Data Breaches

hideshow 11 child comments

[–] perturbedstarstuff@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

On the silver lining side, a lot of people in recent months have experienced the fluidity of the definition of terrorism and maybe, just maybe, will keep that in mind when they hear it used to otherise the next lot.

parent

[+] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works -40 points 1 week ago* (9 children)

I support more public surveillance (although I don't know whether or not Flock specifically does a good job of it) but I recognize that controversial famous people are in fact in a lot more danger from lunatics than the average person is, and here, despite the denials of the people intending to do this, the intent is clearly to increase that danger.

hideshow 9 child comments

parent

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago (1 child)

look man, if they have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.today 3 points 1 week ago

🤣 Well played.

parent

[–] untorquer 11 points 1 week ago

The wealthty are not reliant on their abusers for survival, fuck off.

parent

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.today 8 points 1 week ago

What's wrong with increasing danger for enemies?

Enemies have a moral obligation to kill one another. Conservative oligarchs are doing everything they can to get rich from the oppression and death of the public. They are killing the public. The public should defend itself from its enemy.

parent

[–] BrilliantantTurd4361@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago

Oh no..

parent

[–] Bo7a@piefed.ca 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Why do you support more public surveillance? I am asking this in good faith and will not even attempt to argue against your position. I just don't think I have ever seen a person outside of a scripted event say those words in that order and my curiosity is overpowering.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago* (1 child)

I don't see the connection between public surveillance and oppression that most other people here apparently see. With all other things equal, I'd rather not have the government know where I drive, simply because I enjoy having privacy in that domain for its own sake. However, I'm not afraid that the government will use this information to oppress me. (An oppressive government can oppress me whether or not I've actually done anything illegal, so the surveillance doesn't make much difference.) And in the absence of that concern about oppression, I value the potential to reduce crime more than I value my privacy while in public (something of a contradiction in terms).

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Bo7a@piefed.ca 3 points 1 week ago

Thanks for the reply. I appreciate your time.