Slashdot Mirror

Ha! Come join some other Slashcott refugees at comp.misc then. It's a pretty cool group. I also run a news server (with difficulty; INND is a royal pain in the arse): it runs the dictator.* hierarchy from http://dictatorshandbook.net/ (on Usenet you can connect to dictatorshandbook.net for Usenet access to that hierarchy).

No regrets - I love that tech!

I've read a lot of those old "doomsaying" articles and in general they're interesting. But the Malthusians have been preaching the same apocalypses for a long time now and they've generally failed to come true.

I agree resource scarcity is essentially at the root of most of our problems, and over at http://www.dictatorshandbook.n... the discussion basically revolves around the idea that religious wars are a proxy for resource grabs, while bad governments either prevent more violence or promote it to achieve short-term political gains.

Bring on the world war and let's get back out of everyone's face. And let the MiddleEast burn, so we can do something nice on the ashes.

Hey speaking of predicting uprisings, I'll bet Dice's models never predicted so many Slashdotters would bail out in disgust their commentary on the new Beta was ignored! See you on Usenet at comp.misc.

You can't coerce an open vote? The hell you can't. Go read the Dictator's handbook (http://dictatorshandbook.net/) if you haven't already. There's a forty page chapter on ways to trick-out Elections alone (URL:http://dictatorshandbook.net/book/node346.html>). The last election in Venezuela was a fiasco. Yes, it was a legitimate election and even electoral monitors found it hadn't been falsified in any way. But the Chavez government went to great lengths to make people suspect their votes were being recorded and tracked, and that those who had voted for the "other guy" would eventually suffer repercussions. That's a big deal in a country where 90% of the jobs come from the government. If the govt figures out you voted "wrong," you'll never get hired, or if you've already got a job, you'll get fired. Or your daughter won't get into the good school, or your son won't get a scholarship. Or in one of hundreds of other ways, something you need from the government will be denied you.

The game is simple: give everyone a vote, but make sure they are under intense pressure to "spend it" the way you want. Ta-da! You're a democracy, but you're not.

I wouldn't touch an ipad/android voting machine at all. They're already tracking me six ways to sunday; it would be a piece of cake for that voting software to also send to the "right people" how I voted. Game over man, game over.

Haw, haw, haw. If you're appalled by the gall, the outrageousness, the cojones then you've been duped: this kind of stuff is happening all over the place. When I researched and wrote the Dictator's Handbook: a practical manual for the aspiring tyrant in 2012 I found dozens of examples of this kind of stuff. In the words of an expert, "it's not the vote that counts, it's the count that counts." Have a look at chapter 11 covering elections for some other good examples, including Russia, the Dominican Republic, North Korea, and elsewhere. Hell, there are even some good examples at home, but why bother citing them when the NSA is watching me type?

I'm not going to say democracy is flawed, it's in fact probably the strongest of systems that attempt to bring order to a flawed species. But democracy is a game that's too easily manipulated, which makes dictators of the sort that read my book all-too-capable of having some fun to keep power. Welcome to the real world.

Haw, haw, haw. If you're appalled by the gall, the outrageousness, the cojones then you've been duped: this kind of stuff is happening all over the place. When I researched and wrote the Dictator's Handbook: a practical manual for the aspiring tyrant in 2012 I found dozens of examples of this kind of stuff. In the words of an expert, "it's not the vote that counts, it's the count that counts." Have a look at chapter 11 covering elections for some other good examples, including Russia, the Dominican Republic, North Korea, and elsewhere. Hell, there are even some good examples at home, but why bother citing them when the NSA is watching me type?

I'm not going to say democracy is flawed, it's in fact probably the strongest of systems that attempt to bring order to a flawed species. But democracy is a game that's too easily manipulated, which makes dictators of the sort that read my book all-too-capable of having some fun to keep power. Welcome to the real world.

Well, it's a democracy, and the people voted. That's good. But they voted in a bunch of Tea Party imbeciles. That's bad. Congress debated competing budget proposals. That's good. They were all politically-driven, ideological dreck more intent on sinking Obamacare than on reaching a deal. That's bad. The government is closed! That's bad. But security ops are still funded. That's also bad. But it's still a democracy! That's, uh, aaaa, hang on a sec, that's go- I mean b- that's, well, hell, I don't know if that's good or bad. Can we hand it over to a strongman tyrant now, so we can do away with the endless debate over nothing and actually get something done. Maybe this book would be of some use to the new guy?

