HI Florian --
In 2013, we're watching this history repeat itself as a farce. Many
people (myself included) are flabbergasted by the lack of mass-scale
protest against the government programs disclosed by Snowden. It
seems as if two
Speaking from the Belly of the Beast (semi-rural Arizona,
In 2013, we're watching this history repeat itself as a farce. Many
people (myself included) are flabbergasted by the lack of mass-scale
protest against the government programs disclosed by Snowden. It
seems as if two
ei Florian -- it's also because crap like this is happening among the
billions is, indeed, an overstatement, but:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/09/06/the-feds-pays-for-60-percent-of-tors-development-can-users-trust-it/
the state dept had tens of millions spent every year on promoting internet
freedoms:
From 2008 through 2011, the State
First, right-wing-ness is misleading, especially insofar as those
considered far right and those considered far left have never been
closer in outlook and their lists of what to overturn. Once it is both
ends against the middle, you enter a pre-revolutionary setting. Let us
not wander down that
Hello list. On Tor,
The US
was slow to realize (or did they know this from the beginning?)
Surely the latter
It seems to me that [US] State feels a clear need to hold both sides of
this technology -- its availability, and its redress -- much as it avails
itself of diplomacy as well as
One aspect doesn't seem to have been addressed here yet: that the
Panopticon may be an outmoded metaphor because of its sole emphasis on
visuality. Twelve years ago, in 2001, the exhibition ctrl_space at ZKM
Karlsruhe drew deserved criticism after its curators had departed from the
notion of the
The degree of surveillance will simply escalate along with
the technology -- what's unjust is the access to the
information: the proverbial level-playing-field was the one
big underlying promise of the Internet... We all should be
able to learn where the rogue-cops, corrupt CEOs, gangsters,
Quoth morlockel...@yahoo.com:
The corollary is that the future belongs to the few, not to the
masses, because high tech is centralized by nature, as it requires
understanding, and those capabilities are scarce. The rest are
fucked ... I mean 'users'.
There are only competing elites.
I
This discussion thread indicates that (a) there is a high level of discomfort
with the current situation of the digital panopticon, and (b) bringing the
oversight of engineers (or other humans) into the loop is not really going to
change things much because there are wider systemic issues at
Quoth Felix Stalder:
The concept of the panopticon has been very popular ever since
Foucault elevated it to the rank of a central metaphor for modernity
in Discipline and Punishment (1975). And the NSA revelations seem
to confirm its usefulness once again.
It seems to me that the term
Felix:
Some people are using the concept of ban-opticon to express this.
Correct. The principles involved have been in force for the past 100+
years -- long before *digital* systems. In the original 19th-century
Benthamite Panopticon, the key idea was that the inmates had no idea
if anyone
Felix:
Some people are using the concept of ban-opticon to express this.
Correct. The principles involved have been in force for the past 100+
years -- long before *digital* systems. In the original 19th-century
Benthamite Panopticon, the key idea was that the inmates had no idea
if anyone
hi,
Am 11.10.2013 um 10:19 schrieb Felix Stalder:
So surveillance has been decentralized and turned into task performed
by the prison inmates themselves, and make into a precondition for
staying inside: think credit ratings, facebook friends, google ranks
etc. You have to make yourself
sure, amateur DIT surveillance defines fb and credit, but lets not forget
the enthused amateur surveillance defining fame. or fashion. or any of
those. (i'm still convinced that the nsa is modelling a new version of
capital..
louis fourteenth enthused about greed as a mechanism for policing the
This realization per se is pretty much useless, as are endless
ruminations regarding how free we were, once upon time. The old Marxist
postulate that awareness will save the species is blatantly false - look
around you.
These technologies came to rule the world because their proponents made
On 10/11/2013 01:46 PM, newme...@aol.com wrote:
Correct. The principles involved have been in force for the past
100+ years -- long before *digital* systems. In the original
19th-century Benthamite Panopticon, the key idea was that the
inmates had no idea if anyone was watching, so they
It becomes a kind of Borges-esque -- in the future, everyone on Earth
will be watching everyone else on Earth, at the same time, all the
time.
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:24 AM, chris mann chrs...@gmail.com wrote:
sure, amateur DIT surveillance defines fb and credit, but lets not forget
the
original to:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/rules-for-the-digital-panopticon
Rules for the Digital Panopticon
The technologies of persistent surveillance can protect us only if certain
boundaries are respected
By G. Pascal Zachary
(Posted 20 Sep 2013)
For centuries, we humans
18 matches
Mail list logo
