Split: New Windows 7/8.1 updating method coming

Topic

New Reply

Jan K. wrote:

woody wrote:

… I’m reasonably sure that the EU is going to take Microsoft to task for excessive snooping in Win10. It’s highly unlikely they’ll try to take on Win7…

Oh! The upcoming privacy laws will have nothing to do with OSes… all that matters is, that if you collect any info on me or my behavior, you’ll have to tell me exactly which data – and where they “end”. Much more important to me is, that you can only collect, what I’ve allowed you to collect! And default answer is “no”, btw. In other words: unless I in advance say “yes” to allow you to collect anything, that means, you collect nothing. If you still collect anything, then just wait form the hammer to fall. The fines are not insignificant… so come May 25 2018.

It’s EU policies like this that drove England to Brexit. Worrying about privacy today is like a saltwater fish worrying about salt. Unless you’re willing to live in a cave (and even then you’ll probably be visible via Google Earth), privacy is a concept that belongs in a museum. It’s over. Let’s get on with our lives. Someone somewhere is recording this, maybe even as I type it.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

Replies

I altered the permissions of my backup locations to require admin privileges to write to. That protects against any malware that is not able to get admin privileges.

1 user thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

Yeah, that should handle a lot of it.

Reply | Quote

“listing patches that should be removed”–what does that refer to?

Edit to remove HTML

Reply | Quote

It makes sense for saltwater fish to worry about salt, if they were capable of doing so.  Too much of it will kill them.

Even so, the analogy doesn’t hold.  A saltwater fish is defined as such by the salt it lives in.  If salt is telemetry, it would mean that all of us are defined by the telemetry that spies on us.  You may have given up, but not all of us are willing to have our entire existences summed up by what some hostile third party has learned by spying on us.

If anyone wonders why every corporation and government thinks it’s okay to spy on anyone, anytime, it’s attitudes like privacy belonging in a museum (which would be hard, because people seldom go to see intangible concepts on display).  I’m chagrined that more of my fellow saltwater fish have been willing to trade privacy for baubles, but I don’t have any right to presume to know better for anyone else.  In the same way, no one has the right to decide for me.  It’s a shame that people who have already given up their own privacy don’t support my right to choose for myself as I do for them.

Dell XPS 13/9310, i5-1135G7/16GB, KDE Neon 6.2
XPG Xenia 15, i7-9750H/32GB & GTX1660ti, Kubuntu 24.04
Acer Swift Go 14, i5-1335U/16GB, Kubuntu 24.04 (and Win 11)

7 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Sessh, samak, HiFlyer, radosuaf, Alice, fp

Reply | Quote

It’s worse than that: it’s not just the collection. They use the data to produce algorithms which increasingly determine our choices — if you can call them “our choices” anymore — most of which are biased, manipulated, erroneous etc. Since nobody knows how these algorithms work, the temptation to instill all sorts of self-serving, wealth extracting features is just too strong to be resisted. At some point everything that happens will be controlled by a handful of behemoth with Govt just protecting their activities by law. Read 1984.

1 user thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

The problem is that these fines are pocket change for the tech giants relative to what they make out of violating the laws. EU has just imposed a 120mil fine in Facebook for promising privacy when it bought WhatsApp and reneging on it. Do you really think they care? Cost of doing business the Sillicon Valley way: lawlessly. Govt has long lost control of these companies.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, samak, HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

@fp
You keep making political statements which are sometimes inconsistent.
You claim in some place that you were raised in the Soviet block which had a system which was fundamentally flawed because of the Government controlling everything, but now you ask for more Government control (regulation) in US or EU. Which one is your choice?
Let’s keep this discussion related to Windows Update and move the political debates elsewhere.

4 users thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer, Alice, woody

Reply | Quote

Listen: the people who founded this country put in place mechanisms to prevent concentration of power; the ensure true competition between firms small enough to not have any effect on the market; and to protect individual rights. After 1929 other mechanisms were put in place to protect from unbounded corporate greed. Those were enforced by a GOVERNMENT which, despite its flaws, was not anything like the USSR. And was one of the reasons we came here.

Then over a period of decades these mechanisms were gradually dismantled and the country went through several crashes without anybody punished for the robberies. Currently you’ve got 5 monopolistic corporations that are lawless, malevolent and caused enormous inequalities and social problems that are endangering this country.

The point is that both the so-called communism and so-called capitalism — neither of which were the real things–self destruct if taken to extremes. The soviet block went first, the US is in the process of following it.

It is only a simplistic mind that interprets my comments as being inconsistent and to equate ANY AND ALL government advocacy with communism. There is nothing inconsistent in arguing for the kind of government that the founders put in place which is now corrupted beyond recognition. But not to do that requires a modicum of intellect.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Elly

Reply | Quote

It’s ttitudes like yours that brought us here. Those who will not worry about their own privacy and security do not deserve to have them and they won’t. Unfortunately, they seem to be the majority these days and the impose the consequences on all of us.

7 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Sessh, samak, HiFlyer, 212louis, Canadian Tech

Reply | Quote

Ascaris wrote:

It makes sense for saltwater fish to worry about salt, if they were capable of doing so. Too much of it will kill them. Even so, the analogy doesn’t hold. A saltwater fish is defined as such by the salt it lives in. If salt is telemetry, it would mean that all of us are defined by the telemetry that spies on us. You may have given up, but not all of us are willing to have our entire existences summed up by what some hostile third party has learned by spying on us. If anyone wonders why every corporation and government thinks it’s okay to spy on anyone, anytime, it’s attitudes like privacy belonging in a museum (which would be hard, because people seldom go to see intangible concepts on display). I’m chagrined that more of my fellow saltwater fish have been willing to trade privacy for baubles, but I don’t have any right to presume to know better for anyone else. In the same way, no one has the right to decide for me. It’s a shame that people who have already given up their own privacy don’t support my right to choose for myself as I do for them.

There are too many unwarranted assumptions and conclusions here to deal with individually, but I want to single out one: Not only do I support your right to choose for yourself, I respect your decision immensely. Only it’s quixotic. This fight is over. Privacy is an antique concept, and the harvesting of your personal data is only going to get worse. I wish it were otherwise, but the simple truth is that, like some Star Trekian galactic monster, corporations and the government (and there’s not much difference anymore) want data, and they’re going to get it. Is that a good thing? No. Is it inevitable? Yes. You can fight it all you want, but you’ll be wasting time that’s better spent on other pursuits. You can expect someone soon will seriously float the idea of making it illegal to block telemetry. (“What have you got to hide?” they will ask.) I don’t like it, but it’s not a fight you can win except in symbolic and meaningless ways, like blocking MS telemetry in the name of striking a blow for freedom.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

I agree.

But this is only the case because when this trend STARTED, people never paid attention, realized where it was going to go and took the attitude you display now.

The problem is that this will not stop here. As somebody born and raised in the Soviet block I know things that Westerners cannot even imagine even without technology. With the tools that are being developed now… 1984 is nothing like Orwell would have written had he known those.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Sessh, samak, HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

fp, there is another critical dimension to this privacy issue with Windows. In most cases (not including Apple), you have a choice. You do not have to use Google Gmail or Yahoo or even Microsoft Outlook.com. In every practical sense of the word, you have no choice but to use Microsoft Windows.

