When people say they have nothing to hide, let's reply:

* Post your passwords here
* Write down everybody you hate
* Tell the world who you voted for
* List all the videos you watched

- Medical history.
- Sensitive conversations with employers, children, spouses.
- Billing and banking information.
- Purchase information.
- Web search history.
And more...

I need privacy. Not because my actions are questionable, but because 'your' judgement and intentions are.

And it doesn't matter whether or not my communications are weighty or frivolous in nature - they are mine and only for those whom I've chosen to share them with. Not the government's, nor goog's, nor my ISP's, but mine.

Also, what is legal where I live today, may not be legal tomorrow and my discussion of it may incriminate my future self. It has happened in the past many times to others in other places.

Probably a good time to share @fedizine again. Our anarchist introduction to federated social media :anarchy_black:

distro.f-91w.club/fedizine/

Someone share it on twitter so we can see some unhinged Twitter takes too :jokerfied:

stop talking to people in your life who think adblocking is "theft"

I've been skeptical of the idea of technological singularity for a long time. We already have superhuman intelligence in the form of humans augmented by software and the Internet. And we can increase the collective intelligence of the human race exponentially simply by increasing equity. This morning in the shower it occurred to me that technological singularity is really a techbro fantasy about making an end run around this need for greater equity: since we have so far been unwilling to make the changes necessary to enable everyone to contribute, let's just replace humans with AGIs.

I think singularitarianism may even be fundamentally fascist: who decides on the nature of AGIs to let loose on the human race? Who decides whether to allow it at all? Who owns the technological advances the AGIs produce? Who decides how to apply those advances? In Ray Kurzweil's case, the answer is obviously the Great Benevolent Google.

I think it may not be enough to regulate the development of AGI. I suspect we're going to need to think really hard about who should even be allowed to even amass the data and computational power needed to produce such a thing. In fact, I'm not even sure the AGI itself is the threat, but the data and computational power. Being able to run arbitrary inferences across huge datasets is itself dangerous when those datasets contain information from which private information can be derived, even if none of the data in the dataset is itself private.

I'm sorry, I don't have a mental state! I'm an anarchist!

Repeat after me: using your legal name online is neither required [99% of the time] nor doing you any good (I mean, itโ€™s doing advertising companies and other data brokers a huge favor).

See a website, signup page, form, or app asking for your name and personal information? Make some shit up. Fuck em.

And if you can help it donโ€™t give out your real/primary phone number or email address.

[DM me for more tips, or contact me via raelovejoy.com/contact]

There should be no possible way for somebody to profit from the suffering of others
And yet OUR ENTIRE FUCKING WAY OF LIFE IS BUILT ON THAT CONCEPT

sometimes i'm reminded that students in the US are forced to pledge allegiance to the US every day and like. what the fuck

Endless scrolling is a UX problem that shouldn't exist.

It's become impossible to keep up with these infinite scrollhole sites. There's got to be a better way of 'catching up' with whatever happens when you're not staring at a screen.

Just gimme all the goddamn interesting shit that I 'missed so I don't have to go looking (a.k.a. scrolling) for it later.

But then again, is anyone really 'missing' much? A... no... THE question for our time. (IMO, yes, but mostly no...*)

* the problem is that actual meaningful content gets lost in all the noise.

Luckily this shit [points around] is technically microblogging. Audience: optional.

If one doesnโ€™t (actively) exist on social media does one even exist at all? Asking for aโ€ฆ myself.

I think about artificial general intelligence (AGI) a lot and I canโ€™t escape the conclusion that it will never be fully realized* (which includes realizing capitalism is bullshit) if it is controlled by corporations and/or governments.

* me trying to replace the word โ€œpotentialโ€ (e.g. reaching its โ€œfull potentialโ€ which is too similar to other words like โ€œprogressโ€ and โ€œcivilizedโ€ used to justify all kinds of horrible shit.

I am a slow writer (and subsequently a limited communicator) but it is necessary.

theguardian.com/environment/20

This finding, while predictable, confirms that there is little future for the car, whether electric or gas, or any other technology. The future is biking, walking, and rail transportation. As long as we use heavy, tired vehicles to move 1.7 people we will kill ourselves and non-human animals through air pollution and microplastics.

Show older
kolektiva.social

A collective effort to offer federated social media to anarchist collectives and individuals in the fediverse. Registrations are open. Kolektiva.social is made by anarchists and anti-colonialists, for the social movements and for liberation!