/cyb/ - cyberpunk and cybersecurity

if you are stupid enough to see that technology was never created by corporations, but technology has created these corporations itself, there is no complete sense to argue with you in something. Apple has started in the garage, Google was formed by 2 students, Microsoft was created by 2 friends. These people created the technologies we are using now, not the corporations. Even 5 grade kids know that the main goal of any corporation is to extract money.

> now that you have realized the truth of the matter
the only thruth I realized is that you are edgy schoolboy, whose fart isn't worth reading, my little truthbringer.

>>3170
you've missed the point of my post, friendo. the OP was explaining why your struggle against the "misuse" of technology is a pointless struggle. who cares if these corporation were started by a single person? You started out as a sperm and look at you now a walking mass of cancer. i was only pointing out the stupidity of your struggle. you love technology, you praise technology, you use technology everyday, and you teach yourself to specialize in a specific technological field powered by your autism.

as long as technology is alive and proliferating and entertaining there will always be people who will use it for their selfish and greedy ambitions. the whole point of technology after all is to control people. remember that throughout history the kings were the people who could persuade, force, or trick the masses into doing his bidding. technology helps make that easier in a world that is becoming increasingly complex.

so if you really do want to struggle against technology you wouldn't be focusing on how corporations are tracking your internet usage to see what kind of porn you watch. you shouldn't be focusing on why CPUs have builtin backdoor. no you should be focusing on tearing down technology of all sorts. but you wouldn't do that because you love technology. so your "struggle" is a pointless exercise in futility.

By your standards no work can ever be fruitful, for all that is produced will in some way lead to loss.

Alright so I've seen this before. Before I start allow me to say that I've been working for 3 days on picking walnuts and there are still 3 days to go. We work from 5 to 11 (18 hours) non stop, only breaks for food, water, toilet ect… After day one you feel as if your lower back is gonna snap any moment and you will be handicapped for the rest of your life, your legs hurt like crazy and you cannot even walk properly for at least 2 days and lifting 30+ kg of crates on a 10 minute basis. However, you have still a lot of work to do, and you cannot stop. If you think that you would last to work this way for at least 2 weeks like people 1000 years ago did, you are delusional.

All the machinery that goes into collecting, transporting and the technology that allows you to call for extra help, refine the produce is invaluable. Same thing goes for any commodity that allows us humans to live life just a tad bit better, to overcome nature and build a lasting environment for our bodies.

To progress technologically is the only way to progress as a human being. What you dont understand is that the flesh has limits (you simply cannot train to become the next Baki and do the work of 500 people, move at car level speeds, lift two tons, your muscles give up automatically), while the spirit (mind) has none.

To give you a heads up, people in the good old days (both tribal societies and classical social structures) used to have 8-9 children per family. 4 of these children used to die before reaching age 10 from malnutrition and disease (abstractly, lack of knowledge). Family bonds were that of duty more and less of love. Statistically if you couldn't handle eating raw meat and combating fever while also performing labor you were dead. Statistically if you didnt even use the technological progression of even the Wheel lets say, you were at a disadvantage of never passing on any genes . To give you a taste of how bad this is, these extreme childbirth-fatality numbers were still occurring to my country in the 1960s and my grandma still recalls 3 siblings who died before age 12.

The Faustian tragedy of man, is that the flesh is willing to improve by all means necessary. The devil for us humans is both the limits of bones and muscle, but also the duty to carry out the sin of technology because we seek perfection, improvement and (as a expiring, organism) godhood.

There is no greed, only nature imbued into us. To combat authoritarian research is to go against humanity. To use said technology to live and perform opposite goals than those you disagree upon is not hypocritical. To help by expanding technology and knowledge, even if it is used by your enemy is progressing humanity as a whole. People that use technology for their own goals are just people who see greater problems that they can understand a better solution using the accumulated knowledge/technology pool accumulated through the thousands of years humans exist.