I feel for you, bro. I really do, but I don't have much to add to the discussion, though. I've seen this stuff coming for a long time (as have a number of other people on Slashdot). The real people who need to be convinced are outside of Slashdot. That's where your words need to be taken. While you're out there telling your story as to what happened, please remind them that both political parties are responsible for this issue. I have tried to deal with family who think $POLITICAL_PARTY1 is somehow better than $POLITICAL_PARTY2. So far, nothing I say works. I might use your example to see how that works on them.

Be prepared for people to deny what is happening. Check out this comment earlier up in this thread. I responded to it, but will it help? Probably not. Words like this fall on deaf ears.

When you're liquored up, I suggest reading the following (because it's really depressing to read when you're sober):

Dictator's Handbook and Little Brother. Little Brother specifically addresses why your words may fall on deaf ears.

I applaud you for your comment and your bravery, but I must correct you on one thing:

The brave aren't easily terrorized.

Yes, they are. Here is a quote of quote from the Dictator's Handbook:

Some men and women have great courage ... But the tyrant has ways of countering even this. Among those who do not fear death, some fear torture, disgrace, or humiliation. And even those who do not fear these things for themselves may fear them for their fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, wives, and children. The tyrant uses all these tools.

Even ignoring any threats by the government, I am always worried about the health and well being of my wife, my brother, his wife, their unborn child, my young goddaughter, my aging parents, my ill in-laws, etc. Being brave can mean watching your family get hurt. Being brave can mean your family hating you even if you are doing the right thing. Perhaps it's a medical thing like in my case. (Let's just say my mother in-law and I have disagreements about what is best for her.) Perhaps they hooked on drugs. Perhaps they have a gambling problem. Speaking in terms of a repressive government: having your whole family turn against you because you stand up for what is right is a very difficult thing to do. In fact, the water gets really muddy... is it better to stand up for your fellow countrymen or to keep your loved ones "safe" and alive? Sometimes, you can pick only one. A choice you make might remove their freedoms or their lives.

Unfortunately, I don't find the picture isn't quite black and white as a lot of others do.

Dude, why so surprised? You read it here first:
http://dictatorshandbook.net/book/node237.html

From the dictator's handbook, chapter nine:
You own the hardware. Internet access passes through the infrastructure of your state-owned telecommunications systems, or at least the infrastructure of private telecoms that depend on your goodwill for their existence and continued operations. As such, you have a high degree of control over what information enters and exits your national territory. The Chinese have proven you can safely filter out âoeharmfulâ information from the outside without stifling economic activity.[180]

You control the purse-strings. The Internet is run by corporations, and corporations are most influenced by economic, not political considerations. Google was forced out of China by economics, not human rights concerns; both Twitter and Facebook have refused to join the Global Network Initiative (an organization focused on the right to expression and privacy). Research in Motion (RIM) offered access to its otherwise encrypted and protected messaging servers as soon as Bahrain asked for them, prompting other nations to do the same.9.1

No better resource than the Internet has ever existed with which an individualâ(TM)s life and movements can be tracked via their cyber footprints by any curious autocrat. Imperial Russiaâ(TM)s Okhrana, the East German Stasi, and the Soviet KGB: each was feared for its ability to track and monitor its prey. But they would be astonished with how much easier technology has made their work.

Let's see:

replicated posts, no central point of failure, high degree of anonymity, no obvious mechanism for relating a single email address to a name or address, free software: sounds to me like Usenet.

I know it's fashionable to jump on the "Usenet is dead, long live social networking" bandwagon but the fact is Usenet technology was developed by people who felt strongly about these things and built a system that would allow free expression and no single point of attack for those who would try to silence the conversation. Over 30 years later, it's still around (although slightly battered, thanks to spammers and douchebags).

When I built the forums for conversation at http://www.dictatorshandbook.net/ I chose Usenet because if you're going to discuss dictatorships and autocracy, Usenet technology gives you more (although not total) anonymity relative to, for example, a discussion group on Facebook. You can even access the dictator.* hierarchy on whatever NSP you want, or use an anonymiser or get there via Tor. It's all the same.

