3 ms·

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?