6 ms·

First, I'm a big fan... but: I'm struggling with why you don't open arms embrace the Gen-X / Gen Y's actual attitude towards a government that can grab any of

First, I'm a big fan... but: I'm struggling with why you don't open arms embrace the Gen-X / Gen Y's actual attitude towards a government that can grab any of them and shame them into compliance is the moral voting decision. There is an actual synthesis available, the state collects all kinds of data, but it cannot be used against its citizens. Using any that data to help solve ANY domestic crime becomes the greater crime - it is traitorous for any public employee to do so. We have a long legal history or fruit of the poisoned tree, Gen X / Gen Y can simply ensure PRISM and its ilk - we save and extend that, and harshly punish a few civil servants. Lesson taught. Its similar to the militarization of the police. Why not expect and cheer Gen Y / Gen X to say out loud, "we don't care if more cops die because they have only a vest"? Why not expect and cheer, the total destruction of the bureaucracy your work pillories? Why valorize the near criminal firm behavior the 40 year s and a watch created? I'm Gen X and I'm totally comfy with the idea of a state that has to rebuild itself around 1M Snowdens ready to heroically crush state malfeasance for $, fame, or patriotism. It dawns on me you aren't a fan of Nassim Taleb. I prefer my sci-fi writers to be dedicated libertarians. So maybe, if you aren't, don't publicize it.

unalone 13y ago
The government is not a monolithic entity. The evils of intrusive surveillance doesn't make, say, social programs, or economic regulation, evil just because they're other large government programs. Libertarianism is great if you're already wealthy; it's... problematic... if you're starting off from a position of relatively little power. > I prefer my sci-fi writers to be dedicated libertarians. So maybe, if you aren't, don't publicize it. This is astonishingly condescending of you.
- in2liberty 13y ago
  I'm not insisting we throw out the state because of PRISM. It seems like you basically agree with my question of CSTROSS. The last bit, was just me letting him know, putting his politics in front of his art means some won't make it to his art. I like keanu reeves bc he doesn't let me know what he thinks. I'm weird that way.
  - unalone 13y ago
    And putting politics "in front of his art" will probably convince some of the, you know, thousands of people who read his blog posts on Hacker News and elsewhere, that maybe his books are worth picking up and buying. Regardless, what you said was pretty rude.
    - jacquesm 13y ago
      > that maybe his books are worth picking up and buying. They are, no matter what your politics. It's good stuff.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    > I'm weird that way. Dick. You are a dick. Just letting you know.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
    > putting his politics in front of his art means some won't make it to his art. And a lot of artists are 100% ok with that. Mr Stross seems to be among them. Last time I heard that sentiment expressed was recently - a folk band who mentioned that they just weren't interested in playing a paying gig for a British National Party member. To me it feels like personal integrity. But then I'm in broad agreement with Mr Stross' political views (and the folk band too) so it's not much of a challenge. I wouldn't want to be a fan of a far-right artist anyway.
pessimizer 13y ago
Is this Dada?
fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
> We have a long legal history or fruit of the poisoned tree, We had that. It is eviscerated by things like "Parallel Construction", "Exigent Circumstances", and really low standards for "Probable Cause". WRT domestic law enforcement (like drug cases), police may violate laws, peoples' rights in all manner of ways. Prosecutors usually get to keep the evidence if police can show "good faith".
cstross 13y ago
I prefer my sci-fi writers to be dedicated libertarians. So maybe, if you aren't, don't publicize it. Then you prefer to get your ideology and news pre-digested, do you? (I reckon it's always a mistake to restrict your reading so that it conforms to your own worldview.) I'm not a libertarian. Libertarianism is a specifically American ideology that can be pigeon-holed best as right-anarchism. I'm not American: I'm a leftist with a strong attachment to social contracts, civil liberties, and freedom. If it causes you to stop buying my books because it doesn't gel with your preconception of what I ought to be, that's fine by me. But you don't get to tell me not to talk about it.
- lukifer 13y ago
  I've been tempted to try to coin the term "paleolibertarian": the original meaning of the word was much more left-leaning. http://youtu.be/RxPUvQZ3rc http://youtu.be/RxPUvQZ3rc I think there is an oppurtunity for a coalition between the far left and the far right over civil liberties, if only we can "agree to disagree" on economic theories until the rule of law under the Constitution has been restored. (There's even a good brand hook built-in: the Green Tea Party.)
  - ameister14 13y ago
    I see talk about 'restoring the Constitution' a lot; but the truth is the Constitution is inherently flawed. It was broken (or fixed) the first time within a few years of its ratification, and failed utterly with the Civil War. In the process, the government of the United States actually became much more stable. Unfortunately, I don't believe it's about the Constitution right now. I think the problem is that civic priorities have shifted.
    - tracker1 13y ago
      The Bill of Rights (first "fix") was mainly to restore certain civil protections that were established in the Articles of Confederation that the Constitutions ratification took away, or didn't expressly spell out (10th Amendment). I think after the 1830's decision to use the commerce clause in more encroach into a broader role that it was a pragmatic decision at the time... however, that expanded role continued into what we have today. We should emphatically NOT have domestic arms of the U.S. Government with the power that the DoJ, FBI, CIA, NSA, ATF, DEA, ICE and their ilk are holding.
rst 13y ago
"Fruit of the poisoned tree" is a peculiarly American doctrine which is recent as these things go; Wikipedia traces it to a court case from 1920. And it's a somewhat problematic way of dealing with misconduct by the authorities. For one thing, it relies on them to correctly report where they're getting their information. Fast-forward to the recent NSA/DEA leaks, including memos offering agents explicit guidance in "parallel construction", a euphemism for constructing false case histories in which the existence of evidence from the NSA dragnet is concealed from the courts. Where this is happening, the exclusionary rule has failed as a constraint on the cops.
- in2liberty 13y ago
  We deal with it two ways: 1. We make accessing and using the data domestically the biggest punishable crime in the land. 2. Parallel construction relies on creating a believable narrative. As such we become suspicious of chance occurrences within those narratives. And as soon as someone screws up the story, we hit them with #1 so hard everyone else freaks.
tracker1 13y ago
Personally, I lean very libertarian (with pragmatism towards said ideals). And although i think that GenX/Y (tail end of X myself) are far more open to free expression than many generations (though the 60's/70's did have a lot of protesting, you can see the impacts that started there). I think there are plenty of people that are very closed off, and closed minded. Positions of power tend to be obtained by those that seek it out. Those that seek out power and achieve it are generally those that are both charismatic, and ambitious. This can be a dangerous combination. When you combine this with people who love raw technology, the opportunity to work with said technology will often outweigh the moral obligation someone should have with their larger community. This is why things like PRISM can happen, and actually start being used before leaks happen. Many people I know would have not had the fortitude (I think myself included) to actually take the steps to speak out.

