4 ms·

How is it computer adjacent, keep in mind, it's a talk about how the media communicates things... Surveillance was the political topic of 2020, so there was qu

How is it computer adjacent, keep in mind, it's a talk about how the media communicates things... Surveillance was the political topic of 2020, so there was quite a few talks about that, migration is the political topic 2025, so there are a lot of talks about that There are also other unrelated things which do not have a lot to do with computers, like "all creatures welcome".

aleph_minus_one 10mo ago
> Surveillance was the political topic of 2020, so there was quite a few talks about that, migration is the political topic 2025, so there are a lot of talks about that There is one important difference: surveillance is a deeply computer-/hacking-related topics while migration isn't. So I would say a talk about surveillance (as long as it is relevant for hacking topics) typically has its place while it is much harder to find a reason why a talk about migration has relevance for a hacking conference.
- pinkgolem 10mo ago
  The linked surveillance talk has nearly 0 references to computers and is all about media/reporting
  - aleph_minus_one 10mo ago
    > The linked surveillance talk has nearly 0 references to computers and is all about media/reporting (link to the talk: https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-8969-die_sprache_der_uberwacher https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-8969-die_sprache_der_uberwacher ) Surveillance has relevance to core CCC/hacking topics (privacy is a central topic against which hackers fight), so I can understand why the organisers decided to include this talk in the schedule: they considered it to be a good idea that the audience should also get a "non-computer perspective" on a topic that is highly relevant to hackers. But I agree that for the decision to include or not include this specific talk, the organisers have to apply an exceptionally good judgement: if they make a "wrong" decision here, people will immediately (rightfully) complain that the talks are too political (or if they "wronged" by non-inclusion of this talk, the other side will complain that important topics are omitted).
    - pinkgolem 10mo ago
      > Surveillance has relevance to core CCC/hacking topics (privacy is a central topic against which hackers fight) Great, who exactly is making those rules for all hackers? People have complained about this for atleast the last 15 years where I have been active, to political, not political enough. Stop complaining, start creating.
      - aleph_minus_one 10mo ago
        > Great, who exactly is making those rules for all hackers? For example the Hacker Ethic by Steven Levy is very well-accepted: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hacker_ethic&oldid=1329479208#The_hacker_ethics https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hacker_ethic&oldi... > Stop complaining, start creating. Who says that I don't do?

aleph_minus_one 10mo ago

> Surveillance was the political topic of 2020, so there was quite a few talks about that, migration is the political topic 2025, so there are a lot of talks about that There is one important difference: surveillance is a deeply computer-/hacking-related topics while migration isn't. So I would say a talk about surveillance (as long as it is relevant for hacking topics) typically has its place while it is much harder to find a reason why a talk about migration has relevance for a hacking conference.

pinkgolem 10mo ago
The linked surveillance talk has nearly 0 references to computers and is all about media/reporting
- aleph_minus_one 10mo ago
  > The linked surveillance talk has nearly 0 references to computers and is all about media/reporting (link to the talk: https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-8969-die_sprache_der_uberwacher https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-8969-die_sprache_der_uberwacher ) Surveillance has relevance to core CCC/hacking topics (privacy is a central topic against which hackers fight), so I can understand why the organisers decided to include this talk in the schedule: they considered it to be a good idea that the audience should also get a "non-computer perspective" on a topic that is highly relevant to hackers. But I agree that for the decision to include or not include this specific talk, the organisers have to apply an exceptionally good judgement: if they make a "wrong" decision here, people will immediately (rightfully) complain that the talks are too political (or if they "wronged" by non-inclusion of this talk, the other side will complain that important topics are omitted).
  - pinkgolem 10mo ago
    > Surveillance has relevance to core CCC/hacking topics (privacy is a central topic against which hackers fight) Great, who exactly is making those rules for all hackers? People have complained about this for atleast the last 15 years where I have been active, to political, not political enough. Stop complaining, start creating.
    - aleph_minus_one 10mo ago
      > Great, who exactly is making those rules for all hackers? For example the Hacker Ethic by Steven Levy is very well-accepted: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hacker_ethic&oldid=1329479208#The_hacker_ethics https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hacker_ethic&oldi... > Stop complaining, start creating. Who says that I don't do?