There is historical and current evidence for the danger of those tools. Continuous danger for the whole population of an affected state. Some countries has learned from that, like Germany from the Stasi. They have some educative materials on that topic. You should google it up.

> Also, taking a serial killer who murdered 8 women and dismembered several of them off the streets to me outweighs quite a bit of harm. But that's just me.

Unfortunately it is not just you. Many people are willing to give up their privacy for something that has been suggested to them as "security", based upon fear mongering and abstract dangers to them. Fear is a very powerful tool.

You can "justify" so much with that sentence, that it becomes meaningless.

Also, it won't hide the fact that this surveillance infrastructure can cause much much more harm then it prevents. We've seen what it might do in repressive states and we see today that even those states which represented the idea of individual freedom on this planet, you are only one election away from madness.

Yeah, the law is unjust but spare even this part of the population this unnecessary risk. It's not like they can't join if they want to but why put force on it? So everybody feels miserable? What's the point?

And yeah, ich habe treu und tapfer verteidigt...

It wouldn't have been so successful if everybody be called "Anonymous" meaning that they wouldn't be able to make money with it.

They've started to take this away now. Today it's some account with obviously few words. Tomorrow it might be one with wrong words. What you counted as value is nothing. It might be lost tomorrow, so why bother?

So what's the point of the comment? Your fear that it might be superior?

and while accountability never was the strength of the US, it has became unstable and unreliable in the recent years. It would be stupid to just look away and act like it's not happening.

FDE is not the only thing they sell.

Software Licenses for their products (Gotham/Foundry/AIP) is why countries (and businesses) deal with them.

So what is there left to do but follow recommendations online realistically?

Looking through the list I've found 2 books which might interest me. I'm done with the list now and won't return. If 1 of them is great, it is already a win.

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

- op basically says: don't pay attention to recommendation lists

- they assume you plan on reading all books recommended there or none

- they do not present an realistic alternative to finding books you might like

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

Especially the last point is what I missed from your comment because it is actually a good idea to browse through other peoples recommendations to find similarities in taste.

Like in this list, I looked at the SciFi section and didn't find Neal Stephenson. Which, for me, is a sign of good quality together with other books I've already read. There are other books I have not even heard about. I might check them out and it would be a logical thing to do. Nothing wrong about it and chances are good that I might like it. They are certainly better than a wild guess.

Sure, they are still needed for debugging and for sneering at all those juniors and non-programmers who will finally be able to materialise their fantasies, but there is no way back anymore, and like riding horses, you can still do it while owning a car.

Why are you keep repeating this myth?

The only relevant player who might break up oligarchies before they become to powerful is the state they operate in.

Seeing what's possible in this position, I doubt future US presidents will hold back.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46860138

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

They knew what they were doing and I'm sure the stalking aspect helped their sales significantly as it seems to be a very popular behaviour in the US.