4 ms·

> The United States should back it's (alleged) principles & help develop & spread liberalizing, anti-authoritarian software, like this. Says someone who's clea

> The United States should back it's (alleged) principles & help develop & spread liberalizing, anti-authoritarian software, like this. Says someone who's clearly never lived in an authoritarian regime. Tell me, how would the US "spread" such software in North Korea ? What do you think will happen to your average North Korean who gets caught with this US-backed anti-authoritarian software ?

AnimalMuppet 5y ago
Well, how does such software currently spread in North Korea? And, what do you think will happen to your average North Korean who gets caught with the current non-US-backed anti-authoritarian software? But then when we look deeper, it gets more complicated. Could we make software that is easier to use and harder to detect? Probably. If someone gets caught with it, will they be in more trouble than they would with non-US-backed software that had similar functionality? Very likely. If the time comes when NK figures out how to track it, and more people have it on their phones because we encouraged them, and the hammer comes down on them, but more information got into NK because of this, is that a good trade-off or a bad one? (I'm not even going to propose an answer to that question...) Love your username, by the way.
rektide 5y ago
If i had all the answers i'd be doing it. Wifi-p2p, bluetooth-le broadcasts... who knows. We need more trying stuff. This salty snippy rejectionist behavior doesnt help. Being so certain of failure, convincing everyone not to try to improve things, swearing all attempts are futile... dont you see what vaccuous sucking nihilism this is? It's badgering & bullying to have a stance that is so uncompromising, so mightily assured of failure, that phrases "concerns" so demeaningly. There's no room for any possibility that maybe, just maybe, we could make things better, and that: I hard reject as cruel & unsavory. I dont know what happens. Maybe we find some fantastic covert plausible deniability systems- launch the tech as a small payload in every top 10 site on the planet. Maybe NK doesnt end up being a good spot for freedomware. Maybe it helps Russia, or Myanmar. Doing nothing will help no oppressed people ever: that I promise. Lets not be cowards, let's find some principled things to explore & advance, lets try.
- themacguffinman 5y ago
  Ignorantly pushing random solutions because "we need more trying" can be so much worse than not helping. North Korea and many of these regions pose huge geopolitical problems. The potential gepolitical outcome of a misguided "solution" isn't just that we "will help no oppressed people ever", it is mass destruction & conflict on a global & industrial scale. Deniability based on technicalities and plausibility is really tenuous at the geopolitical level and I think it's outrageously harmful to suggest ignorantly fucking with it, as if the leaders in North Korea and their Chinese allies give two shits about plausibility when they see a coordinated cyberattack from the US aimed at their systems. If you have no idea what you're talking about, please don't try. You are not playing with VC dollars. Otherwise, the US govt is hiring and they're looking for thoughtful and discreet people.
  - rektide 5y ago
    endless miles of gatekeeping, gotcha. i'll make sure i practice my beliefs & my values quietly where no one else might see them. sounds smart. very safe. i am too fearful uncertain & doubtful to share my hopes & ideas of betterment: mission accomplished.
    - themacguffinman 5y ago
      Ooh, burn. I feel sorry for Alan Turing and his colleagues at Bletchley Park, all they could pitifully do was practice their beliefs & values quietly where no one else might see them. It would have been much better if they overcame their fear, uncertainty & doubt to share their hopes & ideas for the world to see, what a shame you weren't there at the time to leak them. Wouldn't want to gatekeep.
      - rektide 5y ago
        What values were AT & Bletchley advancing? To me it seems clear they weren't engaged in grand strategy, that the particulars of democracy & values weren't at the forefront. Simply turning back the tides against onslaught was the move of the day. Facing overrun, they were seeking every advantage they could; they did not have the luxury of advocating their values. I feel sorry for AT & his colleagues. Because they couldn't share their great work, because incredible advanced & efforts had to be kept secret. Because people had to die, information had to go un-acted upon, to maintain the strategic advantage. But developing a toolkit for democracy, developing capabilities and potentials: that threatens no one. There's no cost to doing that. We don't have to try to seed democratic technologies to the world. But we should have this arsenal of freedom. We should ennoble & potentiate humanity, so that when the times come, we are ready. Let's try. Let's not be afraid, and worthless. Let's be as brave as Bletchley, let's prepare.
TremendousJudge 5y ago
>Tell me, how would the US "spread" such software in North Korea ? Maybe in a way similar to Stuxnet?
scaramanga 5y ago
Also, wouldn't they be much more successful trying to spread it in South Korea, where they have considerable political influence (they command its military, they have 30,000 troops stationed there, the intelligence agencies are highly interlinked, the defence ministry is almost literally inside a US army base)? Oh, I think I see the problem now.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago

