[yubblegum]

Why do you think this is only going to be in Europe? This will be the global norm modulo some astroid hitting earth or civilizational crash.

The trajectory is crystal clear: access to information (AI), control over personal finance (CBDC), privacy of personal communications (handful of big tech MITM in everything), metered social interactions (today China, tomorrow the world over).

[account42]

Well there besides the asteroid there is also the option that involves the blood of patriots and tyrants.

[yubblegum]

(No offense is intended)

I disagree with the simplistic model you are presenting, as if "patriots" would themselves deal with the matter of (global) governance in our age in a non coercive, "just" or "fair" manner, and not tyranny, whereas the historic record is that all such revolutionary attempts to removal of (perceived) tyranny prove themselves to be even greater tyrants.

Issue is systemic to the human species and our current state of development. Symbolically, we have achieved an excess of technical prowess while our mental and psychological (and here we can fold in spiritualism if you wish) remains underdeveloped. And there is also the (unpleasant but real) fact that various 'noble' human characteristics are not uniformly distributed among our species, regardless of gender, culture, or ethnicity. Humanity is very 'lumpy'. And the fact that some among us are lagging in certain aspects is unplatable but factual.

Many of these control systems being devised by the guvners are in fact addressing this reality. These things are not emerging from a dark pit where malignant humans are plotting against the rest of humanity. Contrary. Many are mind products of some of the best educated and well meaning who are trying to address the realities of our common coexistence on this planet.

In an ideal worlds, there would be no locks, no cops, no jails, no hunger, no oppession.

We do not live in that world.

Beyond our human condition (but certainly driven by it) is technology, which also has its own inherent developmental tendencies.

In my personal view, a mature and balanced approach here would be the insistence that the humans who are entrusted with the operation of these emerging systems of social control and management are the best of us.

Right now, given the pure profit incentive that selects a specific subtype of 'smart and capable' to leading positions, we are facing a hazard. (See Zuck as posterboy of the problem).

[spwa4]

Until the sun grows in a final blaze of glory and burns all Qurans at the same time for 100 million years?

[ButlerianJihad]

You say that like it’s a bad fnord

[RIMR]

I mean, I get that these things are typically matters of opinion, but if you value things like freedom and privacy, these things are objectively bad.

[john_strinlai]

i am interested in hearing why you think it is not god awful

[logicchains]

Fortunately the US has not only freedom of speech in the constitution but also tens of millions of armed civilians that place a hard limit on how much control the government can have over people's speech. The only reason the Chinese government can achieve such control over speech is because it can disappear anyone who speaks against it.

It doesn't even need guns; Nepalese youth managed to stop social media censorship there just by going to the political capital and threatening to beat the MPs to death.

[rwyinuse]

America may have tens of millions of armed civilians, but I'm not convinced that so many of them care about freedom of speech, particularly when it comes to people who they disagree with.

[trinsic2]

Yeah there is proof of that. I wonder if most of those Americans that believe in freedom probably are the ones that voted in Trump and now look at where we are at.

[niels8472]

From the Chinese constitution:

Article 35 Citizens of the People’s Republic of China shall enjoy freedom of speech, the press, assembly, association, procession and demonstration.

[vondur]

Hahah, that's also what the Constitution of the Soviet Union stated. Tell that to everyone that got sent to the Gulag's for speaking up.

[account42]

That's his point.

[fakedang]

Has the armed civilian population done anything to protect constitutional rights? Last time a section of them mobilized, it was to overthrow a rightfully elected government.

[xienze]

They were unarmed and the government was and continues to be scared shitless of that "attempted overthrow" (with no weapons? Does anyone really believe that had any chance of succeeding?) to this very day.

Seems to me like that Second Amendment thing could be very effective with a sufficiently motivated population.

[_carbyau_]

> They were unarmed and the government was...

Exhibit A says: Bullshit.

[A] https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/us-capitol-attack-rioters...

[fc417fc802]

In context a few handguns clearly isn't what was meant.