> Politicians and police are not subject to monitoring, only ordinal citizens messages’ should be wiretapped
Of course, in 1984, their instruction manual, the top members of the party can turn their telescreens off.
Of course, in 1984, their instruction manual, the top members of the party can turn their telescreens off.
Kind of funny to hear people refer to 1984 these days. We're so far past it now, and we did it to ourselves; giving up location data for maps (and mobile phone function for that matter), a Ring doorbell on every front door, participation in social media, etc.
But somehow it's all OK, because it's corporations instead of the government (a blurry line itself) on the other end.
Most people don't know that we did it. They still happily click on "accept all" and blame it on EU to need to do that. They don't know what the heck is that, and why they should understand what's written there.
When they are asked cleanly, and simply whether they want to share their data to thousands of shady companies, about only a quarter choose yes. That's why Facebook had to force everybody in the EU to choose between paying and accepting it.
Divide and conquer tactics work. Microsoft, Facebook and Apple all use it to great advantage. The funny thing is it was always about free software. Not enough people listened to Stallman. None of this could have happened if people rejected non-free software.
Stallman lives in his own delusional world, and GPL not only solved the problem, it created more burden, that developers decided to use other less restrictive licenses.
Such as?
> it created more burden
In what way?
You can search the web, but as an appetiser here you go: https://jfrog.com/blog/malware-civil-war-malicious-npm-packa...
> In what way?
Well, you can't bundle GPL licensed software with less restrictive one such as BSD, which is a big deal, that's why BSD and GNU/Linux are so separated in many ways. That's just one problem. It'c clear that all-or-nothing approach doesn't work in free and open source software world.
Sure you can. If the result is a derivative work redistribution is subject to the terms of the GPL but you can bundle all you want.
But, if it was the government receiving all of this data, they'd be in a panic. This has basis in current day fear-mongering about government power, as well as warnings about authoritarian governments from Orwell and beyond.
Not to say there's no reason to be concerned, but the casual mentions of 1984 are hilariously dated and ironic in 2024.
More substantively, it also reveals the naivete of those who wish to completely disempower their democratic governments. That is, someone will still retain the power when it's taken from the government. The only question is who and whether everyday people will have a voice in their own governance.
One look at corporate power and our deference there is a pretty big hint.
For me it was more like 2014. Though it was going on long before this … I think it was the pandemonium and ultimately the widespread acceptance … that sealed the deal!
No we are not, you are not forced to have a smartphone, your are still allowed to have sex and most democracy's don't torture you for speak against it.
Don't just fixate on the surveillance aspect in 1984, there's much much more in the book.
Yes. That was my point. We are not forced to (though life would be hard without one). As I said, we did it to ourselves.
>Don't just fixate on the surveillance aspect
I'm referring to the context of this thread, which is largely around surveillance. That, BTW, is also the context in which references to 1984 most often arise.
Other people's thoughts of you are not under your control. That people feel pressured to be on these platforms says more about the company they keep than anything else.
Society moves in one direction, some people don't (can't, won't, whatever). Those people become marginalised as society fails to provide adequate alternatives. Reducing it to "the company you keep" and "feeling pressured" seems a tad simplistic.
Why not go to the European Court of Justice?
And I did not say that there are no parallels to 1984, but I would argue that there are more parallels to Lord of the (key)ring than to 1984 ATM.
By the way, the driving force behind this law is also Swedish (Ylva Johansson), so maybe Sweden has some work to do ;)
If not, I'm sure they'd find a way to accept payment from someone who has eaten and has means to pay that don't include a smart phone.
Edit: No power given to government rarely not become something grotesque. US social security cards were “only for benefits”, now they are some ubiquitous identity number. In recent times, Covid vaccination cards were supposed to “only a patient record” until everyone started demanding them. So if your information starts leaking out your “conformance” will follow one way or another.
Recently, implementations for PalmOS and J2ME phones featured on HN [1], among others.
Password managers such as Bitwarden or 1Password also feature implementations.
How do I opt out of all of this bullshit?
I just want to go back to paper forms and letters mailboxes and stuff.
You can still file your taxes and apply for benefits on paper, if you’re so inclined.
Banks and government departments still have phone lines.
You can still send letters to your friends or call them on the phone.
Like don't tell me that you can stil live life the old analog and paper way, you know that is quickly becoming a thing of the past.
If they don’t accept cash, don’t patronize them? Also, a debit or credit card isn’t a smart phone, so I am not sure what you are arguing for here.
You have a choice to vote with your wallet and not go to places if they don’t have services that match your needs.
Businesses are not obligated to do business with you.
https://www.nyc.gov/site/dca/consumers/Prohibition-of-Cashle...
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/san_francisco/latest/s...
In most European countries, you are forced to have smart phone to access banking services, many other online services. Even some government agencies use WhatsApp for communications.
Others require you to generate a token with the bank app.
Android and iOS are sandboxed and cannot be trojaned so easily.
Hence de facto requirement of a smartphone for banking.
FYI, ironically SMS 2FA is usually still available to cope with people not being able to install their official apps… so back to square one!