Because we are speaking about an OS, not an application or web site, this is an issue which deserves much greater elevation.

Aside: I will not recommend and Microsoft Product. When my clients and colleagues ask me for a recommendation, I am telling them to consider Apple. Apple is just as bad when it comes to privacy, but at least they know how to spell C U S T O M E R. Apple’s customer service is legendary. Microsoft has never met a customer that it could not totally ignore.

CT

2 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

Apple’s customer service is legendary.

In an IT sense based on current standards, you can call it so.
Otherwise I have reservations, although their service and standards are infinitely better than Microsoft’s.
Let’s not forget than Apple and Microsoft run businesses and they use their customers as tools to make money. Whoever thinks differently is an idealist.

Reply | Quote

Indeed.

However, the distinction is fast disappearing. Most of the tools you mention are parts of platforms that are, for all practical purposes, monopolies on which functioning has become utterly dependent. At best they are oligopolies and choosing among them makes no difference in terms of privacy and security. What is more, there is no incentive in the system to protect systems from attacks because (1) the vendors want to do it themselves (2) they can BS customers into buying the protection rather than defending from attacks. It is more profitable.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Sessh, HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

And this sort of attitude is why it appears inevitable. Have enough people fight back with determination and it will be changed. But the only thing needed to actively support the status quo is to not actively fight against it, so self-fulfilling prophecy for anyone who sees it as a battle already lost.

“Folks have been conned into thinking they can’t change the world, have to accept what is. I’ll tell you something my friends. The world is changing every day, the only question is who’s doing it.”

3 users thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer, Elly, Sessh

Reply | Quote

/edit: why do my post end here, when I clicked ‘reply’ on post?

 

Anyway, it’s for this post…

gkarasik wrote:

… Worrying about privacy today is like a saltwater fish worrying about salt. Unless you’re willing to live in a cave (and even then you’ll probably be visible via Google Earth), privacy is a concept that belongs in a museum. It’s over. Let’s get on with our lives. Someone somewhere is recording this, maybe even as I type it.

Since I store confidential customer’s data, I have an obligation to secure their privacy.

I’ve seen the list of thousands of datapoints collected and used with third parties… since I don’t have a choice to select precisely the kind of telemetry I want/need, I’m according to the law I operate under not allowed to use win10… hence the longing for May 25 next year.

Of course “privacy” is an option. More than that even, it’s a request and a demand.

Gaming, I’m fine, but my workstation is a completely different animal…

4 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Sessh, samak, HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

Jan K, thank you for those comments. I have long wondered how any business, consultant, medical or service business organization could tolerate Windows 10, exposure to their data.

It seems to me that the very loading of data about them, is a huge abuse of privacy. In some cases, it could easily result in legal issues.

How can these organizations even consider Windows 10?

I have a client who is a consultant to government organizations. Her contracts all stress the need for total privacy. I cannot imagine one of those clients tolerating her using Windows 10 and exposing that data to Microsoft and its partners for what ever purpose they decide is useful, no matter how they assure their concern. I suspect that the vast majority are unaware of this threat to privacy. Some day, the price may be paid for such ignorance.

CT

5 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Sessh, samak, HiFlyer, Alice

Reply | Quote

A UK hospital illegally provided patient data illegally to Google DeepMind for AI purposes. In our world today the temptation for anybody with data to use it for nefarious purposes is unbounded. That’s because it’s the easiest way to produce profit efortless — rent income. Why bother with products and services?

Edit Please stay on topic

3 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Sessh, HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2016/02/17/us-department-of-defense-commits-to-upgrade-4-million-seats-to-windows-10/#0iPqWMhSfHuyoR86.97
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/microsoft-department-of-defense-deal-for-windows-10-2016-2

How can those guys do it?
Aren’t the concerns here exaggerated?

Reply | Quote

Forget it. The system not only cannot prevent exploiting private data, it incentivizes it. See my other comment here.

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

It’s ttitudes like yours that brought us here. Those who will not worry about their own privacy and security do not deserve to have them and they won’t. Unfortunately, they seem to be the majority these days and the impose the consequences on all of us.

I swear it wasn’t me.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

One thing that’s very clear is that I won’t be a Win10 user. And the snooping itself may be somewhat less of a problem, though I’d much rather know exactly what’s being sent and that personally identifiable and especially potentially risky if intercepted information isn’t among it (generic stuff like +1 user has this program installed, used it this much, visited these sites, etc.? meh, whatever, have it, but not the user with THIS ID/IP/MAC did this or that, or passwords or stuff like that).
The first problem is the updating, being forced as it is. Have problems with the (now-no-longer-so-)new Win7/8.1 updating too, being bundled and unable to pick and choose to get rid of just the bothersome ones, but I can choose when to install completely at my leisure, can not have the non-security ones at all since they became bundled, and if nastyness will be bundled with security ones too at some point maybe a) somebody will unbundle it somewhere or, as a last resort, b) I may choose to take my chances. On Win 10 I don’t have that, and that is not and will never be tolerable in any way.
And the second problem, while generally being “the snooping”, can be split into the gathering and the sending of information. The sending is a potential privacy problem, but see what I said above and it may be blocked somewhat more easily, with a good firewall and some information looked up. The gathering, on the other hand, uses system resources, and not just that I don’t want to have the system slow down while I’m using it, but don’t want it doing stuff when I’m not at it either. There’s a reason for that, has been since ’99, but it’s my computer and it should be enough to say I don’t want it to happen and the OS should listen.

I keep looking at Linux, but while experimenting with it for a couple of weeks last year it was very clear the one huge reason why it’s still not an option: Lack of a solid application-level firewall. I’m using Comodo, I want something very much like it for Linux, or of course it to also have a Linux version. Will not use something without one, or struggle with one of the few complex Linux security solutions that may also include something of the sort but overhaul the system and require a fair bit of expertise not to mess many other things up while at it. Yet when you look up the issue, on any thread you usually get people “in the know” just rebuffing anyone asking with “you don’t need that on Linux” (says who? I want it, and I want to know what program connects and be able to control that, so yeah I need it), and with what’s available being community driven and the community having that mindset, chances are slim for the situation to change. So I’m dreading the future come every patch Tuesday, and shudder at the thought of 2020…

/rant

Back on topic, was also saying that if the posts will be less aimed at Group B, there will likely be fewer comments about those patches posted at them, especially right away, making them far less useful as a quick notification system of problems for those who won’t normally wait weeks before installing security updates but don’t want to dive in quite headfirst either.

Reply | Quote

@ anonymous#116202

Have you tried Linux’s gufw and other firewall programs.?
https://www.tecmint.com/open-source-security-firewalls-for-linux-systems/

Reply | Quote

Couldn’t agree more.

My comments get often edited here as “political”, but the reality is that whatever is happening now with technology is a direct consequence of socio-political factors. Failure to realize this and analyzing and discussing these issues independently from those factors is an exercise in futility–we can do it until we become blue in the face, but it will get us nowhere. Both Woody and I used the phrase “You ain’t seen nothing yet” — this is not a technology issue but a systemic issue. This or that technique means nothing in the scheme of things. This is an analytical comment, but I suspect it will be treated as a rant.

