International Totalitarianism: WEF, Klaus Schwab, and unelected governments.

[noddy]

https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/31/googl ... purchases/

According to a report from Bloomberg, Google and Mastercard have signed a secret deal so that Google could track retail sales using Mastercard transaction data.

i mentioned a while back that i thought it was suspicious that the bank data wasnt part of this new global awareness.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

And there it is, genuine doom.

[noddy]

the genius being that these private industries with hidden storage of unknown data are not subject to the rules or oversight our governments are when it comes to logging/storing data on us.

yet, they are subject to legal requests on that data if the government of the day applies that pressure by means fair or foul.

seperation of powers being used against us, rather than for us. plausable deniability and isolation of concerns for everyone.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Maybe it would be better to say 'separation of responsibilities'

--------------

Just as an update, as this was brought up in the "First they came for conservatives" thread:

In both the Robert Spencer case as well as the David Horowitz case; both are still prevented from using patreon but the responsibility of who banned whom is a mystery.

Visa+Mastercard deny it but Patreon is sticking to its story that it's totally on the credit companies.

That's the future: bureaucratic turtles all the way down.

[noddy]

That's the future: bureaucratic turtles all the way down.

absolutely.

[noddy]

Maybe it would be better to say 'separation of responsibilities'
.

ill be stealing that.

[Miss_Faucie_Fishtits]

We need a separation of responsibilities because of a toxic expectation of competence......'>.......

[noddy]

https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about/na ... encryption

straight from the horses mouth from an official meeting

The Governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand

3. Freedom of choice for lawful access solutions
The Governments of the Five Eyes encourage information and communications technology service providers to voluntarily establish lawful access solutions to their products and services that they create or operate in our countries. Governments should not favor a particular technology; instead, providers may create customized solutions, tailored to their individual system architectures that are capable of meeting lawful access requirements. Such solutions can be a constructive approach to current challenges.

Should governments continue to encounter impediments to lawful access to information necessary to aid the protection of the citizens of our countries, we may pursue technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions.

all the bullshit about encyrption and some platforms being more secure than others is .ermm. bullshit.

its illegal to not bend over for the 5 eyes, the only players left standing are those that do.

[noddy]

5 eyes has another public moment.

https://www.theage.com.au/business/comp ... 505oc.html

"Agencies could oblige a device manufacturer to preload (and then conceal) tracking or screen capture software (spyware) on commercial handsets which could be activated remotely," said a joint submission lodged by the Communications Alliance (the representative body for Telstra, Optus and device manufacturers like Nokia and Huawei), the Australian Information Industry Association and the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association.

[Doc]

SrsCEbi5N7Y

[noddy]

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/ ... d-facebook

Expressing dismay that the World Wide Web he invented in 1989 has come to be overrun with hatred and controlled by a few giant tech companies who abuse user privacy to boost their bottom lines, Tim Berners-Lee argued in an interview with Reuters on Thursday that Silicon Valley titans like Facebook, Google, and Apple as well as corporate behemoths like Amazon should be broken up to allow more democratic alternatives to flourish.

not sure what "more democratic" means against "overrun with hatred and controlled by a few giant tech companies"

IMNHO

the means to breakup the tech giants comes in the access to bandwidth, any other focus is misguided and missing the point because the barrier to entry on self hosting beyond tiny sites is way to high.

[noddy]

https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/ne ... -customers

A report in the Indian press cites a document from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) which found that banks which have migrated to Microsoft Office 365 services have had their customers' data shared with the US in order to comply with US law.

According to the report, many banks are aware that Microsoft is information sharing but that their end users probably do not.

A Risk Assessment Report (RAR) has been given to the banks' audit committees for their response.

RBI cited one specific example where: "It was gathered from the Microsoft transparency hub that Microsoft is bound to share customers' data under US Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and US national security letters as and when required by the US authorities."

[Typhoon]

Reason | Congratulations, Australian Government. You've Just Destroyed the World's Data Privacy.

Pretty much every single person in the tech industry, human rights circles, and academia warned the Australian government that forcing online platforms to weaken encryption would lead to disastrous results. Nonetheless, lawmakers are pushing forward—and it's not just Australians who will suffer as a result.

Last night, Australia's parliament rushed through the Assistance and Access Bill of 2018 right as their session was coming to a close. The bill gives various government agencies the authority to demand that tech and communication platforms provide them secret bypass routes around encrypted messages.

