3 ms·

Mandating that your property disobeys you, and instead takes orders from someone else. They're starting with "benevolent" stuff like drunk-driving, then it'll b

Mandating that your property disobeys you, and instead takes orders from someone else. They're starting with "benevolent" stuff like drunk-driving, then it'll be quarantine enforcement, then congestion control, and pretty soon your e-scooter will refuse to enter an area with a sanctioned protest taking place, and your TVs automatic content recognition will block channels spreading disinformation and malinformation.

renewiltord 3y ago
I believe we currently do this in many places. There are many radios that will take orders from someone else. e.g. Many Wi-Fi routers will perform DFS and refuse to transmit on some frequency bands if they detect radar. Likewise, many printers and scanners will refuse to operate if they detect the Eurion Constellation. I imagine that the general form of the arguments that permitted those controls will also be used here.
- SenAnder 3y ago
  The key distinction is that it is legal to build and sell a scanner that ignores the Eurion constellation, or a radio capable of transmitting in radar frequencies [1]. You may not be allowed to actually interfere with radar or counterfeit money, but that is a choice that is up to you, and it is up to the state to enforce it. It does not deputize your possessions, turning them into an omnipresent police to enforce the law and tattle on you. [1] Though FCC regulations on radio may be a gray line here, but I'm not too familiar with them.
  - 65a 3y ago
    You might be able to sell it (not sure, probably depends on what it was officially being sold for), but it wouldn't be legal for it to transmit unless it fell under some FCC approved license or statute (e.g. Part 15).
happytiger 3y ago
My current philosophy supports the idea of individuals having the right to say what is good for themselves. But it’s increasingly clear that the wealthy classes don’t think people should have this level of self-determination as they don’t appear to be able to govern themselves responsibly enough to consciously avoid catastrophic global consequences. Or perhaps the threat of various catastrophes are the mechanisms being used to implement policies even if they are simply being leveraged as an excuse to implement control. In the words of Slovenian philosopher Slavoy Žižek: > ‘To grasp the whole scope of this control and manipulation one should move beyond the link between private corporations and political parties…, to the interpenetration of data-processing companies like Google or Facebook and state security agencies. … The overall image emerging … provides an adequate and terrifying vision of new forms of social control that make the good old twentieth-century “totalitarianism” a rather primitive and clumsy machine of control’.
cozzyd 3y ago
Are emissions requirements also mandating that your property disobeys you?
- sieabahlpark 3y ago
  [dead]
sublinear 3y ago
Yes, but what saves us from that is there will always be a class too poor to afford any of that and nobody wants to subsidize them getting access to it. They are significant enough that we must continue to support the old methods and technologies. If you want to be free, vote with your wallet and stop buying this intermediate and compromised junk. On this site we all love technology and have a vision for the future that's possible now, but until we fix the governments of the world, it's just a pipe dream.
- earthling8118 3y ago
  Why should we make that assumption? We all have phones that are expensive and it happened in short order.

renewiltord 3y ago

I believe we currently do this in many places. There are many radios that will take orders from someone else. e.g. Many Wi-Fi routers will perform DFS and refuse to transmit on some frequency bands if they detect radar. Likewise, many printers and scanners will refuse to operate if they detect the Eurion Constellation. I imagine that the general form of the arguments that permitted those controls will also be used here.

SenAnder 3y ago
The key distinction is that it is legal to build and sell a scanner that ignores the Eurion constellation, or a radio capable of transmitting in radar frequencies [1]. You may not be allowed to actually interfere with radar or counterfeit money, but that is a choice that is up to you, and it is up to the state to enforce it. It does not deputize your possessions, turning them into an omnipresent police to enforce the law and tattle on you. [1] Though FCC regulations on radio may be a gray line here, but I'm not too familiar with them.
- 65a 3y ago
  You might be able to sell it (not sure, probably depends on what it was officially being sold for), but it wouldn't be legal for it to transmit unless it fell under some FCC approved license or statute (e.g. Part 15).

happytiger 3y ago

My current philosophy supports the idea of individuals having the right to say what is good for themselves. But it’s increasingly clear that the wealthy classes don’t think people should have this level of self-determination as they don’t appear to be able to govern themselves responsibly enough to consciously avoid catastrophic global consequences. Or perhaps the threat of various catastrophes are the mechanisms being used to implement policies even if they are simply being leveraged as an excuse to implement control. In the words of Slovenian philosopher Slavoy Žižek: > ‘To grasp the whole scope of this control and manipulation one should move beyond the link between private corporations and political parties…, to the interpenetration of data-processing companies like Google or Facebook and state security agencies. … The overall image emerging … provides an adequate and terrifying vision of new forms of social control that make the good old twentieth-century “totalitarianism” a rather primitive and clumsy machine of control’.

cozzyd 3y ago

Are emissions requirements also mandating that your property disobeys you?

sieabahlpark 3y ago
[dead]

sublinear 3y ago

Yes, but what saves us from that is there will always be a class too poor to afford any of that and nobody wants to subsidize them getting access to it. They are significant enough that we must continue to support the old methods and technologies. If you want to be free, vote with your wallet and stop buying this intermediate and compromised junk. On this site we all love technology and have a vision for the future that's possible now, but until we fix the governments of the world, it's just a pipe dream.

earthling8118 3y ago
Why should we make that assumption? We all have phones that are expensive and it happened in short order.