I think it was an attempt to normalise the killing of political opponents. Such violence is already normal and legitimised in America, the land of school-shootings and capital punishment.

As of 2023, only 2 out of 38 OECD member countries (the United States and Japan) allow capital punishment.

Such murder needs to remain behind closed doors as to be polite in American society. Please enjoy the following entertainment-products:

I seriously question the idea that death is inherently traumatic. History is littered with public-executions, ceremonial killings and death for entertainment. People are eager to pay for and play GTA 6: a murder- and crime-simulator. People love violence. People are unfazed by death when the victims belong to an out-group–those that are deemed not to be people.

“Oh that’s just an actor. The character died, not the actor.”

“They’re not real; it’s a video-game.”

“They’re jews.”

“He was a pedophile.”

“She’s a nazi.”

“He’s a murderer; it’s comeuppance.”

Just think how efficient governments would be if we ran them like a business!

The cat has long been out of the bag. Only the cat is invisible (data) and the bag’s a computer. This invisible collection, sale and synthesis of data has become a central component of modern economies now. People playing Pokemon Go didn’t know (and the authors of the game-software probably didn’t know either) that they were collecting data for the use of training autonomous-suicide-drones. This is the economy now. This is surveillance-capitalism.

You can’t lobby for regulation, removedation or prohibition. Capital has invested large sums and that investment is paying dividends. Capital is flowing into this sector and something capitalists refrain from writing is that labour is subjugated entirely by capital. Capitalism is a dictatorship. That means scientists, engineers, technologists, marketers and others now find their jobs being: how can we make ever more sophisticated computers, networks and ways to surveil. This surveillance is done to generate data. Then capital is allocated in the pursuit of synthesizing this data into saleable products. One of its results is the ‘AI’ that you can use from ChatGPT or whatever it’s called. A less known result is the AI being sold to nation-states that target and kill autonomously.

There’s no going back. You and your child live under the dictatorship of capital. You live under capitalism. You are a commodity to be brought and sold by capitalists.

Aside from overwhelming collective-action this can not be stopped. The organization that brought these things are largely ignorant and non-caring. The most you’ll get from them is usually a parroting of “we value your privacy and it’s protected under some law” (which doesn’t protect anything). They don’t care. To care would be to prohibit all new procurements–this is what the market is now selling; this is what’s cheapest. It does something beneficial for them so they brought it. The fact it came with a computer that surveils the children is besides the point. The data is invisible and the computer is small and hidden. Out of sight out of mind. The cat’s invisible. It never purrs or meows. It only demands two things: electricity and a connection. But that’s normal. Everything requires those.

Genuine question: what are the doing with that money? Buying future components from sellers? Buying land? Paying labour? That’s a lot of money going into something that is essentially a ‘service’ entity. They’re not producing anything tangible.

This seems absurd. How did the government get to this point? Were there prior frameworks before they decided on this one?

I can’t see any other result than to deter economic activity that uses computers and “the internet”. I feel this is incredibly reactionary. I sympathize if the goal is to capture economic flows that are disproportionate and outwardly foreign. Facebook as an example: it’s a foreign company with a net negative on France. American ‘internet’ companies dominate others because the governments of the past allowed it. Out of sight and out of mind. China’s the only nation that has been doing it correctly. They have domestic equivalents and more. Compare that to the rest: it’s just America rofl stomping everyone and extracting capital.

Surveillance-capitalism is the new norm. Don’t wait for regulation–it won’t arrive. Protect your own computers with libre-software. Don’t use their services.

Something to consider: we’re partly here because one entity (Google) said it could do it all. Consumers then realised they had no power at all; they had voluntarily subjugated themselves to that one entity that could do it all. Then it started doing things that made them squirm in their seats like recommending who to bomb for the Americans and how to efficiently commit genocide to the Israelis.

Does anyone know a way to replicate that with proton?

How about you pick up a pen and an address book. You’ll then have a decentralised and offline address book. Portable between Android, iPhone, Linux, Windows and no-phone-at-all! Contact lists are high-value to intelligence-organisations and I wouldn’t use any digital offering.

B-b-but I’m just a consumer in the imperial-core and want convenience.

I don’t understand anything about quantum computers. Are they useful? What do they do?