This is what is known as an encryption "backdoor," and it's a bad idea. Governments insist such tools are needed to fight crime and terrorism. The problem is that an encryption backdoor doesn't care who uses it: If there's a mechanism to bypass privacy security on a communication system, it can be exploited by anybody who knows how. That includes hackers, thieves, officials from authoritarian governments, and all sorts of dangerous people (including, of course, the very government people who insist they're trying to protect us). That's why tech companies have spent years fighting against the idea.

Weak encryption is a threat to the health of any tech platform that involves transferring data, and governments know that. So they insist they're not demanding encryption backdoors while attempting to enact policies that pretty much demand them.

[Miss_Faucie_Fishtits]

https://pjmedia.com/trending/tumblr-bans-porn/

http://time.com/5469831/tumblr-ban-dece ... d=tcoshare

https://www.engadget.com/2018/12/03/tum ... mber-17th/

[noddy]

Reason | Congratulations, Australian Government. You've Just Destroyed the World's Data Privacy.

Pretty much every single person in the tech industry, human rights circles, and academia warned the Australian government that forcing online platforms to weaken encryption would lead to disastrous results. Nonetheless, lawmakers are pushing forward—and it's not just Australians who will suffer as a result.

Last night, Australia's parliament rushed through the Assistance and Access Bill of 2018 right as their session was coming to a close. The bill gives various government agencies the authority to demand that tech and communication platforms provide them secret bypass routes around encrypted messages.

This is what is known as an encryption "backdoor," and it's a bad idea. Governments insist such tools are needed to fight crime and terrorism. The problem is that an encryption backdoor doesn't care who uses it: If there's a mechanism to bypass privacy security on a communication system, it can be exploited by anybody who knows how. That includes hackers, thieves, officials from authoritarian governments, and all sorts of dangerous people (including, of course, the very government people who insist they're trying to protect us). That's why tech companies have spent years fighting against the idea.

Weak encryption is a threat to the health of any tech platform that involves transferring data, and governments know that. So they insist they're not demanding encryption backdoors while attempting to enact policies that pretty much demand them.

its pretty diabolical but as always one needs to remember that the 5 eyes thing means nothing is ever as simple as one country being involved - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

*allegedly* the americans dont need this power because they have direct access to the data centres which operate un-encrypted internally.

[noddy]

https://pjmedia.com/trending/tumblr-bans-porn/

http://time.com/5469831/tumblr-ban-dece ... d=tcoshare

https://www.engadget.com/2018/12/03/tum ... mber-17th/

take away the hand crafted pron collections and tumblr is just SJW rants.. im not sure they thought this one through.

[Typhoon]

Reason | Congratulations, Australian Government. You've Just Destroyed the World's Data Privacy.

Pretty much every single person in the tech industry, human rights circles, and academia warned the Australian government that forcing online platforms to weaken encryption would lead to disastrous results. Nonetheless, lawmakers are pushing forward—and it's not just Australians who will suffer as a result.

Last night, Australia's parliament rushed through the Assistance and Access Bill of 2018 right as their session was coming to a close. The bill gives various government agencies the authority to demand that tech and communication platforms provide them secret bypass routes around encrypted messages.

This is what is known as an encryption "backdoor," and it's a bad idea. Governments insist such tools are needed to fight crime and terrorism. The problem is that an encryption backdoor doesn't care who uses it: If there's a mechanism to bypass privacy security on a communication system, it can be exploited by anybody who knows how. That includes hackers, thieves, officials from authoritarian governments, and all sorts of dangerous people (including, of course, the very government people who insist they're trying to protect us). That's why tech companies have spent years fighting against the idea.

Weak encryption is a threat to the health of any tech platform that involves transferring data, and governments know that. So they insist they're not demanding encryption backdoors while attempting to enact policies that pretty much demand them.

its pretty diabolical but as always one needs to remember that the 5 eyes thing means nothing is ever as simple as one country being involved - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

*allegedly* the americans dont need this power because they have direct access to the data centres which operate un-encrypted internally.

Good point. The issue now is one of the extent of social control being exerted against individuals based on data collected.

[noddy]

https://www.extremetech.com/internet/28 ... encryption

Australia has become the first nation to enact into legislation what both the UK and US governments very much want — government-mandated backdoors into encryption systems that require corporations to hand over data on demand. The response of the tech industry has been straightforward: There is no way to perform this task that does not fundamentally weaken security. And for all that journalism is often the process of laying out multiple sides to an argument or debate, there’s no actual debate to be had, here — not, at least, as far as the security principles are concerned.

[noddy]

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/sur ... 50atw.html

china you say.

