Nettime mailing list archives

Re: <nettime> notes from the DIEM25 launch
morlockelloi on Sun, 14 Feb 2016 03:26:21 +0100 (CET)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> notes from the DIEM25 launch

> I think you are overrating technologies of control, neither the Stasi
> nor the KGB could save their systems from collapse (though the ruined
> a lot of lives....).

I think that the conclusion that nothing really changed and that power grabbing and re-grabbing mechanisms are the same as they were (and will stay the same in indefinite future) is grossly wrong (as is the notion of immutability of 'human nature'.)

This school of thought is essentially waiting for the next successful 'organizing of masses and revolt' to make things right again. The organizers have just to say the right words and tweets, publish the right pamphlet, which somehow they missed to figure out so far (in all previous failed revolts), but they will find the magic words eventually, and then the Revolution will happen. It's all about words.

It is going to be a long wait, as it's a classic example of Einstein's Insanity.

It really depends how you think repression works these days. If you
think that it's about repressing particularly dangerous individuals,
then both encryption (when they can be dealt with individually) and
large numbers (when they cannot be dealt with individually because you
cannot imprison, or shoot, a very large number of people) help. If you
think repression works by influencing the patterns of how people think
(e.g. creating an environment that incentivizes people to put all
emphasis on maximizing the number of useless "friends", or competing
in a rat race of faking their own happiness), then encryption won't
help much, but nothing much will.

Neither of the above. Targeted repressing or influencing is not relevant, it's too expensive and ineffective. That's smokescreen and useful for PR.

It works by inferring correct forecasts, from exposed communications, about group behaviours, before groups themselves understand them. The rest is easy. The biggest obstacle is that this is hard to understand by those who haven't been exposed to the data. It's not intuitive - it's statistics and number crunching, it's a new phenomenon. The way around is to look for secondary tell-tale signs, for example what's legal and what's illegal, what goes into standards, etc.

#  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: nettime {AT} kein.org
#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: