| ▲ | DrewADesign 16 hours ago |
| You know, I thought stories of law enforcement and the military targeting people using commercially collected data, effectively skirting the sanity boundaries we applied to surveillance, would raise a little bit of awareness in the US. It didn’t. Then when the political scene got really into deliberately targeting political opposition, I thought that might raise more eyebrows about all of this data being out there, but it didn’t. Same with ICE and border patrol. I think the risk and mechanisms will remain too abstract for people to grasp until they’re one of the unlucky people staring down the barrel of a gun because they, or someone they were associated with, had the wrong opinions. |
|
| ▲ | voakbasda 15 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| This has echos of “First They Came” [0]. The current status quo begs a question that must have been asked in the time it was written: at what point does it have become morally acceptable for citizens to rise up and overthrow a violent government? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_They_Came?wprov=sfti1# |
| |
| ▲ | mindslight 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | The current dynamic IS based on the new gestapo thinking they're "rising up and overthrowing a violent government", due to a propaganda bubble thirty years in the making. Where do you think "ICE" is getting all of these new recruits from? The red state militias that have been seething about the slow creep of bureaucratic authoritarianism, now deputized and told they get to use their weapons to attack the other tribe. Which is also why said militias are silent now that it's actually time to defend our country from fascists - they are the fascists. Propaganda is a hell of a drug. | | |
| ▲ | isodev 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | So we agree, we shouldn't let AI companies mix their products with government or ad-inspired insights, right? | | |
| ▲ | mindslight 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | You seem to be stating this like I said something that might imply otherwise, but I can't figure it out even seeing you've got the GGGP comment. This thread kind of went off on a tangent that isn't directly addressing your original point. But to hopefully answer your question - yes I'm in favor of wholesale importing the GDPR as-written into US law and letting the courts sort it out (sidestepping the corruption^Wlobbying process wherein corpos would make "small" edits that effectively gimp it with loopholes). I'm also in favor of antitrust enforcement against companies that anticompetitively bundle software with hardware and/or services - ie people should be able to choose software which doesn't have ads, rather than being coerced by the pressure of network effects. And if neither if those were enough to stamp out the consumer surveillance industry (aka "Big Tech") as we know it, then I'd support directly banning personalized advertising. (I would support directly curtailing government from abusing commercial surveillance databases as well, but I don't see a straightforward meta-way to prevent that besides drastically shrinking the commercial databases to begin with) |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | raw_anon_1111 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| It’s not that they don’t care - the current administration is targeting people that they specifically don’t like. And Trump has a cult of personality where many Republican politicians are literally afraid for their lives if they stand against him because they get death threats. Romney said other Republican politicians won’t stand against Trump because they can’t afford security like he can. Majorie Green Taylor said her family has started getting death threats and the Indiana legislators who were first opposed to redistricting are now holding a vote because they also got death threats |
| |