I could go on about how said corporate structures eventually fall under their own weight, how the human organization, global society always produces people that characteristically follow certain patters of behavior and how technology seems to be the only variable that does not oscillate up and down, but follows a trend of constant improvement… but then again I have work to do and sore muscles to feed.

>>3173

If you are seriously sleeping 5 hours a day, get some sleep instead of writing about authoritarianism on some lost imageboard. But that behaviour is too autistic to actually believe

>>the whole point of technology after all is to control people.

Is that really the point of rubber, axels, and refrigerators? No. Technology makes tasks easier and makes new forms of actions and reactions possible.

>because you and the corporations both love technologies.

Corps love money. Not tech. Just look at two of the biggest tech companies. Microsoft and Apple. They make almost no tech, software or hardware wise. They do buy and sell licenses and proprietary software using a knowledge of business. Their tech is also hampered by their primary goal. To make money. They love tech like a butcher loves his cleavers.

>to struggle pointlessly like this only shows how dumb you are. though you like to fancy >yourself as a sophisticated individual seeking technical knowledge you are unwillingly or >willingly contributing to the very evil that you so hate.

>There is no greed, only nature imbued into us.
There is no nature. Only environment and memes.

>To combat authoritarian research is to go against humanity.
Even if so. Who cares.

>technocrats
Wtf is this?

I've actually grown to hate "technology".

>>3168

I probably did not understand completely what you were trying to say, but i can clearly see you are viewing thing in a black and white fashion. There is a lot of nuances to the problem of corporation and i don't think it as anything to do with them and us loving technology even if it was the case which is probably not, wouldn't change the fact that they use it against us.

No one here hate new technology most of us, i believe, hate the fact that they sell us technology in the goal to use it against us or to get something from us.
To give you an example let's take Alexa. It is a wonderful technology sadly most of us are aware that this piece of soykaf listen to us and is probably back door. Now let imagine for a second that there was an Alexa FOSS, wouldn't that be amazing? This is were the problem get nuances, we do not own them but they own us it's a fact with newer technology.

>to struggle pointlessly like this only shows how dumb you are.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. It's not pointless, the simple fact that we get to have less privacy the further we go is enough for me to seek knowledge to help the rest of the world to better understand the predicament we're in. Even you are showing that you did get out of way to seek approbation of your statement. (I know your probably a troll but you still raise an interesting question.)

>so if you really do want to struggle against technology you wouldn't be focusing on how corporations are tracking your internet usage to see what kind of porn you watch. you shouldn't be focusing on why CPUs have builtin backdoor. no you should be focusing on tearing down technology of all sorts. but you wouldn't do that because you love technology. so your "struggle" is a pointless exercise in futility

So instead of curing disease and saving a million of life you're ready to genocide every single ill people simply because they could contaminate another million? How irrational and delusional is that? This isn't progress but regression. Yes, corporate create technology with bad intent like Alexa but that doesn't mean we should destroy something simply because it's badly use at the moment. Just imagine how life would be if we did apply this to something else in the history of technology? Like the telephone lawyer created law to protect privacy, they didn't advocate the destruction of a technology that would increase the quality of life of people.

>as long as technology is alive and proliferating and entertaining there will always be people who will use it for their selfish and greedy ambitions.

This is why there is community like ours that help people who seek knowledge to understand. There is also EFF that fight for our right to privacy in the online sphere. Even software like FreeTube, Tor Project, KeepPass, Prism computer, Libreboot, OBS, Invidious there is also website regrouping information like privacytools.io that give us tool to enable what we want technology and software to become, to be better. It's not because thing are bad that you shouldn't improve it.

>>3174
>>3174

Perform labor kid and this behavior will start making sense.
5 hours of sleep / day is nothing

>>3175
Yikes, I didn't know memes are what drives us to go hungry and horny, much so to advance tech and solve said problems.

