←back to thread

267 points giuliomagnifico | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
pmags ◴[] No.43517799[source]
I'm a US scientist and the use of minimalist phone and a laptop is something I'm planning for all my travel.

This is for the simple reason that I have determined, based on a large body of cases that are accumulating at a disturbing rate, that the current US administration considers themselves "above the law". Furthermore, the administration has shown that they are eager to carry out actions that violate due process and freedom of speech against anyone they perceive as opposing their policies/views.

EDIT: I'm happy to document such cases for those who have not been paying attention, but I also encourage those who are doubtful to simply search the many examples that have been posted here on HN (unfortunately, many flagged in an attempt to suppress discussion).

replies(6): >>43517821 #>>43517838 #>>43518113 #>>43518270 #>>43518508 #>>43522930 #
dataflow ◴[] No.43517821[source]
Do you not feel unsafe sharing this publicly?
replies(2): >>43517884 #>>43518331 #
whatshisface ◴[] No.43517884[source]
That is not really relevant, because you sort of have to say what's true whatever happens to you, as required at the intersection of the duties of a scientist, of a citizen of a republic, and even on the basis of the basic tenants of the country's majority religion. In some sense to live a steady life you have to be resigned to potential misfortunes, even if you do not want them to happen to you.
replies(2): >>43518006 #>>43518059 #
stevenAthompson ◴[] No.43518059[source]
It is incredibly relevant.

Thomas Payne published "Common Sense" anonymously, and had that not happened the United States may not exist. It is a relatively obvious fact that there can be no freedom of speech without anonymous speech. Especially in the face of tyranny.

replies(2): >>43518290 #>>43518559 #
javajosh ◴[] No.43518290[source]
I agree that anonymous speech is an important right in free societies. A novel attack on such a right in the Internet Age is to allow so much speech, anonymous or otherwise, ensure that most of it of is of very low quality, that thoughtful criticisms are ignored or, more accurately, overlooked. A related attack is to "flood the zone with shit", low-quality but emotionally resonant criticisms of speech, generated by hired humans and/or software. (Anecdotally most readers will see any coherent pushback as a signal about the OP's veracity.)
replies(1): >>43518441 #
kmeisthax ◴[] No.43518441[source]
"Censorship through free speech", in other words.
replies(1): >>43518587 #
lovich ◴[] No.43518587[source]
It’s just a special case of signal jamming.

If you add enough random energy to any channel, it becomes impossible to filter signal from noise

replies(2): >>43518723 #>>43518968 #
1. javajosh ◴[] No.43518968{3}[source]
Yes. I'd be curious to know how resistance movements deal with this problem in other regimes. How do (did?) Navalny or İmamoğlu supporters organize, for example? Is it simply Telegram & Signal? How does one spread a message to the public under such a regime, via pamphlets? Does it work to share "anonymously" on a foreign-hosted platform? Asking for a friend.
replies(1): >>43521768 #
2. lovich ◴[] No.43521768[source]
Navalny died and İmamoğlu is in prison right? I feel like a lot of people’s hesitation with recognizing the new world is recognizing that it’s effective even if it’s distasteful.

If you(the royal you) disagree, then please point out the last pro democracy advocate who didn’t get demolished by their local authoritarian leader in the past 30 years