unalone 13y ago

The government is not a monolithic entity. The evils of intrusive surveillance doesn't make, say, social programs, or economic regulation, evil just because they're other large government programs. Libertarianism is great if you're already wealthy; it's... problematic... if you're starting off from a position of relatively little power. > I prefer my sci-fi writers to be dedicated libertarians. So maybe, if you aren't, don't publicize it. This is astonishingly condescending of you.

in2liberty 13y ago
I'm not insisting we throw out the state because of PRISM. It seems like you basically agree with my question of CSTROSS. The last bit, was just me letting him know, putting his politics in front of his art means some won't make it to his art. I like keanu reeves bc he doesn't let me know what he thinks. I'm weird that way.
- unalone 13y ago
  And putting politics "in front of his art" will probably convince some of the, you know, thousands of people who read his blog posts on Hacker News and elsewhere, that maybe his books are worth picking up and buying. Regardless, what you said was pretty rude.
  - jacquesm 13y ago
    > that maybe his books are worth picking up and buying. They are, no matter what your politics. It's good stuff.
- saraid216 13y ago
  > I'm weird that way. Dick. You are a dick. Just letting you know.
- SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
  > putting his politics in front of his art means some won't make it to his art. And a lot of artists are 100% ok with that. Mr Stross seems to be among them. Last time I heard that sentiment expressed was recently - a folk band who mentioned that they just weren't interested in playing a paying gig for a British National Party member. To me it feels like personal integrity. But then I'm in broad agreement with Mr Stross' political views (and the folk band too) so it's not much of a challenge. I wouldn't want to be a fan of a far-right artist anyway.

pessimizer 13y ago

Is this Dada?