 

3 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, Sessh, HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

The problem is that this will not stop here.

And I agree with you.

One quibble: Most people, without giving it a thought, will simply trade their personal data for some trendy software geegaw. Not a good thing, but that is what happens.

So, because, as you say (and I deeply respect your experience), the problem will not stop here, then instead of railing against the inevitable, it behooves those of us who see it coming, and who can imagine a very dark side to all this, to work to limit the use of all this personal data to humane and societally beneficial ends. We can do that. There are social-justice ends that can be served by big data. There are poverty and food-distribution and health ends that can be served by big data. The dark siders will surely win only if no engages them. And taking the position that “I’m going to block you from coming into my cave” seems to me futile in the long run.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

A lot of it has to do with the collapse of education under the illusion that its function is sheer job training. It is not: it is instilling knowledge, enabling independent and critical thinking, a modicum of empathy, compassion and ethics. In its absence we get customers that are ignorant, uninformed, unable to reason, gullible public readily manipulable and exploitable. Those who choose technological convenience at the expense of privacy and freedom are not born to it — they are indoctrinated with it –their ability to reason was never developed.

Which is why I doubt the ability to stop the trend.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/05/the-thinning-line-between-commercial-and-government-surveillance/524952/

History shows that once you eliminate education you’re doomed.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Elly

Reply | Quote

We have to remember that most users were willing to allow their private data to be used for ad, marketer and app sales revenue in exchange for getting free use of computer products or services, eg Google’s Android, ChromeOS, Search, Maps, Gmail, Youtube, etc. This is a FAIR trade, similar to some users willing to accept lots of ads in free TV programs from ABC, CBS and FOX. (cf; expensive non-free Cable TV and Satellite TV)
Windows OS is not free and so should have no basis/justification to do what Google did, esp for Win 10. If Win 10 is free, now and forever, many users won’t mind M$ doing what Google did, ie collect/track users’ private data for ad, marketer and app sales revenue.
So, Apples and oranges.

OTOH, because of likely collusion between M$ and the NSA, a few users are not comfortable using Win 10 = an NSA spyware?, even for free.

Reply | Quote

> then instead of railing against the inevitable, it behooves those of us who see it coming, and who can imagine a very dark side to all this

The problem is, to reiterate, that you can’t solve systemic problems by individual action. They require collective action and that is something that Americans are very weak at. The attempts to marginalize “political” comments here is one reflection of this. Americans are indoctrinated with individualism and that compromises their ability to get together to combat systemic problems. Those who own the country — and now they are the few monopolistic tech companies–know and understand this and exploit it. It is a quite effective oppression method to which most Americans are blind.

 

 

3 users thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer, Elly, Sessh

Reply | Quote

Brexit was mainly about immigration and nothing to do with privacy laws. GDPR will be incorporated into UK law (which is a matter of fact) and will in all probability be kept in a similar form (or left untouched) to maintain parity with the rest of Europe because of it’s importance to trade.

Reply | Quote

Group A Win 7.  Since I did the May patch my Microsoft Security essentials will not up date.  Warning App doesn`t work.  If I uninstall MSE then reinstall then it will up date completely during the reinstall.  After that it will not update the next day.

Reply | Quote

radosuaf wrote:

this is still an official MS statement

Yes, but there is still an official MS loophole (See https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/accessibility/windows10upgrade), so they can’t deactivate W10 installations just because they were activated after July 29, 2016.

1 user thanked author for this post.

HiFlyer

Reply | Quote

Alice wrote:

Yes, but there is still an official MS loophole (See https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/accessibility/windows10upgrade), so they can’t deactivate W10 installations just because they were activated after July 29, 2016.

With the amount of telemetry they’re collecting, I’m also quite sure they are able to check if you actually use accessibility features or not. I used the loophole but haven’t even touched them.

Fractal Design Pop Air * Thermaltake Toughpower GF3 750W * ASUS TUF GAMING B560M-PLUS * Intel Core i9-11900K * 4 x 8 GB G.Skill Aegis DDR4 3600 MHz CL16 * ASRock RX 6800 XT Phantom Gaming 16GB OC * XPG GAMMIX S70 BLADE 1TB * SanDisk Ultra 3D 1TB * Samsung EVO 840 250GB * DVD RW Lite-ON iHAS 124 * Windows 10 Pro 22H2 64-bit Insider * Windows 11 Pro Beta Insider

Reply | Quote

@ Alice

woody said, …The upgrade is still free, by the way. Use any valid Win7/8.1 key and you can install and activate Win10 directly.

I do not think woody was referring to upgrading Win 7/8.1 to Win 10 through the Accessibility loophole upgrade method, ie https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/accessibility/windows10upgrade

Reply | Quote

anonymous wrote:

I do not think woody was referring to upgrading Win 7/8.1 to Win 10 through the Accessibility loophole upgrade method

He wasn’t. I never said or implied that he was.

Reply | Quote

@ Alice

You said, … Yes, but there is still an official MS loophole (See https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/accessibility/windows10upgrade), so they can’t deactivate W10 installations just because they were activated after July 29, 2016.

If Win 7/8.1 users did not use the Accessibility page for their free Win 10 upgrade and activation after 29 July 2016, what radosuaf said may come true, ie only those who did will be “let-off” by M$.

Latest news from ghacksdotnet says that Win 10 S can be upgraded to Win 10 Pro for free through the same Accessibility page.

Reply | Quote

ch100 wrote:

– KB2952664 functionality is part of the Operating System for the latest server OS – see the frequent updates for its companion updating definitions KB3150513 for Windows Server 2016 and there is no reason not to install it.

woody wrote:

That’s a good point, but it’s open to debate for folks who don’t connect to Windows Server.

I think this one needs clarification.
I mentioned the Server version in the sense that if this patch is good for Enterprise and in many situations those dealing with sensitive information, then what is the reason for someone with less means of understanding the technicalities behind it to avoid it?

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

I think in the next 2.5 years you’re going to see even more people dumping Windows – although all of the alternatives have congenital flaws.

I think the evolutions in the URLs mentioned here
https://www.askwoody.com/forums/topic/new-windows-78-1-updating-method-coming/#post-116242
more than compensate for the potential loss.

Reply | Quote

I think MS already understand this and is extricating itself from Windows by giving priority to the Cloud, hw and sw on iOS and Android. They will be left with corporate users who are captive and can’t afford to migrate and will pay anything to keep their Windows systems and consumers who use their systems blindly and will accept and tolerate whatever MS imposes on them. They won’t want anybody else.

Reply | Quote

fp, I agree with you. In effect, Windows 7 is the last real Windows OS. From this point onwards, MS is not in the OS business. The vast majority of people writing in this forum, are not the kind of customers that Microsoft wants.

Reply | Quote

I’ve been on board with Group B since the beginning, and have found the patching “as directed” very straightforward. More time consuming has been keeping up with changes “out there” including MSoft practices and the hack of the moment. I try to follow the many discussions so that I at least understand the issues if not all the “programming” details.

Even though I’ve not yet made the decision to leave Group B, I hope Woody will deliver the step by step for switching from Group B to Group A, especially if it’s not a simple cold turkey matter of abandoning Group B procedure and adopting Group A procedure on the chosen month.

