What’s up today?


My point is that if we want rights and laws to be respected, we have to fight for them, especially for those we don’t like - because those who want to take our rights away always target those we are least likely to defend. Once we let that happen, our rights no longer exist.



And privacy is not there as protected. Your person and possessions are, but not privacy. Just look how your NSA is collecting all the data it can without regard for privacy. Even if that amendment did have an implied right to privacy of your information it is not being honoured.



I was basing those statements on my Wikipedia reading:

Although the Constitution does not explicitly include the right to privacy, the Supreme Court has found that the Constitution implicitly grants a right to privacy against governmental intrusion from the First Amendment, Third Amendment, Fourth Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment.

I am not a lawyer of course, but it seems to me like the right to privacy is not a basic right, but something implied from the other ones. So the case for it is a bit weaker :stuck_out_tongue:



My point is that those rights are not being taken away. They never existed in the first place, other than on paper. What’s happening to Assange, what’s happening to people doing random things while being black in the US, what’s happening to gipsy kids and opposition politicians in Eastern Europe, are not news of change but evidence to existing fact.

EDIT: I’m all for fighting for those rights, but the first step is to recognize they only exist for those who have a voice. How to give everyone an equal standing before the laws that already exist? In practice, not in theory. For example, the legal system must be simplified or only those with much money can pay somebody who can work with the laws efficiently. That alone puts regular people at a great disadvantage, but it was just one of many examples. But it still didn’t touch on the real problem, getting away with anything through money and power.



Just because our natural rights are being infringed upon/disabused does not mean that they do not exist. They would exist even without a piece of paper “granting” them. They are unalienable rights deriving themselves from natural law.



Yea I’m too pragmatic for that. If something doesn’t work, it’s as good as if it didn’t even exist.



Saw this and it relates to the privacy discussion. Mouse over the comic and see the notation about the actual quote used in the comic

1 Like


Please, focus on the big picture here. This is after all the Safenet forum. You forgot to mention his cat and how he abused it or some such thing, unforgivable!

Seriously though, grooming and more importantly maintaining power requires extraordinary narrative control. You go on to express and defend there is no alternative (TINA) sentiments, designed to instill apathy. Take heart! History including the most recent is full of examples of what happens when a small self serving elite lose control of the narrative. Populations the world over are registering all time no-confidence levels in their Oligarchy+mouthpiece media, and the trend is accelerating like an immunity. Hence all the “fake news” and internet copyright filter scrambling for containment of the fifth estate.
Assange’s Wikileaks with no small help from whistle blowers has put a pretty big tear in the curtain. You can smell the desperation at US and British elite mouthpieces asking everyone in the aging demographic that still listen to them to please, don’t think! Just consider Assange sub-human cat abuser and this will all be a lot easier for everyone.

Edit: Added link on mouthpiece media by John Pilger.



I do apologize. On so many levels.

(I find it slightly offensive that I didn’t get Rick-rolled, by the way.)

You’re giving me too much credit. But thanks for letting me know there’s an acronym for this :face_with_hand_over_mouth:

I don’t think they had control of a narrative to start with. I don’t see it as a conspiracy but as a side-effect of a system that doesn’t work. The big picture is much bigger than just people’s lack of confidence in the corrupt elite of today.

We want hierarchies because only then can we have mascots or idols and us-against-them tribalism but also, and maybe more importantly, only then can we point at individuals when heads should fall – and we don’t want to give up on that.

However, hierarchies lead to too much power getting concentrated in too few hands, and here we are where we are. Even worse, apart from leading to such power disparity, hierarchies are not even sufficient to run a complex world.

I do think alternatives exist, I’m just not sure how to break old habits so we could get there…

Anyway, sorry for the rant, I’m sure these posts will soon get moved to some unlisted thread as they should be.

1 Like


Lots of solid in depth research with well documented examples to satisfy any geek interested in the mechanics of how societies are hacked. A good a starting place as any might be one of the most referenced authors, and his Manufacturing Consent (complete with video summary for the time challenged).

1 Like


I guess bullying random people wasn’t such a great call:

Especially if we consider who has bigger influence:



Usually the last roll of the dice for a desperate person/group. And he lost, it was a pathetic attempt anyhow with two bit lawyers who needed to proof read their letter too.

1 Like


Absolutely. I wasn’t sure it wasn’t just some kid trolling around. Until I saw the fallout. (CZ casually promised to cover for Peter McCormack’s legal fees on Twitter by the way. Wright may be rich but I doubt he has comparable resources.)

It’s so ironic though. The real Satoshi could just claim being Satoshi by sending a single transaction. We know the public key and if somebody gives a valid signature it’s pretty much case closed.

So, why bother with the theater, the arguing, the legal threats? The only reason for not providing such a simple evidence is that he’s unable to. How can an obvious fraud like him be accepted by a sizable community is beyond me…




:smiley: crypto-proof only



Today this very corrupt Supreme Courte of InJustice in Brazil is closing accounts of people, magazine (anyone) who speak the truth about them, or send forward TRUE information about their fraudulent schemes of the past DECADES! Safenetwork we need you! My twitter account was suspended!




I did expect Safenetwork will be Part of porn industry, but after this ban, Porn industry itself just from UK, will be enough to make SafeNetwork popular and bring mass adoption.



I wonder if it is a coincidence you also have to be 18 to be able to vote in the UK.



Don’t know. Only idiots could create such law, it is hard to find any reasoning in brain activity of such people.



I’m sure a lot of brain activity goes into trying to get votes. See this episode of Yes Ministor for example.