You’d have to use it and tell us. No one probably uses all of a suite’s features; some users won’t notice a difference whilst others will. If you’re using Google products though… one is made by a titan of surveillance-capitalism and the other is a project with morality. Google works with America’s government to kill and they’re enabling the genocidal Isrealis. In my mind Google and libre-software are diametric opposites. “How does it compare?” in that context makes the question absurd. Using Google software is never ok.

Computers are literally garbage; there’s so many of them. Get another and use it for 9front. Get another and use if for OpenBSD. These other software projects aren’t immune to AI or whatever this thread is about… video-games are garbage too. Go outside.

AI is a direct result of mass-surveillance. I’ll repost what I wrote to a previous user:

Something you’re not acknowledging is that this technology stems from surveillance-capitalism and the surveillance-state. Google et al were financed to solve the needs of the state. Google search for consumers was a by-product from the state’s need and desire to make sense of their mass-surveillance programs.

Surveillance-capitalism operates under complete deception. Pokemon Go players didn’t know they were collecting data for autonomous-murder-drones.

Solving Google’s Captchas was unpaid labour: you were creating data for Google’s OCR program and now you’re creating data for autonomous cars or whatever their investors want you to toil on next.

The original iteration of reCAPTCHA was criticized for using unpaid work to assist in transcribing efforts.[40]

A 13-month study published in 2023, “Dazed & Confused: A Large-Scale Real-World User Study of reCAPTCHAv2,” found that reCAPTCHA provides little security against bots and is primarily a tool to track user data, and has cost society an estimated 819 million hours of unpaid human labor.

Out of all this theft, unpaid labour and intrusive surveillance what does the working class get? Housing costs are increasing. Food costs are increasing. Poverty is increasing. What is AI going to do for us? It’s not building houses. It’s not harvesting crops. It’s not giving the working class any material benefit, but is further degrading living conditions. Enjoy the endless drone of a data-center! Enjoy breathing the fumes of gas-turbines! Enjoy talking to chatbots and never a human!

AI is deployed as a barrier between the working class and businesses. AI is deployed to decrease labour costs. AI is deployed to kill. The fact you can create text, images, videos and audios that mimic reality only means more surveillance on the working class because digital-signals can be faked absolutely and are now suspect by default.

You can’t eat what AI creates–it is completely immaterial, but it is being used to commit genocide. I’m sure that warms the cockles of the hearts in all of us.

I do not think AI use should be condoned.

The year is 2026. Computer users are still “fighting” Microsoft. Battered person syndrome.

I’m bemused by what I’ll write next as it’s something I would have totally disregarded–that’s to say I see a reflection of my thoughts in what you’ve written. Those thoughts have changed with time. What you want to do is propagandise. I think that’s a complete waste of energy. That enthusiasm would be better spent learning or writing libre-software that you want.

I don’t know, but probably a lot of things.

I do think these posts are spam, but the correct thing to do is to ignore it; they’re not of interest to me. Sorry.

I do have an inkling of interest in why people post this sort of thing though; why people feel something is wholly theirs when they’re hardly involved in the creation process. There seems to be an innate need to claim ownership of things. This predates AI and it urked me to see people issuing similar statements then. “Look what I made!” statements when they did not make anything, but a vestige of attention that glued other peoples’ work together into a slightly novel thing. The act itself I have no qualms with. It’s the public advertisement that states credit is due when it is not. It’s juvenile behaviour that demands attention.

I do have an interest in people’s behaviour as it appears malicious to me: like 3D-printed things software has lost all value. Actors selling things are malicious because they’re pretending as if it was not 3D-printed and price accordingly. In other words they’re hoping to exploit a buyer’s ignorance of the production reality. What they’re selling is nearly worthless.

(Capitalist-market proponents would argue that value is not grounded in reality. I am an ignorant communist though, perhaps entirely because of this vicious exploitation of ignorance in buyers by sellers. It is not just an exploitation of ignorance, but a celebration of it and a monied-interest in expanding it, which increases celebration of one party and misery on the other! The advertising industry is innately malicious to all that is good.)

I perceive software-projects like these in a very similar vein. It creates software that is malicious in nature and it’s offered maliciously (or ignorantly). I do not want to engage with malicious-actors or confused-actors as they’re benignly malicious.