I also wonder if Woody might summarize and advise regarding the issue of hidden KBs, with direction on what to do if one has been skipping/hiding updates forever (e.g., going way back with Susan Bradley)…thankfully without the practice having noticeable negative effect.

2 users thanked author for this post.

fp

Reply | Quote

@GoTheSaints
It is probably a matter of how you see this forum.
If you see it as a place to meet other people and do some small chat, then you are right.
If you see it as a place where you come to acquire information about how to use Windows to your benefit, then think again.

Reply | Quote

Where could I read GoTheSaints, to understand the reference here?

Wondering,
Paul

Reply | Quote

The comments here were moved from the New Windows 7/8.1 updating method coming Topic due to the fact that they became political in nature and were not on the topic of the new Windows 7/8 updating method

1 user thanked author for this post.

woody

Reply | Quote

Thx
Should have found on my own, failed.
Thank you, for plain direction.

Paul

Reply | Quote

@PKCano, I’m not sure why my post (just above, on May 18 at 3:44 pm #116260) was moved here as it wasn’t political in nature and I think it was on topic…?

Reply | Quote

Wow!
Firstly, I see this forum as informative with many posters ideas, suggestions and opinions and I make my decisions from reading them. Whether I agree or disagree is neither here nor there (nor does it matter).

I am offended by your assumption this is only a chat room to me, I have many people to chat to face to face in the real world.

You are entitled to your opinions as am I.

Reply | Quote

It is important that people understand WHY they are all of a sudden subject to MS behavior that disrespects them as users and violates their rights. This is not particular to MS but is a systemic phenomenon that is due to the corporate takeover and corruption of govt. This is something that cannot be addressed by just cvetching about it here or spending unaffordable or unavailable resources to configure individual systems just to protect oneself from malwarers and monopolistic corporations exploiting this as an opportunity to do their own ransomware.

Discussing this may be political, but is an integral part of the problems of which people complain here and separating it from the main technical discussion is essentially protecting these phenomena from ever being understood and dealt with effectively. The notion of staying purely technical in the context where the causes have deeper political causes is a recipe for ensuring that the problems will only become worse. That AskWoody seems to have gone from advice to protect users from bad updates and MS behavior to accepting them for protection from malware is best evidence for this argument.

Reply | Quote

David F wrote:

Brexit was mainly about immigration and nothing to do with privacy laws. GDPR will be incorporated into UK law (which is a matter of fact) and will in all probability be kept in a similar form (or left untouched) to maintain parity with the rest of Europe because of it’s importance to trade.

My point was not that this particular EU initiative caused Brexit, but that persistent EU bureaucratic overreach caused Brexit. Intrusion is intrusion whether it comes from rapacious corporations  or well-meaning nanny states.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

No, that was the thing that was exploited by alt-right data billionaires. Check out the link in my reply to you.

Reply | Quote

As somebody who adopted this country, I can’t help being amazed at how Americans will tolerate the most egregious exploitation and rights violations by monopolistic for profit corporations just because they are not the govt. The only explanation is indoctrination, not much different than I experienced in the soviet block. They have come to believe that if it’s not the govt, oppression is fine.

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

> then instead of railing against the inevitable, it behooves those of us who see it coming, and who can imagine a very dark side to all this The problem is, to reiterate, that you can’t solve systemic problems by individual action. They require collective action and that is something that Americans are very weak at. The attempts to marginalize “political” comments here is one reflection of this. Americans are indoctrinated with individualism and that compromises their ability to get together to combat systemic problems. Those who own the country — and now they are the few monopolistic tech companies–know and understand this and exploit it. It is a quite effective oppression method to which most Americans are blind.

I wouldn’t say blind, just naive, and individual awareness of a problem is a prerequisite for collective action. But that’s precisely why right wingers want to destroy the education system–they hate and fear the very concept of “collective” and its ramifications, like unions. By keeping people ignorant and sensually sated they preclude individual awareness and thus banding together in common cause and thus collective action. They prefer instead the illusion of collective action in the current iteration of voting, wherein two parties try to provide candidates within a mutually acceptable range and let them pretend to be independent. That that can occasionally backfire and give us what we have now didn’t occur to them apparently.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

@ gkarasik

But that’s precisely why right wingers want to destroy the education system–they hate and fear the very concept of “collective” and its ramifications, like unions.

No. The conservatives advocate for personal liberty, personal responsibility and the rule of Law as per the US Constitution’s guarantees to the citizens for their freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom to pursue happiness, aka “In God We Trust”, “good things follow good deeds”, “karma is a beeetch” or “you reap what you sow” or “do the crime do the time”.

1776 Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
First Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Conservatives are against the left-wingers’ nanny-state policies, liberal indoctrination in the education system and the giving of exorbitant pay to unionized workers in return for their votes. A traditional UAW low-skilled factory worker has to be paid about US$150,000 a year, inclusive of fringe benefits. That was why many US jobs were exported overseas, eg non-unionized factory workers in China only need to be paid about US$15,000 a year, inclusive of benefits.

Power-crazy left-wingers are mostly pandering for votes by selling out America esp to the minorities, ie giving out all kinds of freebies and benefits in return for votes.
The silent majority, esp individual White voters, have rejected the destructive left-wing policies by voting out the liberal Democrats in the Nov 2016 national election. Now, the liberal press are yelling blooody murder against the Trump administration, eg NYT, WaPo, NBC, CNN, etc.

Similarly, a few liberal and left-wing posters here at askwoody are trying to impose nanny-state Group A policies and indoctrinate/brainwash Win 7/8.1 users, ie to toe the M$ line.

Reply | Quote

Oh, please, you are the best example why they get away with that charade! It’s so **** easy. Don’t rell me: you voted Trump.

As to your interpretation of our arguments — you’re not even wrong.

Reply | Quote

I have been arguing the intentional collapse of education for years. You may want to check out the political section of the This Week posts @my blog, dbdebunk.com and The PostWest, my political blog.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/07/the-great-british-brexit-robbery-hijacked-democracy

Once data are collected, particularly by for profit corporations for whom it is easier to monetize them than to provide goods and services of values to customers, where they end up and to what use they are being put is unknown and uncontrollable and the chance of misuse is almost 100%.

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

I have been arguing the intentional collapse of education for years. You may want to check out the political section of the This Week posts @my blog, dbdebunk.com and The PostWest, my political blog. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/07/the-great-british-brexit-robbery-hijacked-democracy Once data are collected, particularly by for profit corporations for whom it is easier to monetize them than to provide goods and services of values to customers, where they end up and to what use they are being put is unknown and uncontrollable and the chance of misuse is almost 100%.

In the early 1970s, the Carnegie Foundation released a report on the state of education in the US which report said that if a foreign power were doing to our education system what we were doing to it we would consider it an act of war.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

Absolutely right.

It is an act of civil war: the destruction of this country and all its forthcoming generations.

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

No, that was the thing that was exploited by alt-right data billionaires. Check out the link in my reply to you.