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

> We have a long legal history or fruit of the poisoned tree, We had that. It is eviscerated by things like "Parallel Construction", "Exigent Circumstances", and really low standards for "Probable Cause". WRT domestic law enforcement (like drug cases), police may violate laws, peoples' rights in all manner of ways. Prosecutors usually get to keep the evidence if police can show "good faith".

cstross 13y ago

I prefer my sci-fi writers to be dedicated libertarians. So maybe, if you aren't, don't publicize it. Then you prefer to get your ideology and news pre-digested, do you? (I reckon it's always a mistake to restrict your reading so that it conforms to your own worldview.) I'm not a libertarian. Libertarianism is a specifically American ideology that can be pigeon-holed best as right-anarchism. I'm not American: I'm a leftist with a strong attachment to social contracts, civil liberties, and freedom. If it causes you to stop buying my books because it doesn't gel with your preconception of what I ought to be, that's fine by me. But you don't get to tell me not to talk about it.

lukifer 13y ago
I've been tempted to try to coin the term "paleolibertarian": the original meaning of the word was much more left-leaning. http://youtu.be/RxPUvQZ3rc http://youtu.be/RxPUvQZ3rc I think there is an oppurtunity for a coalition between the far left and the far right over civil liberties, if only we can "agree to disagree" on economic theories until the rule of law under the Constitution has been restored. (There's even a good brand hook built-in: the Green Tea Party.)
- ameister14 13y ago
  I see talk about 'restoring the Constitution' a lot; but the truth is the Constitution is inherently flawed. It was broken (or fixed) the first time within a few years of its ratification, and failed utterly with the Civil War. In the process, the government of the United States actually became much more stable. Unfortunately, I don't believe it's about the Constitution right now. I think the problem is that civic priorities have shifted.
  - tracker1 13y ago
    The Bill of Rights (first "fix") was mainly to restore certain civil protections that were established in the Articles of Confederation that the Constitutions ratification took away, or didn't expressly spell out (10th Amendment). I think after the 1830's decision to use the commerce clause in more encroach into a broader role that it was a pragmatic decision at the time... however, that expanded role continued into what we have today. We should emphatically NOT have domestic arms of the U.S. Government with the power that the DoJ, FBI, CIA, NSA, ATF, DEA, ICE and their ilk are holding.

rst 13y ago

"Fruit of the poisoned tree" is a peculiarly American doctrine which is recent as these things go; Wikipedia traces it to a court case from 1920. And it's a somewhat problematic way of dealing with misconduct by the authorities. For one thing, it relies on them to correctly report where they're getting their information. Fast-forward to the recent NSA/DEA leaks, including memos offering agents explicit guidance in "parallel construction", a euphemism for constructing false case histories in which the existence of evidence from the NSA dragnet is concealed from the courts. Where this is happening, the exclusionary rule has failed as a constraint on the cops.

in2liberty 13y ago
We deal with it two ways: 1. We make accessing and using the data domestically the biggest punishable crime in the land. 2. Parallel construction relies on creating a believable narrative. As such we become suspicious of chance occurrences within those narratives. And as soon as someone screws up the story, we hit them with #1 so hard everyone else freaks.

tracker1 13y ago

Personally, I lean very libertarian (with pragmatism towards said ideals). And although i think that GenX/Y (tail end of X myself) are far more open to free expression than many generations (though the 60's/70's did have a lot of protesting, you can see the impacts that started there). I think there are plenty of people that are very closed off, and closed minded. Positions of power tend to be obtained by those that seek it out. Those that seek out power and achieve it are generally those that are both charismatic, and ambitious. This can be a dangerous combination. When you combine this with people who love raw technology, the opportunity to work with said technology will often outweigh the moral obligation someone should have with their larger community. This is why things like PRISM can happen, and actually start being used before leaks happen. Many people I know would have not had the fortitude (I think myself included) to actually take the steps to speak out.