places, no less poignant that it was a movie about resisting the surveillance state (Enemy of the State): one of the primary principles of Guerilla Warfare is to use your opponents biggest strength and turn it into their weakness. This leads me into my next point:

2. There is way too much data. A major part of the push for AI is because it can emulate human decision making while parsing orders of magnitude more data. Trying to find a person in Petabytes worth of video and imagery and metadata is like finding a needle in a hay-planet. Sure, they may have all that surveillance, but most of the signal gets lost in the billions of times more noise.

3. The government is not a monolith. The 50-agencies-in-a-trench-coat may try to pass themselves off as a unified entity, but when push comes to shove, they’re a bunch of organizations that all have their own agenda, and each organization is just a bunch of people that all have their own agenda. Push hard enough, and you’ll start to see the cracks form. Talk to any government employee and you’ll soon realize their org is just as susceptible to all the internal bullshit squabbles that any private company is.

4. Piggybacking off of 2 and 3: they need manpower that they don’t have. When we talk about “the state” or “the government,” we can lose sight of the fact that these organizations aren’t composed of countless, faceless people. Instead of 10% of all civilians, it’s less than 1%. This number may still be huge compared to the size of local leftist org chapters and lemmy communities, but it’s only like 1.3% of the working class.

5. Combining 3 and 4: the large majority of those government employees are also part of the proletariat. Their loyalty to the government only extends as far as their paycheck, and if any kind of class revolution were to kick into full swing, there would be a mass exodus of labor. There would also be hundreds of thousands of workers who are sympathetic to the cause on the inside, throwing wrenches in all kinds of cogs.

So yes, things are pretty bleak with the state of privacy in this day and age. No, there is no magical solution where an authoritarian government just willfully cedes its power to control its populace. No, there won’t be any way to altogether avoid revolutionaries being incarcerated or worse. No, it won’t fix itself, nor will somebody else take the reigns while we can comfortably be bystanders.

But it’s not already a lost cause.

Chomsky after the leaks: “I’m an old, old man, and I’m so sickly and weary and probably on my last legs cough, cough” (looks around nervously to see if anyone’s buying it)

I read Frankenstein 4 times in school: once in senior year of high school, then thrice in freshmen year of college – for the intro english class in my first semester, for an honors class about monster fiction that same semester, and for a class on gothic fiction that took care of my other core credit the second semester.

I have read that book in 4 different ways with countless different perspectives being share, and I can say

I didn’t truly appreciate it the first time, it definitely requires multiple readings

Personally, when I was new to reading, I liked the DK Books reference books for their pictures, and also enjoyed the Hank The Cowdog series. For mystery, I’ll recommend Encyclopedia Brown, because it actually requires reader participation.

As far as horror goes, I’d recommend The Hellbound Heart, because Clive Barker is a genius when it comes to suburban horror, and exposing the sinister desires that fester in the hearts of the repressed.

None of these statements was false, but only one of the recommendations was genuine; I’ll let you guess which.