Certainly the anger in Britain had more than one cause, and the alt-right shamefully exploited that anger. One of the causes of that anger was EU intrusiveness. I know that anecdotally. I am an avid motorcyclist, and I hang out on a number of motorcycle-specific forums. Among motorcyclists, contempt for the EU is virulent. The EU have promulgated rule after rule after rule affecting the sound, speed, safety, and size of every aspect of motorcycling down to the smaller part. This is all well-meaning, but it has raised the cost of and lowered the pleasure of motorcycling, and it is unrelenting. Nor is motorcycling the only area of peoples; lives in which these endless rules have been promulgated. The cumulative impact among those already made prone to anger by their exaggerated sense of being badly used by the world has been significant, and it ultimately led to the self-scourging of the British worker that is Brexit. We can continue to argue–and I hope we do–which amorphous thing caused what amorphous other thing that then could be exploited by the alt-right and Russian-sponsored meddling, but I am convinced that EU intrusiveness was among those causes.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

I am well aware of that side of EU and have often argued that is utterly undemocratic and serves the interests of the power elites that are responsible for it.

But the point is that it may well be the case that Brexit only succeeded due a much more undemocratic scary process that is insidious and invisible. And it involves technology billionaires and data harvested from all over the place.

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

I am well aware of that side of EU and have often argued that is utterly undemocratic and serves the interests of the power elites that are responsible for it. But the point is that it may well be the case that Brexit only succeeded due a much more undemocratic scary process that is insidious and invisible. And it involves technology billionaires and data harvested from all over the place.

No doubt you are correct.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

Oh, please, you are the best example why they get away with that charade! It’s so **** easy. Don’t rell me: you voted Trump. As to your interpretation of our arguments — you’re not even wrong.

He’s being ironic. I appreciate his attempt at humor.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

anonymous wrote:

@ gkarasik

But that’s precisely why right wingers want to destroy the education system–they hate and fear the very concept of “collective” and its ramifications, like unions.

No. The conservatives advocate for personal liberty, personal responsibility and the rule of Law as per the US Constitution’s guarantees to the citizens for their freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom to pursue happiness, aka “In God We Trust”, “good things follow good deeds”, “karma is a beeetch” or “you reap what you sow” or “do the crime do the time”.

1776 Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. First Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Conservatives are against the left-wingers’ nanny-state policies, liberal indoctrination in the education system and the giving of exorbitant pay to unionized workers in return for their votes. A traditional UAW low-skilled factory worker has to be paid about US$150,000 a year, inclusive of fringe benefits. That was why many US jobs were exported overseas, eg non-unionized factory workers in China only need to be paid about US$15,000 a year, inclusive of benefits. Power-crazy left-wingers are mostly pandering for votes by selling out America esp to the minorities, ie giving out all kinds of freebies and benefits in return for votes. The silent majority, esp individual White voters, have rejected the destructive left-wing policies by voting out the liberal Democrats in the Nov 2016 national election. Now, the liberal press are yelling blooody murder against the Trump administration, eg NYT, WaPo, NBC, CNN, etc. Similarly, a few liberal and left-wing posters here at askwoody are trying to impose nanny-state Group A policies and indoctrinate/brainwash Win 7/8.1 users, ie to toe the M$ line.

Funny stuff. Thanks.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

Absolutely right. It is an act of civil war: the destruction of this country and all its forthcoming generations.

The worst part of all of it is the majority of the American public don’t have a clue and in most cases don’t want to know and wouldn’t believe you even if you told them. They’d just call you some name like “loon”, “nut” or “conspiracy theorist” and use those terms to dismiss everything and go on with their lives.

That last term is an interesting one, though. “Conspiracy theory” was purely an invention of the CIA in 1967 used to combat the growing disbelief in the government’s “official” version of events. The term was cooked up to discredit, marginalize and mock people who saw problems with and asked questions about said official stories. It was a domestic (and therefore illegal) PsyOp used on the US public by the CIA and it is, unfortunately, still used that way today despite the fact that many CT’s have since been proven to be completely true.

I wonder if even they thought it would be such a successful operation that would still be working 50 years later. It has served their interests well, that’s for sure. They couldn’t just have people going around asking questions and using their brains since that’s devastating to their plans, after all.

Reply | Quote

Ah, but you see, the reason they are clueless is a direct CONSEQUENCE of the intentional destruction of education!!! Eliminate education and you get clueless people — essential for fooling and distracting them from the fact that they are being manipulated, exploited and controlled.

When I came to this country I quickly realized that the difference between it and the soviet block is not in objectives–for both it is control–but in method. Both eliminated intellectual development and used propaganda.

The soviet system had unlimited violence at its disposal, so it did not care what you thought, only what you did: if you stepped out of line, you disappeared. So the propaganda was blatant, utterly absurd and nobody believed it.

The US system was more limited in its use of force so it was critical that the propaganda were subtle and persuasive — not by chance are marketing and PR the pillars or US culture.  For which reason knowledge, reason, independent, critical thinking–the purpose of true education–are the worst dangers and must be prevented at all cost, not less so than in USSR. So substitute it with preparation for the job market, coding and so on.

Much more elegant and effective, which is why the USSR is gone and the US still stands.

 

 

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

Ah, but you see, the reason they are clueless is a direct CONSEQUENCE of the intentional destruction of education!!! Eliminate education and you get clueless people — essential for fooling and distracting them from the fact that they are being manipulated, exploited and controlled. When I came to this country I quickly realized that the difference between it and the soviet block is not in objectives–for both it is control–but in method. Both eliminated intellectual development and used propaganda. The soviet system had unlimited violence at its disposal, so it did not care what you thought, only what you did: if you stepped out of line, you disappeared. So the propaganda was blatant, utterly absurd and nobody believed it. The US system was more limited in its use of force so it was critical that the propaganda were subtle and persuasive — not by chance are marketing and PR the pillars or US culture. For which reason knowledge, reason, independent, critical thinking–the purpose of true education–are the worst dangers and must be prevented at all cost, not less so than in USSR. So substitute it with preparation for the job market, coding and so on. Much more elegant and effective, which is why the USSR is gone and the US still stands.

A dark and chilling analysis, and I can’t see any vulnerabilities. Of course the reason we still have freedom of speech to say what you’ve just said is that those in power know that most people won’t understand it, so, practically speaking, it doesn’t matter if you say it.

To my mind it is no coincidence that the serious effort to undermine US public education began in the 1960s. A generation of young people, educated to think for themselves, questioned the way the government was structured. Those in power had a “**** ****! What have we done?” moment and began in earnest the process of dismantling what had become a pretty decent system. This effort has morphed into the “Charter School” movement–itself impossible to sell to a majority of voters who weren’t already stupefied–led by people who don’t want children exposed to “liberal” ideas.

Of course, the reasoning that leads to the conclusion that liberal ideas are problematic in a liberal democracy requires a good deal of confusion, but that’s a whole other discussion. I think Robert McNamara’s “The Fog of War” should be followed by a sequel, “The Fog of Education.”

GaryK

Reply | Quote

Well, there is a point at which the effectiveness of this method achieves the goal, it is shrewd to allow a modicum of free speech–otoh, it can be pointed out as evidence that nothing nefarious has happened, otoh it carries no risk because everybody now is clueless and considers the truth insanity. Check and mate.

There may be something to your analysis, but I tend to think that just the unwillingness to go and fight abroad has much more explanatory power–they were questioning their military service, not intervention. I don’t think they had the background to judge the pros/cons of the intervention.

