Thanks. How does the rest of the corrupt international world fall in line? Do you think AI development won't end up becoming a technocratic control system? How soon should we expect global surveillance to collapse and sovereignty returned to what should be constitutionally protected citizens of the USA? Until those surveillance systems are completely removed and BigBrother is no longer watching everyone 24/7, we aren't anywhere near as free or sovereign as the founders fought for people to be, right?
Okay, for these questions I have to say that this is my personal belief that has been refined over the past 8 years just watching how Trump does his thing. Take it with a big grain of salt.
How does the rest of the corrupt international world fall in line?
As the strings are cut, we will see governments fall (How do you think Kier Starmer suddenly had such a big fall, for example) and we will see indictments around the world for various things (some might not even look like anything related).
You will also see regional agreements (like the recent Thai + Combodia for example) start popping up, again sign of strings being cut.
I do however feel that the next round of right-wing governments that will get elected across the world - some of them are controlled as well. Maybe not all, but for example Nigel Farage. But even with the controlled right wing govts, we will see things like:
Covid prosecutions
Local election security around the world
Other local corruption prosecutions etc
Do you think AI development won't end up becoming a technocratic control system?
The simple answer is No, because the AI development is happening right at this moment in history. Any other point and we would have been lost. (I will explain this more later)
How soon should we expect global surveillance to collapse and sovereignty returned to what should be constitutionally protected citizens of the USA?
Everything is happening organically. Just we think we are hitting the precipice, we see new areas of the chessboard and new game pieces come into view. I think we will see all this happen very organically - like we might see a lot of arrests this year (Obama and co), we might see a lot of disclosure starting to happen. As people are celebrating, we might see some extreme tech/surv overreach that get "whistleblown" and cause people to start having serious discussions. People will become more aware of the mechanisms through which people lost their sovereignty.
Ultimately, and this is my belief, the bringing back constitutional sovereignty will happen as a process driven by the people, with Trump just guiding it along. Thats when the global surveillence will end.
But I also think a lot of the surveillance has either been ended / turned only against the enemy, esp under NSA. The other fiveeyes surveillance no doubt still going on.
Until those surveillance systems are completely removed and BigBrother is no longer watching everyone 24/7, we aren't anywhere near as free or sovereign as the founders fought for people to be, right?
Absolutely.
However there is perhaps a different way to look at this. Let me pose this question:
What if we could surveilled every government official, every corporate action etc, and at the same time all of us are also surveilled. And all the surveillance data is public. I know it sounds wierd and scary, but take a moment to think about it. I am not saying we will go there, but its a possibility worth hypothesising in our mind.
Thank you for taking the time as you really have helped me understand. Your last point about surveillance of civil servants is still missing the point a bit. There is no need to constantly monitor upright, decent, human beings. Criminals should be investigated if suspected. End of. What seems clear is the Christless anti-nature of this sad future. In almost every way. Think about it.
I'm afraid we have to step back and realize that "surveillance" has been, is now, and will be, a fact of life. So long as anyone can walk down the street and look around, that is our world. Google does that with driven automobiles and cameras, to compile comprehensive street-level photo maps that anyone can access. There is more civilian access to that surveillance data than any government can afford to spend time on. Even overhead, with private pilots or satellites. So long as no one trespasses, or violates one's rights, there is no problem. It is not a matter of government power---unless the government violates your rights, in which case it is the violation that is the power, not the surveillance. We each of us have the ability to install comprehensive surveillance cameras around our house...including a view of the neighbors across the street, or across our back yard. Do they have a right to complain? As they do of us. Do we have a right to complain?
My view is that people need to return themselves to the fact that we live in society...not on the internet. In the real world, we are not "anons," we are real people, with real faces, and real names---or we are probably criminals, who hide, and lurk, and have aliases. "Surveillance" is just a fancy way of saying "being looked at." But being looked at is inescapable if one wants to live a free life. Being heard is inescapable if one wants to exercise free speech. One is free to be a hermit...but being a hermit is to abandon society (though one may want to continue enjoying the benefits of an economy). It is not a healthy way to live. (Admittedly, some people have disabilities that reduce them to being hermits. But they are to be pitied on account of that, not held up as models.)