Under new laws the federal and state governments will be able to access data and photos from passports, driver licences, and visas for a national facial recognition system called the “National Facial Biometric Matching Capability”

The Department of Home Affairs has been compiling the database for what is known as “The Capability". Unlike the controversial My Health Record, people can’t opt out of their details being included in the system.

luckily their is no cause for concern or public vote as they have guessed what I dont like about it and addressed it already, because they love freedom.

"I am an avid libertarian when it comes to freedom from government interference and [concerns] have been forecasted and addressed in this legislation."

this will not become a feature creep of dystopian pscyhosis because

NSW Attorney-General Mark Speakman said the system has "robust privacy safeguards in mind".

"Any expansion of the scheme, including to the private sector, would require the agreement of the Government," Mr Speakman said.

[Doc]

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/sur ... 50atw.html

china you say.

Under new laws the federal and state governments will be able to access data and photos from passports, driver licences, and visas for a national facial recognition system called the “National Facial Biometric Matching Capability”

The Department of Home Affairs has been compiling the database for what is known as “The Capability". Unlike the controversial My Health Record, people can’t opt out of their details being included in the system.

luckily their is no cause for concern or public vote as they have guessed what I dont like about it and addressed it already, because they love freedom.

"I am an avid libertarian when it comes to freedom from government interference and [concerns] have been forecasted and addressed in this legislation."

this will not become a feature creep of dystopian pscyhosis because

NSW Attorney-General Mark Speakman said the system has "robust privacy safeguards in mind".

"Any expansion of the scheme, including to the private sector, would require the agreement of the Government," Mr Speakman said.

Sounds like I won't be going to Australia anytime soon

[Parodite]

Joe Rogan Experience #1236 - Jack Dorsey
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mP9OmOFxc4

It seems to me that Jack Dorsey from Twitter admits he/they have a problem they don't know how to solve.

With their algorithms they try to force excesses (mob and bot tweeting) more into the background but only people can really ban other people from the network, at least for now. And there is the first problem.

Those algorithms are very poor judges in assessing contextual meaning or "reading between the lines" which is especially necessary for distinguishing humor (joking, satire, sarcasm, irony) from sentences that are meant to be understood literally. Also human beings exist that have no sense of humor and even have a problem with analogies; autists. It is simply foolish to hire autists to judge, censor or upgrade/down grade presence of posters. They can produce statistics and facts about subjects and posters, information that needs further analysis and human/non-autistic judgement. That is where the buck needs to stop it seems to me. Autists can be very gifted data collectors and scripters but are very poor judges. AI better be understood as Autistic Intelligence, just as a warning.

Dorsey however wants his algorithms to become so sophisticated that they can identify, upgrade/downgrade presence and ban where necessary. The argument probably being that there is simply no manpower available to do the job for a massive medium like twitter. But in that direction only more problems arise making it actually harder for Dorsey and his people to manage their service in a responsible, aqa Western way. They seem to have chosen to move in that direction nonetheless, with a big risk of their service ultimately falling apart or be out-competed because it will not be able to fulfill its social responsibility of being that public square where free speech is the holiest of rules. Together with the already existing red-line that speech directly inciting to physical violence is not allowed. They will not be able to live up to our cherished Western values. This has consequences, one way or other, probably sooner than later.

Autistic censorship cannot survive very long, but the end-controls in the hands of a small class of human beings at the very top in technology+politics could. The Chinese are ahead of the curve. The Communist Technocrat Pragmatists have the controls and decided to keep it. Ride that horse, tame, control and use technology instead of being a whimsy slave of it, not knowing what your Master will do the next day. Better not be pulled around by a wild horse with a rope through the village of shame! China is also a society of caged birds however; they need mass surveillance, fanatic social engineering and control not to fall apart. How long such a technocratic big-brother-is-watching-you dictatorship can survive remains to be seen.

What the Chinese maybe fear most is an economic downfall of the US because they own most of its dept. They want to drown-out the US and the petro-dollar, but not kill Uncle Sam let alone the West as a whole. They need raw international capitalist free markets as much as anyone, but use national controls to tweak and maximize profits for themselves.

With economic power comes military power and the ability to impose rules on others also in the financial system. Just like the US has been doing, but for how long still? The Renminbi is coming. Technological innovations emerging from silicon valley are used by China for its own benefit. They probably love it that people like Dorsey are trapped in silly discussions about free speech and censorship; problems they don't have to deal with. That Dorsey and his US social media compatriot CEOs want to create better, smarter AI-bots to monitor and control their platforms.. must be music to their ears.

Oh the weaknesses of the naive West! Creating more controls in the name of freedom... how FUNNY is that?