Point is: Usenet has been doing this for ages. The fact that a bunch of young nerds are finally waking up to the inherent weakness in social networking is really funny to us neckbeards who started out on something that provides everything you guys seem to be looking for.

All I can say is, there's a reason chapter 8 (Dealing with uprisings, protests and demonstrations) and chapter 9 (dealing with the media, journalists, and the Internet) are back to back in the Dictator's Handbook. See for yourself at http://www.dictatorshandbook.net/. Autocrats defensively strike to criticise the media when their actions make them vulnerable, and Twitter - being one of the better sources of information during the demonstrations and the whole bulldozer thing (which wasn't a bulldozer, if anyone noticed) - makes an easy target.

I agree Twitter is a menace, but only because their servers crash too often to be considered a standard form of communication. Give me SMTP or NNTP anyday.

But back to Erdogan, good luck buddy - you're going to need it. Check out chapter 7 (managing the military) before you go much further: you're going to need it!

When I wrote my book http://dictatorshandbook.net/ I was using LaTeX on a Linux box, so in addition to regular (less-periodic) backups of the entire computer I put in place a system for backing up just the manuscript directory, as often as I wanted (usually at the end of a night of editing and writing). A USB key, a WebDAV directory, and an email account were all I needed, and here's the little Bash script I wrote to make it all work: http://www.therandymon.com/content/view/236/98/ This is one of the things I love about Linux as a writing environment.

I use SpiderOak for my config and dot files, but still rely on burning the occasional DVD or CD-R for my other stuff, and I store the disks offsite. I know that's old-fashioned in the new, hip world of cloud storage, but I live in a place with slow internet and don't have the bandwidth for fancier stuff. And the DVD burning works, boo-yah.

I spent a lot of time researching autocratic leaders (call them Dictators, or just "Dicks" if you like) when writing the Dictator's Handbook (http://www.dictatorshandbook.net/) and the research shows that despite promises to the contrary about the benefits of privatization, clever dictators can still have their way with privately-run services like cellphone companies. It's normal - almost expected - in much of the world for calls to be monitored, intercepted, dropped, and blocked. Everyone knows the SMS outage stories (Belarus, Russia, Egypt, to name just a few) but it goes way beyond that. Most of the commercial gadget conveniences that have made life easier have benefitted autocrats as well, who have new ways to track, monitor, and basically hassle its people. Chapters 4 and 11 of the Handbook cover it in depth. Now we get to smart phones, facebook accounts, linkedin profiles, and all the happy social media stuff: it's all a treasure trove for autocrats. The research dug up anecdotes about Iranians dragged in for questioning and presented with copies of their own email, cellphone call record, and worse.

If you want to weaken dictators, I don't think Twitter is the way to go. Shortwave radio was just as effective, if not more, and it was a hell of a lot harder to block. Cellphone operators are absolutely in a tough spot: required to meet quality-of-service rules while simultaneously kissing the Dictator's Ass. It's not an enviable place to be in, I can assure you.

Usenet is doing fine. It's just the suckers getting weeded out. Go check out the forum at http://dictatorshandbook.net./ On the surface it's a communications forum for commenting on bad governmnets. Underneath it is an INND server reachable via NTTP.

Usenet technology is still useful, and in an age where everyone wants you to post under your real name and link it to everything else you do, say, or buy, I'd say Usenet technology is more indispensable than ever.

Ask Hugo Chavez about the FUD factor inherent in voting machinery no one trusts. In Venezuela it was popularly thought that the machines could track who voted for whom, and that people that voted against Chavez would suffer reprisals. Whether that was true or not, the very existence of that fear kept people from voting for the opposition. This was particularly effective among populations with less education, worse access to internet, and more undecided about who they preferred. If voting for the opposition means your husband loses his job, your kid gets kicked out of the (better quality) government school, and your uncle gets taken into custody for a lengthy and scary episode of "questioning," you'll probably take the safe route and just vote for the incumbent, even if you don't like him. It's safer.

Naturally the government made no effort to dispel the rumors, so who cares if the FUD was true or not?

There's more about this story at http://www.dictatorshandbook.net/ and similar election tricks make up the bulk of Chapter 11 of the Dictator's Handbook, which Chavez, Lukshenka, Ahmadinejad, Kim, and Many Many Others have all read (and you can too).

