• demonsword@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 years ago

    We could limit this capability. We could prohibit mass spying. We could pass strong data-privacy rules. But we haven’t done anything to limit mass surveillance. Why would spying be any different?

    Bruce nailed it, unfortunately most people are too apathetic to fight for theirs rights and for a less shitty world

    • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      Strong data privacy rules which will inevitably have loopholes for intelligence agencies that they will use to just spy on us anyways.

  • Paragone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Yes, that is right.


    It also, however, enables these, too:

    • it multiplies propaganda by itself at-least once, so now propaganda-squared aka propaganda^2 is the minimum saturation

    • it multiplies the thought-police enactment

    • it multiplies the false-evidence-production

    • it makes it exponentially tougher to filter-out malicious-actors/propaganda from one’s knowing.

    • etc…

    Haven’t bothered to look at how it affects each & every dimension of our world, but it gives the malicious many-times much more than it gives the good, and the good are sooo starry-eyed with the new distractions that controlling the hyperdimensional “explosion” happening in our world won’t happen, until automatic-genocides have become normal.

    _ /\ _