3 ms·
>Never in history could a dictator know more of the communications of all his citizens One must be incredibly naive to think only dictators have this capabili
by FirmwareBurner 1y ago
>Never in history could a dictator know more of the communications of all his citizens
One must be incredibly naive to think only dictators have this capability and not democratically elected governments. Just start a protest and find out just how quickly the government unlocks Godlike surveillance capabilities to be used against you. Hell, even a Tweet might do in places like UK or Germany.
They don't even have to send the police to the streets to beat you up or throw you in a van like in the USSR, they can just debank you like the trucker protestors in Canada and the problem solves itself peacefully.
- atoav 1y agoYou are unfavourably reading things into my comment I did not say. Please consider this section of the HN guidelines: > Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. If someone uses a specific term (dictator), that does not automatically impyly they think the broader term (any government) doesn't apply. If I say "all dogs do eventually die" that does not imply I think that all other animals are immortal. This is basic logic. And btw. I agree with your statements about democratically elected governments not being immune to abuse of surveilance power.