The natural tendency of society is for power to concentrate, so freedom and democracy is an interlude between tyrannies when a tyranny self-destructs. There is no case in history of any society that could be deemed minimally democratic that did not succumb to tyranny after some period of time.

There is an illusion/delusion that the US will not, but that’s all it is.

 

Reply | Quote

Another must read:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/19/mark-zuckerberg-says-change-world-he-sets-rules

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

Another must read: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/19/mark-zuckerberg-says-change-world-he-sets-rules

Awesome. Thanks. I hadn’t seen that.

I have two immediate reactions:

1) The path to hell is paved with good intentions.

2) …and people here are worried about Windows telemetry.

This just illustrates my earlier point: Privacy is dead. Somewhere an entity has recorded everything I’ve done today (including typing this). That’s not going to stop. Our sole hope–and that hope is very close to no hope at all–is to control the use made of all this data. Privacy is gone–get over it–and most people happily exchanged it for a chocolate éclair. I insist that every person who objects to this first tell me if he/she has a Facebook account. (Which by the way I don’t.)

GaryK

Reply | Quote

But you miss the point of telemetry: these are ways to get the plebos used to worse things. And to test limits. By the time you accept telemetry you have ensured worse.

 

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

Well, there is a point at which the effectiveness of this method achieves the goal, it is shrewd to allow a modicum of free speech–otoh, it can be pointed out as evidence that nothing nefarious has happened, otoh it carries no risk because everybody now is clueless and considers the truth insanity. Check and mate. There may be something to your analysis, but I tend to think that just the unwillingness to go and fight abroad has much more explanatory power–they were questioning their military service, not intervention. I don’t think they had the background to judge the pros/cons of the intervention. The natural tendency of society is for power to concentrate, so freedom and democracy is an interlude between tyrannies when a tyranny self-destructs. There is no case in history of any society that could be deemed minimally democratic that did not succumb to tyranny after some period of time. There is an illusion/delusion that the US will not, but that’s all it is.

As to the first part–“they were questioning their military service, not intervention”–not so, at least where I was. They/we questioned both. Granted, these were not sophisticated analyses, but they/we were aware that the intervention was unwarranted. A lot of us were only 18 and still in, or just out of, high school, so sophisticated analyses would have been surprising, I think.

As to the second part, many of us realize that we’ve already succumbed. Many of us, though not a majority, even voted for it. Which left many others of us deeply disheartened.

I had some pro-Trump friends seriously justify their voting for Trump by saying (this is a direct quote), “The system needs shaking up. Besides, how much damage can he do in four years?’

How much damage has he done in four months?

GaryK

Reply | Quote

I wouldn’t put down the shakeup argument. The tragedy of elections in America is that there is really no choice and that there is no mechanism for producing candidates that could make a difference. But that is an inevitable consequence of dominant powers that peak and collapse–they self-destruct. And if that’s not true, let them name one that hasn’t.

IOW, the problem is that a shakeup is necessary, but the conditions that would enable exploiting it don’t exist.

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

But you miss the point of telemetry: these are ways to get the plebos used to worse things. And to test limits. By the time you accept telemetry you have ensured worse.

Where we differ is that you seem to believe that it can get much worse, and I don’t. At this point it’s a lost cause. It’s like someone saying, “I will help stop climate change by taking shorter showers.”

GaryK

1 user thanked author for this post.

Sessh

Reply | Quote

Not really. I just want at least some people–those with some modicum of reasoning ability–to realize the reality, not to reverse it, because individual action is useless.

As to good intentions, heh:

Facebook fined $122 million for misleading EU over WhatsApp deal
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/05/facebook-fined-e110-million-for-misleading-eu-over-whatsapp-deal/

Not to mention that he sued 300 people in Hawaii to force them to buy their land for his estate and the mistreatment of all his neighbours in SF. One way to distract from this is to issue nice manifestos and build a hospital. Then you can do almost anything without loss of your “nice guy” aura.

That’s what destroying education means. But check out the private schools these people send THEIR kids!!!!

Reply | Quote

 

Where we differ is that you seem to believe that it can get much worse, and I don’t. At this point it’s a lost cause. It’s like someone saying, “I will help stop climate change by taking shorter showers.”

I think it could get a lot worse. I’ll use self-driving cars as an example. Let’s say Facebook becomes what “Zuck” wants it to be and there is an AI that determines whether or not someone is a terrorist based on things they “like” and/or comments they make.

Let’s say they’re out in their self-driving car and suddenly, a signal gets sent to it that causes the current destination to be abandoned, the doors to lock and a new destination right to the nearest police station is entered because they need to ask you some questions based on the Facebook AI saying you’re a terrorist. That’s just one example I can think of for “worse” and I’m sure there’s more.

It could get a lot worse otherwise there’d be no point in these corporations to keep sinking their claws in deeper and deeper. It can always get worse and if people keep their heads in the sand, it will. It can change, but it would require a massive revolution of awareness and thought which would help people remember how to work together towards a common goal. As long as there is such disorganization and division among the 350 million people living in the US, no, nothing will change, but nothing lasts forever either.

Reply | Quote

It’s actually worse than even that. These methods could be used to get rid of whomever they don’t like, or are obstacles or anything. And it would be invisible — nobody would even know it happened this way.

The use of secret algorithms that nobody understand how they work and where, when and by whom they are applied–there’s no limits to the tyranny that they tempt. The Brexit article I linked to exposes the application of psyop military techniques to the electorate by shadowy companies and individuals who are hidden and uncontrollable without anybody being aware of it.

This is what happened in the soviet block in the open and without computers. Think of what is possible insidiously and with AI.

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

Not really. I just want at least some people–those with some modicum of reasoning ability–to realize the reality, not to reverse it, because individual action is useless. As to good intentions, heh: Facebook fined $122 million for misleading EU over WhatsApp deal https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/05/facebook-fined-e110-million-for-misleading-eu-over-whatsapp-deal/ Not to mention that he sued 300 people in Hawaii to force them to buy their land for his estate and the mistreatment of all his neighbours in SF. One way to distract from this is to issue nice manifestos and build a hospital. Then you can do almost anything without loss of your “nice guy” aura. That’s what destroying education means. But check out the private schools these people send THEIR kids!!!!

Well, we’re probably agreeing. It’s precisely because individual action is useless that I’m not willing to spend energy worrying about Microsoft telemetry.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

Well, we’re probably agreeing. It’s precisely because individual action is useless that I’m not willing to spend energy worrying about Microsoft telemetry.

Not one person, but one person can become many people and there is strength in numbers. While I do see what you’re saying and agree to a point, if everybody thought like that, there’d be no resistance at all which is even worse.

Reply | Quote

Sadly, no, that’s an illusion that distract. I recommend the Olson book I mentioned–you’ll see what I mean.

Reply | Quote

Sessh wrote:

Where we differ is that you seem to believe that it can get much worse, and I don’t. At this point it’s a lost cause. It’s like someone saying, “I will help stop climate change by taking shorter showers.”