Well, how does such software currently spread in North Korea? And, what do you think will happen to your average North Korean who gets caught with the current non-US-backed anti-authoritarian software? But then when we look deeper, it gets more complicated. Could we make software that is easier to use and harder to detect? Probably. If someone gets caught with it, will they be in more trouble than they would with non-US-backed software that had similar functionality? Very likely. If the time comes when NK figures out how to track it, and more people have it on their phones because we encouraged them, and the hammer comes down on them, but more information got into NK because of this, is that a good trade-off or a bad one? (I'm not even going to propose an answer to that question...) Love your username, by the way.

rektide 5y ago

If i had all the answers i'd be doing it. Wifi-p2p, bluetooth-le broadcasts... who knows. We need more trying stuff. This salty snippy rejectionist behavior doesnt help. Being so certain of failure, convincing everyone not to try to improve things, swearing all attempts are futile... dont you see what vaccuous sucking nihilism this is? It's badgering & bullying to have a stance that is so uncompromising, so mightily assured of failure, that phrases "concerns" so demeaningly. There's no room for any possibility that maybe, just maybe, we could make things better, and that: I hard reject as cruel & unsavory. I dont know what happens. Maybe we find some fantastic covert plausible deniability systems- launch the tech as a small payload in every top 10 site on the planet. Maybe NK doesnt end up being a good spot for freedomware. Maybe it helps Russia, or Myanmar. Doing nothing will help no oppressed people ever: that I promise. Lets not be cowards, let's find some principled things to explore & advance, lets try.

themacguffinman 5y ago
Ignorantly pushing random solutions because "we need more trying" can be so much worse than not helping. North Korea and many of these regions pose huge geopolitical problems. The potential gepolitical outcome of a misguided "solution" isn't just that we "will help no oppressed people ever", it is mass destruction & conflict on a global & industrial scale. Deniability based on technicalities and plausibility is really tenuous at the geopolitical level and I think it's outrageously harmful to suggest ignorantly fucking with it, as if the leaders in North Korea and their Chinese allies give two shits about plausibility when they see a coordinated cyberattack from the US aimed at their systems. If you have no idea what you're talking about, please don't try. You are not playing with VC dollars. Otherwise, the US govt is hiring and they're looking for thoughtful and discreet people.
- rektide 5y ago
  endless miles of gatekeeping, gotcha. i'll make sure i practice my beliefs & my values quietly where no one else might see them. sounds smart. very safe. i am too fearful uncertain & doubtful to share my hopes & ideas of betterment: mission accomplished.
  - themacguffinman 5y ago
    Ooh, burn. I feel sorry for Alan Turing and his colleagues at Bletchley Park, all they could pitifully do was practice their beliefs & values quietly where no one else might see them. It would have been much better if they overcame their fear, uncertainty & doubt to share their hopes & ideas for the world to see, what a shame you weren't there at the time to leak them. Wouldn't want to gatekeep.
    - rektide 5y ago
      What values were AT & Bletchley advancing? To me it seems clear they weren't engaged in grand strategy, that the particulars of democracy & values weren't at the forefront. Simply turning back the tides against onslaught was the move of the day. Facing overrun, they were seeking every advantage they could; they did not have the luxury of advocating their values. I feel sorry for AT & his colleagues. Because they couldn't share their great work, because incredible advanced & efforts had to be kept secret. Because people had to die, information had to go un-acted upon, to maintain the strategic advantage. But developing a toolkit for democracy, developing capabilities and potentials: that threatens no one. There's no cost to doing that. We don't have to try to seed democratic technologies to the world. But we should have this arsenal of freedom. We should ennoble & potentiate humanity, so that when the times come, we are ready. Let's try. Let's not be afraid, and worthless. Let's be as brave as Bletchley, let's prepare.

TremendousJudge 5y ago

>Tell me, how would the US "spread" such software in North Korea ? Maybe in a way similar to Stuxnet?

scaramanga 5y ago

Also, wouldn't they be much more successful trying to spread it in South Korea, where they have considerable political influence (they command its military, they have 30,000 troops stationed there, the intelligence agencies are highly interlinked, the defence ministry is almost literally inside a US army base)? Oh, I think I see the problem now.