scratsearcher 🔍🔮📊🎲 @ glowing_hans @sopuli.xyz

Unless otherwise noted my posts are under [CC0-license](https://creativecom

---

Read more

Posts

11

Comments

223

Joined

8 mo. ago

Yep I agree now the analysis is wrong on the extrovert/introvert part and it is totally uncorrelated. Many "business types" who love the Elons, Peter Thiels, or Viveks out there seem management types who want short term stock prices to go up, by any means needed.

Also I would not describe Donald Trump or Steve Banon as introverts.

Unpopular Opinion: Trump represents a demographic transition in the U.S. as the old people go into retirement new young people emerge. The retiring and now dying people had the following properties:

• did not use social media, reads popular newspapers
• extrovert, wanted to dominate international institutions and create new international rules
• pro free markets, wanted to achieve global systems dominance, containment of enemies (Soviet Union)
• unionized working class (example: Boeing employee)
• majority Protestant, Catholic or Mormon

Meanwhile Peter Thiel, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy and other Silicon Valley emperors captured a new demographic:

• uses social media, isolated in select bubbles
• introvert, isolationist
• pro tariffs, local markets, walls as a symbolic and total solution to societies openness, what I would describe as "self containment protectionism"
• not in a union, does not even dream of a union. (example: Fruit picker in Florida/Texas)
• Catholic, majority is atheist now

This might represent the final shift away from the old cold war era to a new war(?) era. To my understanding South America is majority introvert conservative catholic in its foreign policy and North america is (was) majority extrovert unionized protestant in its foreign policy. And now North America starts to look more like an isolationist version of Argentinia or Brazil to me with heavy protestant tones (think of Milei of Argentinia or Bolsonaro of Brazil, who are ironically more protestant than catholic in their support base). I am not american so proudly correct me where I am totally wrong in my analysis.

First: Mass Surveillance is possible without computing technology. The Stasi secret police in the DDR or secret police of the Soviet Union and North Korea demonstrate this. Normal citizens where secret spies that reported their family members or "friends" activity. In your wording of your text I notice you are mostly concerned with computational surveillance with modern technology, why not expand this to other human based surveillance systems?

Now to the computing aspects: Standardization Whatever is possible with technology will be implemented by someone, even if it was meant as a temporary test it might become permanent apparatus for surveillance. A good example of that is the http protocol which through its faulty design allows some surveillance: cookies, user-Agent headers, IP-Addresses, Domain name systems. Someone in the surveilance agency of China understood http stack and its vulnerabilities, otherwise there would be no great chinese firewall that can block all foreign traffic 🏰🏯🏰.

No one wants to go away from http, eventhough it enables chinese mass surveillance, because it became a convenient standard. This is why it became permanent, even though more private systems are possible (onion/i2p sites), very few use them. Lazy Convenience > Privacy.

All communication will yield metadata.

Tldr:

Knowledge is power.

Human organizations: It is free real estate.