Holy cow, all of you need to get your butts *quick* over to the Dictator's Handbook http://dictatorshandbook.net/ and have a quick read. Nobody calls theirself a dictator anymore. There are too many creative ways to be "democratic."

That's the game, of course.

As someone who follows corporate strategy a bit and who is enjoying watching Apple, Google, and to a lesser extent Microsoft slug it out, this is a move that makes sense. And I love to see anything that reduces the intoxication people have with Microsoft formats. Dependence on compatibility with Microsoft formats has set computing back by a decade - and the fight continues.

On the other hand, as a consumer and someone who's very wary of getting locked in, I've gotta say, that's a Dick Move. (http://dictatorshandbook.net/memes/dmb.jpg/)

No, it cuts both ways. When I wrote and researched my book, The Dictator's Handbook, it was clear governments are able to make easy use of this data. There are numerous examples: governments planting trojans, tracking journalists, hacking email, sending out spear phish attacks, and worse. Rioters in Syria and Iran are frequently amazed when they are put in jail and their own email is read to them during the legal proceedings. Twitter is no better, and rogue governments create fake Facebook log-in pages to trap log-in credentials. Join us on the forum at http://dictatorshandbook.net/ for more, and you're welcome to read using NNTP protocol for increased anonymity.

I'm not sure invention of the new catchphrase "Junkweb" was necessary. It's subjective after all - one man's junk is another man's treasure. I'm also not sure the new phenomenon of text-on-picture is all that big a deal - when people get sick of it, the trend will die out. I'm old school by most measures - born in the early 70s, grew up on a Commodore Pet and later C64, remember Gopher and Telnet, etc. But I think the stuff getting floated on Reddit is pretty funny, and it makes me laugh.

If there's anything worth talking about at all, it's not the rise of something someone calls a "Junk Net," it's how the utopian promise of the Internet - liberated conversation, connection, and access to information - has been somewhat diluted by lots of other stuff, and as more and more people have gotten connected their tastes have swayed the general trend of what's on the web.

I've got a forum that runs on Usenet era technology (http://dictatorshandbook.net/ and it's not exactly been a blistering success. People find usenet and even the web-based front end to it to be too "texty" and dry. They want pictures and LOLcats and stupid memes. OK, fair enough - that's not the audience I'm trying to attract, and the folks that are interested in educated conversation about dictators will probably enjoy my site and its text forum while everyone else will go bugger off.

So if there's an issue here, it's just that increasingly people go to the internet not for information but for entertainment, and the companies have teed up to make that happen - look at the ipod ferfucksake, now I can watch TV in bed! YAY! I think this is a failure of society over all, not of technology.

Fact is, there are good, knowledge-intensive sites out there. Go hang out on them if that's what you want. And if you want a good laugh, enjoy the latest meme. It's all good.

On behalf of every would-be tyrant, autocrat, dictator, and fiend, I'd like to THANK Zuck. I mean Christ, who needs to invest in expensive and complicated counter-terrorism and surveillance services when you can just put a person in front of a computer and they'll happily blab away their every secret in exchange for links to silly cats and pictures with text over them?

Facebook is the best thing to happen to dictators in a while. It's a tremendous source of information, it's not hard to hack (and has BEEN hacked on numerous occasions), and gives the tyrant an almost complete picture of who you hang out with, when, where, and what you discuss. DickTater know what you like, what you do, where you work, where you studied, and who your co-subversives are.

So thanks, Zuck. Being a tyrant was never so easy. In fact "using Facebook" makes up a large part of chapter 9 (Communications & Media) of the Dictators Handbook (http://www.dictatorshandbook.net/). True!

And I should know, I wrote it. Chapter 9 (Media) goes into extensive detail on how to clamp down on the media, route communications through state systems through which you can monitor and track. Chapter 10 (International Community) goes into how to do one thing while stating the other; how to befuddle the donors and international oversight committees, and so on.

The point is, what Ethiopia is doing, and Eritrea too by the way, is nothing new. Nor is it specific to Africa. Belarus, Iran, China, Thailand, and a lot of other countries are capitalizing on state infrastructure to control communications. Have a look at http://dictatorshandbook.net/