As with that laughable Western Judeo-Christian obsession with the individual. The real power dynamics are always in the collective and the big numbers. No matter how smart and philosophically-morally correct you try to prove the opposite.

Take that sod-sad figure Jordan B Peterson. He promotes the idea that the biggest hero of the West is a man who got killed rather quickly and easily! No wonder there is so much mental depression in the West. Testosterone is needed for the will and ability to win. Love and empathy is there to ease the pain of the wounded, for those who lost a battle and need care. Giving love and care to people who didn't loose a battle, i.e. don't need it, is making them depressed and setting them up to loose real battles... when they come. It also makes them hallucinate problems that don't exist, feeling like victims without being victims.

China, its behavior once so aptly described by Colonel Sun as an elephant in musth, is watching how the West is depleting itself culturally from testosterone. Donald Trump was probably elected because of an instinctive understanding of this emerging weakness, but his behavior is wild.. and more importantly, short term. He will be gone in a few years, whereas XI Jinping & Co are declared dictator in chief for life. Which allows for long-term strategies and tactics. The West is becoming like a leaf in the wind. Or even a leaf in a storm of its own making.

The Chinese seem to have only one simple rule of life: what works will win. A little devil and detail: what works is not forever. One day also China has to face the real dragon of unpredictability and chaos that always lurks in the cosmos and forces everybody to change tricks. Especially after a cataclysm. JBP will then say: told ya! But he may not be around anymore by then. And you never know what a new balance between order and chaos looks like. A new ice age could also change the looks of the landscape rather dramatically. Some new dragonfly may evolve that can survive in arctic conditions.

[Simple Minded]

Excellent rant Parodite. Succinct, accurate summary of the realm, that we once thought would be common ground called the internet.

We already have AI failures here at OTNOT. I type in parodite and the AI bot changes it to parasite.

If humans can't separate the Nazi's from the sarcastic in the absence of facial expressions and body language, how can the programs humans create do any better?

We is always the greater good when it comes to the sacrifice of others, but when the me's are expected to sacrifice for the greater good, it becomes unjust. Add in the competing interests of short term and long term time factors, and the pursuit of order just might become chaotic.

[Parodite]

Excellent rant Parodite. Succinct, accurate summary of the realm, that we once thought would be common ground called the internet.

We already have AI failures here at OTNOT. I type in parodite and the AI bot changes it to parasite.

You must be kidding. I demand paradise, not parasite.

If humans can't separate the Nazi's from the sarcastic in the absence of facial expressions and body language, how can the programs humans create do any better?

Zero chance.

We is always the greater good when it comes to the sacrifice of others, but when the me's are expected to sacrifice for the greater good, it becomes unjust. Add in the competing interests of short term and long term time factors, and the pursuit of order just might become chaotic.

I can only ease the pain with a romantic thought (free of charge): creation includes destruction. Who knows what the Great Creator has in store for us. We are co-creating participators, even when just watching the show. We burn oxygen, which is not nothing. Plants love the C02 we breath out talking to them with love. Or just watch tv. All is good.

[Miss_Faucie_Fishtits]

Take that sod-sad figure Jordan B Peterson. He promotes the idea that the biggest hero of the West is a man who got killed rather quickly and easily! No wonder there is so much mental depression in the West. Testosterone is needed for the will and ability to win. Love and empathy is there to ease the pain of the wounded, for those who lost a battle and need care. Giving love and care to people who didn't loose a battle, i.e. don't need it, is making them depressed and setting them up to loose real battles... when they come. It also makes them hallucinate problems that don't exist, feeling like victims without being victims.

I think the mission of the Divine Individual as JBP names Him, is to confound all the old ideas of what a god is suppose to be. We are supposed to see the Passion as an internal struggle. A God that chooses to accept humiliation and death over raining death and annihilation over earth and creation, going against His nature. Going against your nature is a defining aspect of free will. Someone on a YouTube comment chain said something about humans are not born with free will, they have to develop it. Being able to develop free will is what sets us apart from the other animals....

A concept or point of view to derive from the teachings of the Divine Individual in scripture, is to become skeptical and drop the notion that you can interact with reality as another consciousness. Except for God, and that's way more complicated and speculative than I want to get into right now. A consciousness you can bargain with or petition for favour. A blessed and saved individual is the one who uses internal resources to battle destiny and fate, rather than through divination, magic or expressions of piety.........

[noddy]

the same automated autism that falsely flags the ironic as literal also lets the ironic through provided you stick to dogmatically correct constructs.

you can see this with the 4chan shitposters constantly coming up with new symbols and phrases for the lefties to work themselves in a lather with.