I think it could get a lot worse. I’ll use self-driving cars as an example. Let’s say Facebook becomes what “Zuck” wants it to be and there is an AI that determines whether or not someone is a terrorist based on things they “like” and/or comments they make. Let’s say they’re out in their self-driving car and suddenly, a signal gets sent to it that causes the current destination to be abandoned, the doors to lock and a new destination right to the nearest police station is entered because they need to ask you some questions based on the Facebook AI saying you’re a terrorist. That’s just one example I can think of for “worse” and I’m sure there’s more. It could get a lot worse otherwise there’d be no point in these corporations to keep sinking their claws in deeper and deeper. It can always get worse and if people keep their heads in the sand, it will. It can change, but it would require a massive revolution of awareness and thought which would help people remember how to work together towards a common goal. As long as there is such disorganization and division among the 350 million people living in the US, no, nothing will change, but nothing lasts forever either.

Frightening indeed. But by “get worse” I am speaking specifically about data collection and people’s sense that their privacy is being eroded and that they’re fighting back against further erosion by blocking Windows telemetry. Makes me chuckle just to think about that. What I mean, precisely, is that blocking Windows (I keep wanting to put an apostrophe there) telemetry can and will make not one iota of difference in the grand loss-of-privacy scheme. If it makes someone feel better–like they’re fighting the good fight–fine. Pleasure yourself. But that’s all you’re doing. Privacy is dead. It lasted about five decades longer than ***.

As far as what use corporations/governments can–and will–make of all that data, yes, absolutely, as you say, the world in which we live can become a LOT worse. I’m so old I won’t be around to see it. That’s one reason I’m glad I don’t have children.

As a sidelight, we need a new word to describe the entity that will result from the ongoing merger of corporations and governments. “Corporment?” Not very elegant. How about “governation?”

GaryK

Reply | Quote

Corporate state will do. I even used “Sillicon Valley state”, because that’s where all this stuff originates and has been allowed to expand without any limits.

Reply | Quote

Sessh wrote:

Well, we’re probably agreeing. It’s precisely because individual action is useless that I’m not willing to spend energy worrying about Microsoft telemetry.

Not one person, but one person can become many people and there is strength in numbers. While I do see what you’re saying and agree to a point, if everybody thought like that, there’d be no resistance at all which is even worse.

No, no–I’m on your side in that. I’m all for resistance and think it’s possible. It’s just that resistance in the form of stopping Windows telemetry is a silly waste of time.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

AFAIK that’s exactly what I have been arguing here (and have been edited as political).

1st, realize what’s at stake and where it’s going. 2nd, the solution is not configuring individual computers to avoid telemetry and data collection, but in the collective activity necessary.

Unfortunately, collective action has an inherent weakness that is being exploited by the anti-democratic forces. I strongly recommend THE LOGIC OF COLLECTIVE ACTION by mancur Olson–a small great book that explains that weakness.

Reply | Quote

Frightening indeed. But by “get worse” I am speaking specifically about data collection…

Oh, my bad. I think I’d even disagree with that. With new technology like Siri, Alexa and whatnot gaining more and more popularity, it will be like bugging your own house. I think there’s more privacy to lose in the home, but maybe I’m just deluding myself. Smart TV’s may have mics, but I believe they need internet access to transmit anything.

Even using the car example, I can imagine there being data collecting devices in cars that monitor your location and current speed and the next thing you know, you’ve got a few speeding tickets coming in the mail.

I think it can always get worse. We can’t imagine every scenario, but I’m sure someone else has not only imagined them, but has already started making it a reality. Nothing would surprise me anymore TBH. One thing I’m fairly sure of is it CAN get worse; a lot worse. Data collection and the use of said information both.

Reply | Quote

No, no–I’m on your side in that. I’m all for resistance and think it’s possible. It’s just that resistance in the form of stopping Windows telemetry is a silly waste of time.

Perhaps so, but I think not fighting back or even trying to is easy to get used to and before you know it, you’ve forgotten how to fight back. I think that can be said for many people these days unfortunately. So, I fight it as much as I can not just with telemetry. I’m probably losing just like everyone else, but it just doesn’t feel right to me to just give up and submit because the situation seems hopeless. I certainly understand why people do it, though, I just wish more people didn’t.

Besides, I imagine that if even half of Windows users made substantial efforts to block some of all of Windows telemetry, it would definitely get Microsoft’s attention. It goes back to not being organized, though. I guess where we disagree is that I don’t think resistance, no matter how trivial it may seem, is useless because if a significant amount of people would do it, it couldn’t be ignored. If hardly anyone does it, then it can be ignored.

Reply | Quote

Sadly, to realize the need to fight back and learn how to requires you to experience the hind of regimes like the Soviet, Middle East, Medieval times etc. Americans never experienced this and have taken everything for granted — they cannot conceive of the horrors that can arrive gradually. Sadly, they will have to experience the full brunt of it to reach a point when they are no longer clueless.

As I said earlier, that is, in fact, how freedom interludes happen: when tyrannies reach their limits and self-destruct. And such interludes continue until the next tyranny.

Reply | Quote

Sessh wrote:

Frightening indeed. But by “get worse” I am speaking specifically about data collection…

Oh, my bad. I think I’d even disagree with that. With new technology like Siri, Alexa and whatnot gaining more and more popularity, it will be like bugging your own house. I think there’s more privacy to lose in the home, but maybe I’m just deluding myself. Smart TV’s may have mics, but I believe they need internet access to transmit anything. Even using the car example, I can imagine there being data collecting devices in cars that monitor your location and current speed and the next thing you know, you’ve got a few speeding tickets coming in the mail. I think it can always get worse. We can’t imagine every scenario, but I’m sure someone else has not only imagined them, but has already started making it a reality. Nothing would surprise me anymore TBH. One thing I’m fairly sure of is it CAN get worse; a lot worse. Data collection and the use of said information both.

But Siri and Alexa are already here, and new products are already in the pipeline and about to roll out. To me what you’re describing is simply a difference in degree, not kind. They can already listen to you in your car; I just don’t know if they are doing that yet.

But here is where resistance is practical: We can’t stop them from collecting data or from inventing new ways to collect it. But we can limit how that data is used and misused. To me the real genius of the US Constitution, and this aspect of it has been a model for most non-religious constitution’s since, is that its intent is to proscribe, not prescribe, what government can do. In practical terms, it limits what men (now people but at that time men) can do in government’s name. The framers were cynics who hadn’t entirely lost their optimism. To paraphrase, they said, “No laws shall be made….” What they meant was that men (sorry, they were all men) couldn’t make this or that kind of law. They knew the history of religious persecutions and had seen first hand what men could do in the name of their God or their king, and they sought to prevent men in their new nation from doing those things. But they were working and thinking in a 1700s context, not a 2000s context. What we can do now, 300 years later, in the form of real (as opposed to symbolic) resistance is to foment a movement that seeks a kind of “big data” Constitution, one that limits how big data can be used, with a manifesto something like, “The purpose of the collection of data is to promote human welfare and happiness and individual liberty. Data shall not be used in this way and that way….” That’s what could make a better future.

Time spent thinking about and blocking Windows telemetry is time not spent thinking about and limiing actual misuse of data.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

>But we can limit how that data is used and misused.

Ah, here we disagree. I don’t believe we can. You are much more optimistic than I am. That probably has to do with our origins.