The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it.
Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know. - John F Kennedy.
Thanks. How does the rest of the corrupt international world fall in line? Do you think AI development won't end up becoming a technocratic control system? How soon should we expect global surveillance to collapse and sovereignty returned to what should be constitutionally protected citizens of the USA? Until those surveillance systems are completely removed and BigBrother is no longer watching everyone 24/7, we aren't anywhere near as free or sovereign as the founders fought for people to be, right?
Okay, for these questions I have to say that this is my personal belief that has been refined over the past 8 years just watching how Trump does his thing. Take it with a big grain of salt.
As the strings are cut, we will see governments fall (How do you think Kier Starmer suddenly had such a big fall, for example) and we will see indictments around the world for various things (some might not even look like anything related).
You will also see regional agreements (like the recent Thai + Combodia for example) start popping up, again sign of strings being cut.
I do however feel that the next round of right-wing governments that will get elected across the world - some of them are controlled as well. Maybe not all, but for example Nigel Farage. But even with the controlled right wing govts, we will see things like:
Covid prosecutions
Local election security around the world
Other local corruption prosecutions etc
The simple answer is No, because the AI development is happening right at this moment in history. Any other point and we would have been lost. (I will explain this more later)
Everything is happening organically. Just we think we are hitting the precipice, we see new areas of the chessboard and new game pieces come into view. I think we will see all this happen very organically - like we might see a lot of arrests this year (Obama and co), we might see a lot of disclosure starting to happen. As people are celebrating, we might see some extreme tech/surv overreach that get "whistleblown" and cause people to start having serious discussions. People will become more aware of the mechanisms through which people lost their sovereignty.
Ultimately, and this is my belief, the bringing back constitutional sovereignty will happen as a process driven by the people, with Trump just guiding it along. Thats when the global surveillence will end.
But I also think a lot of the surveillance has either been ended / turned only against the enemy, esp under NSA. The other fiveeyes surveillance no doubt still going on.
Absolutely.
However there is perhaps a different way to look at this. Let me pose this question:
What if we could surveilled every government official, every corporate action etc, and at the same time all of us are also surveilled. And all the surveillance data is public. I know it sounds wierd and scary, but take a moment to think about it. I am not saying we will go there, but its a possibility worth hypothesising in our mind.
Thank you for taking the time as you really have helped me understand. Your last point about surveillance of civil servants is still missing the point a bit. There is no need to constantly monitor upright, decent, human beings. Criminals should be investigated if suspected. End of. What seems clear is the Christless anti-nature of this sad future. In almost every way. Think about it.
But what about the organic nature of it? With all of those governments that fall, things will naturally go well. Because it's happening now.
I'm afraid we have to step back and realize that "surveillance" has been, is now, and will be, a fact of life. So long as anyone can walk down the street and look around, that is our world. Google does that with driven automobiles and cameras, to compile comprehensive street-level photo maps that anyone can access. There is more civilian access to that surveillance data than any government can afford to spend time on. Even overhead, with private pilots or satellites. So long as no one trespasses, or violates one's rights, there is no problem. It is not a matter of government power---unless the government violates your rights, in which case it is the violation that is the power, not the surveillance. We each of us have the ability to install comprehensive surveillance cameras around our house...including a view of the neighbors across the street, or across our back yard. Do they have a right to complain? As they do of us. Do we have a right to complain?
My view is that people need to return themselves to the fact that we live in society...not on the internet. In the real world, we are not "anons," we are real people, with real faces, and real names---or we are probably criminals, who hide, and lurk, and have aliases. "Surveillance" is just a fancy way of saying "being looked at." But being looked at is inescapable if one wants to live a free life. Being heard is inescapable if one wants to exercise free speech. One is free to be a hermit...but being a hermit is to abandon society (though one may want to continue enjoying the benefits of an economy). It is not a healthy way to live. (Admittedly, some people have disabilities that reduce them to being hermits. But they are to be pitied on account of that, not held up as models.)
Tagging u/33ss
The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it.
Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know. - John F Kennedy.
Hey I'm just trying to warn the monitors. You guys don't decide that's the problem. Thanks.