>>3182

>So instead of curing disease and saving a million of life you're ready to genocide every single ill people simply because they could contaminate another million?

This also makes me wonder–computers may be the latest highly visible example of use of technology to help with questionable agendas, but they're surely neither the first nor the last. The problems that are presented by spying over computers will not be, on a fundamental level, helped by not using computers–whatever tools are avaliable can and will be used to questionable ends.

If you, or any of us, seek to actually fix such problems, there is no solution to be found in creating or using or modifying tools, it lies only in creating or modifying man.

>>3186

Correct me if I'm wrong but this is why there is certain philosophy attach to certain type of software like FOSS? I'm aware people use software even if they don't agree with the philosophy behind it, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have the inverse process?

I probably don't view it as you do but if like you said every single software can be used with a questionable agenda, which is a fact that no one can deny, isn't good enough for us to use the same technology to keep a certain ground and moral with tools at check while we search for better alternative?

I really want to agree with you but modifying the nature of man seems rather vague and impossible. How would you do something like that in the first place?

>>3196
> I'm aware people use software even if they don't agree with the philosophy behind it, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have the inverse process?
Its possible I misunderstand you, I'm not necessarily meaning any given piece of software will be used negatively – but broadly speaking software as an invention has been and will continue to be so used. People can and do make efforts to limit misuse of specific software, and software generally, but these can only go so far. In the end a license is only a very long string, and it only limits the behavior of people who care.

>isn't good enough for us to use the same technology to keep a certain ground and moral with tools at check while we search for better alternative?
I dont think there is a 'better alternative'. The best we can hope to do in regards to computers and software is to watch its use and make sure that it isnt used for ill. As long as computers and software are developed this will not be a solved problem. Many people do good work trying to watch and alert people to specific instances of abuse, but this work will never be finished.

>How would you do something like that in the first place?
I'm not saying its really possible, or practical, just that the root of these problems has no relation to the specific places they occur (in this case computers), and rather to humans. If they are ever to have a permanent solution it will have to be in changing mankind.

Of course arguably there exist ways to alter human behavior at large scale, genetic modification and artificial selection and such. Regrettably these are also technologies who will be, doubtless, used for purposes with questionable, as well as honest, intent.

Surely you understand you can have complaints about how something works while still benefitting from its effects?

All of us, literally every single one of us, work under some sort of system which we disagree with to some extent while still benefit from in some way, shape or form. The government, schooling, corporate business so on, so forth. There are still negatives and we can work on some sort of improvement to them. It's not an endless "struggle" like refer to it so patronizingly, just a simple cycle of improvement all systems work in. Everyone's already pointed out what a piece of idiocy this is, so I'm not going to add anything other than that. Still can't get over how obnoxiously condescending this post is. Guess someone needs someone to put their unresearched ramblings.

I wouldn't mind if I had to stop using technology, it is of course a part of me because I am shaped by the world I live in, but it is not something I give much value to. In fact I'm distancing myself from certain misuses of technology, for example, this is the first time I've posted on lainchan in the last months and I'll quit the board immediately after I'm done writing this.

Also, there is nothing wrong with technology in and of itself, the issue is how society deals with technology.

>>3199
pic sums it up succinctly

>>3168
strawman - the post

saged and reported

>>3268
>saged and reported
reported for reporting

>>3168
Slave morality.
A prime mover doesn't think in this manner and instead thinks about how to achieve his own goals.

If I use free software to further my own goals because it helps me achieve my goals am I being a hypocrite? No, because my focus isn't on right or wrong. The corporations' goal is to make money, depending on who you are and what you want to do that might be a conflict of intrest.

>>3168
>>3171
This seems like an incredibly confused philosophy. You appear to be claiming that since technology is useful to people wishing to do evil, technology itself is inherently evil. Rather than supporting that claim though, you simply insulted everyone who disagrees with it.

>>3297
>mods defend bait OP
sasuga, LARPchan!