I’m also beginning to perceive social-media as only the mass-production of advertisement. Malicious actors use social-media as an advertisement vector, which undermines any good that social-media could do. I’m bordering on the pinnacle that would render any social-media to be malicious in all contexts: irredeemable. Abandon it entirely.

You can’t. Accept that statement. Acknowledge that you’re only in control of your body. You can influence others, but you cannot control them. Align yourself with your beliefs without forcing your beliefs onto others.

I know users would like to interject, probably with something like “these aren’t beliefs; they’re objectively bad.” I would agree with that criticism. Beliefs are sometimes aligned with reality and other times they’re not. I believe proprietary-software is evil and I agree with a lot of things Richard Stallman has written.

From the outside I know a lot of people don’t understand and I’m fine with that–I’m not in control of others nor do I want to be (that would be a tremendous burden). I do what I want to do, which is a reflection of my beliefs. When your body aligns with your desires (which stem from your beliefs) you’ll be most content.

I don’t want a Google account. I think creating a Google account is actively causing harm. If someone suggest Facebook, Instagram, Whatsapp, et al as a way of communicating I refuse. If they inquire I’ll explain my reasoning if I perceive their curiosity to be genuine and offer an alternative solution, but the thing I want to impress upon you here is that I’m doing what I want to do.

People have written and said particulars to me that I know others see my behaviour as a type of “self-restraint” or to phrase it another way: of forgoing convenience in favour of something. They perceive the action of adhering to libre-software as a burden. It’s not. It’s what I want to do. It’s what I like to do. (It’s what excites and brings me pleasure.)

I’d probably like it if other people also shared my preferences and I know some do. I also know some don’t. I think they should, but I don’t want to shoulder that burden. It’s an impossible load. I can’t force people to do what I think is the correct thing to do. It is impossible. It’s also probably wrong–most definitely wrong.

Do what you want to do and accept that others are doing what they want to do. If there’s conflict try to resolve it. If it can not be resolved to the satisfaction of both parties part ways amicably.

If you think you can coerce someone with enough persistence–and if you’re using this thread to gain motivation to continue–you’re in the wrong. Do not do it.

What I’d really like is feedback, especially from anyone on a distro I haven’t tested.

The thing is… why? Everyone else can be a prompt-engineer too. This is essentially spam. It’s like going to local markets and stall after stall is 3D printed rubbish. It’s a waste of everyone’s time. These posts are just ads for rubbish.

No. Sorry.

You’re an idiot.

I apologize. The reply you responded to was entirely satirical. It was written in frustration. From my point of view passkeys are the way to do authentication. More specifically public-key cryptography. It has a lot of desirable qualities. Governments and ‘tech platforms’ should have been using it from the start–we’ve had the software to do this since the 1980s and it was libre-software by the 1990s.

Any criticism of passkeys (as brought up in this thread) are more so applicable to the private-dictatorships that are Microsoft, Apple and Google. The contrary behavior of continuing to use these private-dictatorships whilst decrying passkeys is tantamount to hypocrisy? stupidity? To give a tiny bit of context: the quality of attestation in passkeys are also applicable to SSL-certificates, yet no one is decrying SSL-certificates. It’s also applicable to every GNU/Linux distribution and libre-software at large.

That’s to say the criticism is written from a place of ignorance. “Privacy” forums on the internet are not interested in reality. Their users are full of users with static behaviors. More often than not any questions asked in these places amount to “how can I continue doing what I was doing before? Big-corp has introduced a change I don’t like. I want to do the exact same thing on big-corp that was previously permissible.” When the factual observation is stated: “big-corp is a corporation designed for surveillance-capitalism therefore if you desire liberty and privacy whilst computing you cannot use such a corporation in any manner” it’s met with unfounded hostility, hypocrisy and lies. Any use of such software is contrary to your stated desire: digital-privacy. Even when responses illustrate how you could achieve what the OP wanted, but with libre-software and privacy-preserving-software you’re often met with: “no. I want to use Google/Microsoft/et al.” Users are lazy idiots.

Technical and correct responses are ignored whilst a flood of ignorant, emotional or status-quo enforcing responses are brought to magnified attention. I’ve abandoned restraint and started to shitpost as every one else appears to be doing.

I suppose this is all a criticism of ‘social-media’ and how it’s a waste of everyone’s time.