Are all those who walk down the street (municipal streets being a
trivial-to-snoop-or-block service, of course) due to the convenience
thereof and then also 'bitch about surveillance or censorship' in
untenable positions likewise?
Why does the ease with which a given service can be 'snooped or blocked'
impact the legitimacy of contesting surveillance? The implication you seem
to be making is 'surveillance is OK as long as it's easy'.
On Wed, October 12, 2016 6:57 pm, Morlock Elloi wrote:
> Using centralized trivial-to-snoop-or-block services for their
> convenience, and then bitching about surveillance or censorship is
> untenable position.
> You are not entitled to convenience. They lied to you.
> On 10/12/16, 8:37, jnm wrote:
>>I am sorry for all people using this "services" in Turkey, but this is
>>very good news for democracy.
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: