yes, this *is* a step towards a kind of anarchy. i, for one, think this may not be such a bad thing. let's face it, government (especially democratic government) has more or less failed in many of it's roles. in rich countries, the govt belongs to whoever has the dough. in poor countries (like mine) the govt belongs to whoever has the guns. the masses aren't *really* (IMHO) represented anywhere. if nothing else, heavenco and the like will serve to underline how a lot of people feel about the abuse of authority, and smart govts will start to behave themselves. maybe.
yes, this is exactly what i meant by "safety net". Remember, we're talking about *their* safety, not ours. Some governments will do just about anything they want to further their own agendas, and then do anything it takes to save their asses from the fallout. China, Pakistan, India, Serbia, the list goes on and on. A handful of selfish people screwing the masses.
I remember when i was living in the US people used to tell me that the police are given quotas on how many tickets they have to give out, so that the PD's can show that they're being effective. This was prolly BS, but still....
BTW, someone else followed my post with a message about me being wrong about the Indian ISP thing. Apology extended. This was based on something I saw on the BBC, I don't even remember how long ago:)
I live in Pakistan, which is also a pretty authoritarian state. What's interesting to me is our governments' policies regarding the net and IT in general. The reason i mention this here is because i some parallels... ok, according to our law, you can't use encryption, your email and stuff is readable by the govt, what you say can be held against you etc. but on the other hand, none of these laws are actually implemented. my former college, which is owned by the navy, teaches RSA, for example. So the deal is that they want to keep the economy open to whatever benefits CS and IT can bring, but they want a saftey net, "just in case". I think China is leaning more towards the saftey net mentality. And since they are pretty much the closest thing to facism you're gonna find today, i guess they have a need to be paraniod. My government is making this tech very open and accessable cuz they feel our economy needs it. How accessable? well the only national backbone provider is a govt-owned and protected monopoly. But my city has like 10 or 15 ISP's and i get flat modem access for around $20/mo. Compare against our neighbour India, which has only one state-owned ISP (legally protected monoploy, last i heard), and you'll see that this is a pretty big deal for this reigon.
China, with all the trade deals they keep getting (from the US, and the thaw with the WTO), don't feel that economic need. Ultimately, the govt's who supress their people are the one's that can *afford* to. Think about it. If people in china have less of a voice, who's paying to make that happen? the IMF? the WTO? Uncle Sam? You?
Slashdot Mirror
yes, this *is* a step towards a kind of anarchy. i, for one, think this may not be such a bad thing. let's face it, government (especially democratic government) has more or less failed in many of it's roles. in rich countries, the govt belongs to whoever has the dough. in poor countries (like mine) the govt belongs to whoever has the guns. the masses aren't *really* (IMHO) represented anywhere. if nothing else, heavenco and the like will serve to underline how a lot of people feel about the abuse of authority, and smart govts will start to behave themselves. maybe.
yes, this is exactly what i meant by "safety net". Remember, we're talking about *their* safety, not ours. Some governments will do just about anything they want to further their own agendas, and then do anything it takes to save their asses from the fallout. China, Pakistan, India, Serbia, the list goes on and on. A handful of selfish people screwing the masses.
:)
I remember when i was living in the US people used to tell me that the police are given quotas on how many tickets they have to give out, so that the PD's can show that they're being effective. This was prolly BS, but still....
BTW, someone else followed my post with a message about me being wrong about the Indian ISP thing. Apology extended. This was based on something I saw on the BBC, I don't even remember how long ago
I live in Pakistan, which is also a pretty authoritarian state. What's interesting to me is our governments' policies regarding the net and IT in general. The reason i mention this here is because i some parallels...
ok, according to our law, you can't use encryption, your email and stuff is readable by the govt, what you say can be held against you etc. but on the other hand, none of these laws are actually implemented. my former college, which is owned by the navy, teaches RSA, for example. So the deal is that they want to keep the economy open to whatever benefits CS and IT can bring, but they want a saftey net, "just in case". I think China is leaning more towards the saftey net mentality. And since they are pretty much the closest thing to facism you're gonna find today, i guess they have a need to be paraniod. My government is making this tech very open and accessable cuz they feel our economy needs it. How accessable? well the only national backbone provider is a govt-owned and protected monopoly. But my city has like 10 or 15 ISP's and i get flat modem access for around $20/mo. Compare against our neighbour India, which has only one state-owned ISP (legally protected monoploy, last i heard), and you'll see that this is a pretty big deal for this reigon.
China, with all the trade deals they keep getting (from the US, and the thaw with the WTO), don't feel that economic need. Ultimately, the govt's who supress their people are the one's that can *afford* to.
Think about it. If people in china have less of a voice, who's paying to make that happen? the IMF? the WTO? Uncle Sam? You?