3 ms·

> do you know anyone who'd voted for having to scan their face to access verboten webseites? to have encryption backdoors in their messengers? to have state-man

> do you know anyone who'd voted for having to scan their face to access verboten webseites? to have encryption backdoors in their messengers? to have state-mandated spyware preinstalled on their phones? I know a few. They're called "normal people who don't suffer from crippling tech libertarianism" and there's more of them than of you.

choo-t 13d ago
> I know a few. They're called "normal people who don't suffer from crippling tech libertarianism" and there's more of them than of you. They voted for it or you assume they don't mind it existing?
- ShinyLeftPad 12d ago
  They accept it as a tradeoff. They vote for things like "less crime" or "our children don't access things that are bad for them".
vlyan 13d ago
you must have plenty of unambiguous evidence then, given how numerous such goodthinking individuals apparently are. where do these paragons of civil obedience congregate? how do they express their wishes for less freedom and more surveillance?
- ShinyLeftPad 12d ago
  They're all around you irl. Touch grass and find out. And to your sarcastic remarks about those people being dumb, believe it or not not everyone is willing to forgo every possible evil in the name of personal privacy in remote communication. Such privacy was never a thing until very recently anyway. (In fact as far as most people are concerned it isn't a thing today either, you'd be surprised how many people assume that their messages and calls are spied on anyway)
  - vlyan 12d ago
    and so you've spent 20 minutes editing this comment to optimize the amount of snark instead of simply showing me one proof of that silent majority's existence :)
    - physicalecon 12d ago
      [dead]
    - mitxela 12d ago
      Isn't the user base of tiktok proof?
    - ShinyLeftPad 12d ago
      > you've spent 20 minutes editing this comment to optimize the amount of snark why would i waste that much time on writing a reply to you and where do you see snark exactly? > one proof i just talk about it with people irl, yeah that thing i suggest you try;)
      - vlyan 12d ago
        oh, but it's the exact opposite. the people IRL tend to react to censorship and surveillance with the word пидорасы, while the regime's eunuchs on the Internet defend it. maybe having lived under the Soviets makes my people less welcoming to the idea of a commissar deciding what they're allowed to see, hear, say, and ultimately think.
        ShinyLeftPad 12d ago
        what does that word mean? Wiktionary says it's a vulgar word for "gay person", huh? consider that not everyone grew up in an oppressive dictatorship.
  - mitxela 12d ago
    It was actually illegal for the post office to read your mail or the phone company to listen to your calls.

choo-t 13d ago

> I know a few. They're called "normal people who don't suffer from crippling tech libertarianism" and there's more of them than of you. They voted for it or you assume they don't mind it existing?

ShinyLeftPad 12d ago
They accept it as a tradeoff. They vote for things like "less crime" or "our children don't access things that are bad for them".

vlyan 13d ago

you must have plenty of unambiguous evidence then, given how numerous such goodthinking individuals apparently are. where do these paragons of civil obedience congregate? how do they express their wishes for less freedom and more surveillance?

ShinyLeftPad 12d ago
They're all around you irl. Touch grass and find out. And to your sarcastic remarks about those people being dumb, believe it or not not everyone is willing to forgo every possible evil in the name of personal privacy in remote communication. Such privacy was never a thing until very recently anyway. (In fact as far as most people are concerned it isn't a thing today either, you'd be surprised how many people assume that their messages and calls are spied on anyway)
- vlyan 12d ago
  and so you've spent 20 minutes editing this comment to optimize the amount of snark instead of simply showing me one proof of that silent majority's existence :)
  - physicalecon 12d ago
    [dead]
  - mitxela 12d ago
    Isn't the user base of tiktok proof?
  - ShinyLeftPad 12d ago
    > you've spent 20 minutes editing this comment to optimize the amount of snark why would i waste that much time on writing a reply to you and where do you see snark exactly? > one proof i just talk about it with people irl, yeah that thing i suggest you try;)
    - vlyan 12d ago
      oh, but it's the exact opposite. the people IRL tend to react to censorship and surveillance with the word пидорасы, while the regime's eunuchs on the Internet defend it. maybe having lived under the Soviets makes my people less welcoming to the idea of a commissar deciding what they're allowed to see, hear, say, and ultimately think.
      - ShinyLeftPad 12d ago
        what does that word mean? Wiktionary says it's a vulgar word for "gay person", huh? consider that not everyone grew up in an oppressive dictatorship.
- mitxela 12d ago
  It was actually illegal for the post office to read your mail or the phone company to listen to your calls.