4 ms·

I think that the privacy issue will get worst quicker under Trump, which is why I voted for him. I think that it is required, for it to get better, because peo

by awqrre 9y ago

I think that the privacy issue will get worst quicker under Trump, which is why I voted for him. I think that it is required, for it to get better, because people don't care enough yet.

mowenz 9y ago
It wont happen that way. How many times has America been through this kind exercise? Truman gave us a dire warnong and not enough cared. Look at Iraq, Vietnam, Hiroshima and Nagasaki--they were all unjustified atrocties, and that is the truth--which you will come to if you research them--but it's too easy to make up believable bullshit that the people gobble up. Most of us are conditioned to follow leaders, and "great men are almost always bad men." Who has time to think or worry about this? Our jobs, lives, bills and healthcare are overwhelmingly stressful and if that wasn't enough we are conditioned by our culture to religiously value money over everything else, which keeps us in line and productive. "If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever." - George Orwell Something big needs to happen to prevent this.
roywiggins 9y ago
When has accelerationism ever worked before?
- xadhominemx 9y ago
  I think for a lot of relatively wealthy, straight, white people there's not a lot of downside to 4 or 8 years of Trump, which led to some pretty awful accelerationism risk calculus.
  - braveo 9y ago
    Please get out of here with that crap, the loudest majority of anti-trumpers tend to be young, white people who think they speak for every other race and religion.
- braveo 9y ago
  I think the idea is to get people to "right the ship" by forcing it to lean too far to the other side, causing them to quickly pull it back to center.
  - awqrre 9y ago
    thanks, that what I was trying to say.
    - roywiggins 9y ago
      Trump seems to think along these lines as well, though in a different direction. "When the economy crashes, when the country goes to total hell and everything is a disaster, then you'll have a, you know, you'll have riots to go back to where we used to be when we were great." http://video.foxnews.com/v/3179604851001/donald-trumps-2014-political-predictions/?#sp=show-clips http://video.foxnews.com/v/3179604851001/donald-trumps-2014-... If he doesn't manage to work with the Republicans to raise the debt ceiling (Mick Mulvaney doesn't seem to care either way) then we might have a chance to see what happens when the economy crashes hard, with no deficit spending to cushion the fall.
- marcosdumay 9y ago
  Brazil since 2010.
pvnick 9y ago
Not sure that's true. His team seems to have been the victim of it, so that complicates things. May be a wake-up call to the party that's currently in power. It's fascinating because political abuse was exactly what Snowden and Greenwald warned against and yet they don't seem to care much because they dislike Trump. Deep down everybody is a political hack.
mason240 9y ago
One of President Obama's last acts was to expand and entrench mass surveillance by the Federal government. >New rules issued by the Obama administration under Executive Order 12333 will let the NSA—which collects information under that authority with little oversight, transparency, or concern for privacy—share the raw streams of communications it intercepts directly with agencies including the FBI, the DEA, and the Department of Homeland Security, according to a report today by the New York Times. This in direct conflict with his earlier promise to do the opposite. >On January 17, 2014, President Obama gave a public address on mass surveillance. Obama promised increased restrictions on data collection of American citizens, which would include the requirement of court approval for searches of telephone records. In addition, Obama called for increased oversight and admitted the dangers NSA surveillance posed to civil liberties. [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/01/obama-expands-surveillance-powers-his-way-out https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/01/obama-expands-surveill... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_on_mass_surveillance#January_17.2C_2014_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_on_mass_surveilla...
- awqrre 9y ago
  I didn't read Obama correctly... He was a pretty good liar. Hopefully I am not wrong with Trump.

by awqrre 9y ago

I think that the privacy issue will get worst quicker under Trump, which is why I voted for him. I think that it is required, for it to get better, because people don't care enough yet.

mowenz 9y ago

It wont happen that way. How many times has America been through this kind exercise? Truman gave us a dire warnong and not enough cared. Look at Iraq, Vietnam, Hiroshima and Nagasaki--they were all unjustified atrocties, and that is the truth--which you will come to if you research them--but it's too easy to make up believable bullshit that the people gobble up. Most of us are conditioned to follow leaders, and "great men are almost always bad men." Who has time to think or worry about this? Our jobs, lives, bills and healthcare are overwhelmingly stressful and if that wasn't enough we are conditioned by our culture to religiously value money over everything else, which keeps us in line and productive. "If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever." - George Orwell Something big needs to happen to prevent this.

roywiggins 9y ago

When has accelerationism ever worked before?

xadhominemx 9y ago
I think for a lot of relatively wealthy, straight, white people there's not a lot of downside to 4 or 8 years of Trump, which led to some pretty awful accelerationism risk calculus.
- braveo 9y ago
  Please get out of here with that crap, the loudest majority of anti-trumpers tend to be young, white people who think they speak for every other race and religion.
braveo 9y ago
I think the idea is to get people to "right the ship" by forcing it to lean too far to the other side, causing them to quickly pull it back to center.
- awqrre 9y ago
  thanks, that what I was trying to say.
  - roywiggins 9y ago
    Trump seems to think along these lines as well, though in a different direction. "When the economy crashes, when the country goes to total hell and everything is a disaster, then you'll have a, you know, you'll have riots to go back to where we used to be when we were great." http://video.foxnews.com/v/3179604851001/donald-trumps-2014-political-predictions/?#sp=show-clips http://video.foxnews.com/v/3179604851001/donald-trumps-2014-... If he doesn't manage to work with the Republicans to raise the debt ceiling (Mick Mulvaney doesn't seem to care either way) then we might have a chance to see what happens when the economy crashes hard, with no deficit spending to cushion the fall.
marcosdumay 9y ago
Brazil since 2010.

pvnick 9y ago

Not sure that's true. His team seems to have been the victim of it, so that complicates things. May be a wake-up call to the party that's currently in power. It's fascinating because political abuse was exactly what Snowden and Greenwald warned against and yet they don't seem to care much because they dislike Trump. Deep down everybody is a political hack.

mason240 9y ago

One of President Obama's last acts was to expand and entrench mass surveillance by the Federal government. >New rules issued by the Obama administration under Executive Order 12333 will let the NSA—which collects information under that authority with little oversight, transparency, or concern for privacy—share the raw streams of communications it intercepts directly with agencies including the FBI, the DEA, and the Department of Homeland Security, according to a report today by the New York Times. This in direct conflict with his earlier promise to do the opposite. >On January 17, 2014, President Obama gave a public address on mass surveillance. Obama promised increased restrictions on data collection of American citizens, which would include the requirement of court approval for searches of telephone records. In addition, Obama called for increased oversight and admitted the dangers NSA surveillance posed to civil liberties. [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/01/obama-expands-surveillance-powers-his-way-out https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/01/obama-expands-surveill... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_on_mass_surveillance#January_17.2C_2014_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_on_mass_surveilla...

awqrre 9y ago
I didn't read Obama correctly... He was a pretty good liar. Hopefully I am not wrong with Trump.