 

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

AFAIK that’s exactly what I have been arguing here (and have been edited as political). 1st, realize what’s at stake and where it’s going. 2nd, the solution is not configuring individual computers to avoid telemetry and data collection, but in the collective activity necessary. Unfortunately, collective action has an inherent weakness that is being exploited by the anti-democratic forces. I strongly recommend THE LOGIC OF COLLECTIVE ACTION by mancur Olson–a small great book that explains that weakness.

Just ordered it from Amazon, which has added that purchase to everything else Amazon already knows about me. I’m looking forward to reading it. Thanks for the recommendation.

Clearly, it’s not an easy thing to accomplish, possibly quixotic, but it is possible; it’s been done. Sometimes it takes a while (sometimes a long while). But I think we agree that one way it’s NOT going to happen is by having energy and brains siphoned off worrying about Windows telemetry.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

If you really want to understand the inherent difficulties that prevent me from being optimistic look into applications of game theory to human behavior. It has very powerful explanatory power. There are some traps, however, that must be avoided, which is not easy.

 

Reply | Quote

@gkarasik #117036

“Just ordered it from Amazon…”

Save your money, here’s a summary.
http://wikisum.com/w/Olson:_The_logic_of_collective_action

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

Corporate state will do. I even used “Sillicon Valley state”, because that’s where all this stuff originates and has been allowed to expand without any limits.

Corpocracy? Corpigarchy? (I like that because of the “pig” in the middle.) I’m going to keep working on this. To succeed, a movement needs a catchy buzzword.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

>But we can limit how that data is used and misused. Ah, here we disagree. I don’t believe we can. You are much more optimistic than I am. That probably has to do with our origins.

No harm in trying.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

Well, with about as much effect as fighting MS telemetry 🙂

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

If you really want to understand the inherent difficulties that prevent me from being optimistic look into applications of game theory to human behavior. It has very powerful explanatory power. There are some traps, however, that must be avoided, which is not easy.

I heard too many choruses from “Man of La Mancha” when I was a child.
To paraphrase me: There is no glory in doing nothing. There is glory in trying. The more pointless the goal, the more glory in the attempt.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

As long as you don’t bang your head against the wall and don’t do over and over again something that has not worked expecting different result.

Knowledge and reason can at least prevent you from doing that.

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

Well, with about as much effect as fighting MS telemetry 🙂

Can’t argue that point.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

HiFlyer wrote:

@gkarasik #117036 “Just ordered it from Amazon…” Save your money, here’s a summary. http://wikisum.com/w/Olson:_The_logic_of_collective_action

Thanks! I got your note at the same time I got the Amazon delivery notice. It will help to read the summary before I read the book. These social-science monographs can be tedious.

GaryK

Reply | Quote

By all means read summaries, but don’t substitute them for the books. The whole point of reading is not to substitute others’ interpretations and understandings for your own–but train your own mental faculties to come up with your own.

Substituting reviews for the real thing is an intellectual laziness that is another consequence of the destruction of education. Without applying your own judgment how do you know somebody does not manipulate you?

Olson’s is a short book that formalizes a rather familiar phenomenon–the free rider–that has enormous impact on the ability of the public to withstand exploitation and oppression and you must apply your mind to derive the various implications by yourself. That’s how you learn to reason and acquire knowledge. The various mechanisms that power elites employ to atomize societies relies specifically on the free rider phenomenon.

Don’t save money on books, save your mind from atrophiation.

 

Reply | Quote

I’ve never been much of a book worm. I have a book called “War Is A Racket” by Smedley Butler that I still haven’t read entirely and it’s not even a long book, but very interesting how the motives of war back in the early 1900’s are exactly the same as they are now; the military is just the strong arm of corporations and nothing more. Also an interesting read if you’re into that topic. Smedley Butler, the most decorated solider in US history at the time of his death, was a whistleblower as well and foiled a government conspiracy known as “The Business Plot.” in his life. Fascinating stuff. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

I will read that summary, thanks HiFlyer! It’s people like you guys that make me think there’s still hope. 🙂

Reply | Quote

That’s another consequence of the destruction of real education, which instilled desire to read.

Today we have at best schooled people, but not educated people.

During the Reagan era I recall somebody saying: “Reagan knew what he wanted and that was the full extent of his knowledge.” Trump much improves on that. Quote: “He does not know much and he is not interested in learning”.

Reply | Quote

Sessh wrote:

I’ve never been much of a book worm. I have a book called “War Is A Racket” by Smedley Butler that I still haven’t read entirely and it’s not even a long book, but very interesting how the motives of war back in the early 1900’s are exactly the same as they are now; the military is just the strong arm of corporations and nothing more. Also an interesting read if you’re into that topic. Smedley Butler, the most decorated solider in US history at the time of his death, was a whistleblower as well and foiled a government conspiracy known as “The Business Plot.” in his life. Fascinating stuff. The more things change, the more they stay the same. I will read that summary, thanks HiFlyer! It’s people like you guys that make me think there’s still hope. 🙂 

If you get a Sunday paper, and if it has comics, and if it carries the comic strip “Pearls Before Swine,” be sure to take a look at that this morning. Or you may be able to see it here:

http://www.gocomics.com/pearlsbeforeswine

GaryK

1 user thanked author for this post.

Sessh

Reply | Quote

If you get a Sunday paper, and if it has comics, and if it carries the comic strip “Pearls Before Swine,” be sure to take a look at that this morning. Or you may be able to see it here:

http://www.gocomics.com/pearlsbeforeswine

lol, I got a laugh out of that, thanks.

As an aside, I wonder why quoting a smiley face makes it increase in size by about 500%? Putting a smiley face in a quote box is like putting a gummy bear into a glass of water, I guess.

Reply | Quote

It’s Ok, the free efficient market corporations will protect us from govt tyranny.

Reply | Quote

fp wrote:

That’s another consequence of the destruction of real education, which instilled desire to read.

Today we have at best schooled people, but not educated people. During the Reagan era I recall somebody saying: “Reagan knew what he wanted and that was the full extent of his knowledge.” Trump much improves on that. Quote: “He does not know much and he is not interested in learning”.

In my case, I read a lot online whether it’s random articles, scientific studies, tech articles, biology or whatever other spur of the moment topic it may be, so I love learning things and search for stuff all the time. It’s quite fun.

I was a hyper kid, though. So, something that required sitting still and staring into a book for any length of time was a difficult task and so I never caught on to it. Now, it makes my eyes/head hurt staring that close up for that long as the Game of Thrones books showed me. I can put more space between me and a computer monitor at least.

However, I find that not many people share a desire or passion for knowledge of new things these days, so I know what you mean. People become comfortable with what they know and are used to and it can be hard to get people to even consider any other way of thinking or looking at something.

Reply | Quote

GKarasik, fp, et al, I have thoroughly enjoyed following this thread. I know site rules put it here in the rants. I actually wanted to interject and tell you to loosen up within bounds of polite, but did not want to break flow. It has been a very good read. Thank you for providing it.

I doubt it is the goal to have a regular thread on this subject. But to see one develop, and resolve point by point, has been a treat. I feel I understand others better now. Not completely but better.

Paul

Reply | Quote