[pmarreck]

If his fears were rational (based on actual evidence) instead of irrational (based on mere belief), then perhaps he would have had a legitimate point to make... but as it stands, until there's evidence that he was correct, he was just a baseless violent offender

[wu-ikkyu]

>invasion of privacy (through computers)... environmental degradation through excessive economic growth (computers make an important contribution to economic growth)

Is there not evidence of those things?

[pmarreck]

> invasion of privacy (through computers)

Computers also enable absolute privacy via current-gen public/private-key encryption protocols. In fact, this is the first time in history that absolute privacy is actually achievable. This is also the first time in history that I can evade arguably-unethical government controls on my money by using a cryptocurrency. Also enabled by computers. The fact that everyone is willfully crowding themselves into just a handful of un-end-to-end-encrypted for-profit services is just laziness.

> environmental degradation through excessive economic growth (computers make an important contribution to economic growth)

I would agree that computers accelerate economic growth, but they also accelerate solutions to problems created by that economic growth, so I don't see how computers alone can be faulted for this. Also, if my laptop was solar-powered or if I paid for green energy for my home, then my carbon footprint is effectively nil (which reminds me, I need to get on that!)

"Fear of the unknown" is a terrible thing to choose as a motivator, because the unknown will continue to exist for the foreseeable future, we might as well take everything to its logical conclusion and see where that takes us all.

A lot of this seems to just be belief based on an antagonistic worldview ("the world is out to get me unless I'm vigilant and mistrusting") vs. a more positive worldview ("let's just move ahead; we'll figure it out as we go along; I'll trust others until proven otherwise; we'll collectively be fine")

IMHO Kaczynski experienced a traumatic event that changed his worldview to an antagonistic one. His literal trust in the world itself somehow got eroded or poisoned.

[Noos]

...because of computers, it's very, very easy to literally track anyone throughout their day...every location, every activity, every thought they have posted idly, what they like to watch, what they read, etc. I'm sure if the state wished too, they could easily counter encryption if just by forcing you to give the key.

The only reason we are sanguine on the power of tech is that we have the historical luxury of non-predatory government. If the state truly wished to be oppressive, the technology the tech sector has created would allow it to be efficient beyond measure in doing so.

[wu-ikkyu]

>I'm sure if the state wished too, they could easily counter encryption if just by forcing you to give the key.

Or the state could bribe security companies like RSA to use crypto that they backdoored:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_EC_DRBG

[pmarreck]

It strikes me how prescient the movie "Sneakers" was

[wu-ikkyu]

>Computers also enable absolute privacy via current-gen public/private-key encryption protocols.

You don't work in netsec do you, judging by your use of the phrase absolute privacy?

Crypto does not guarantee privacy, especially if your endpoints are pwned

[icebraining]

He does cite some evidence for his fears. Of course, what he fears is based on speculation to where he sees technology taking us in the future, but that's also true of, for example, Musk's and Hawking's fears of AI, and of many other works, or works like Brave New World.

[pmarreck]

The difference is that Hawking and Musk are not bombing machine-learning companies based on this fear, sans actual evidence