#surveillance economy

[cogtropolis]

How to ByPass the TikTok Ban

This guide will show you how to bypass the a TikTok Ban step-by-step. Before we get started, let’s just acknowledge that TikTok definitely does not meet our criteria for an application that respects users privacy. So why help users bypass the TikTok Ban? The answer is that banning apps, websites, speech, communication, or just parts of the Internet in general poses a much greater threat to free…

[biglisbonnews]

New study shows how to use wifi signals like sonar to spy on people I saw this tweet the other day and uhhhh yikes: Accurate Pose Estimation Via WiFi Signals"our model can estimate the dense pose of multiple subjects, with comparable performance to image-based approaches, by utilizing WiFi signals as the only input"arxiv: https://t.co/sV5X1ZQLWS — Read the rest https://boingboing.net/2023/01/19/new-study-shows-how-to-use-wifi-signals-like-sonar-to-spy-on-people.html

[kittyit]

post-entertainment society

[emptyanddark]

Industrial methods of worker control were prefigured on plantations, which sought to maximize the labor of enslaved Black people otherwise unmotivated to produce value for those who kept them captive. While the relationship between industrial and plantation worker control is foundational, it is essential to recognize that there is no easy equivalence between the terror-enforced racialized labor regimes of plantation slavery, and industrial labor processes that drew on technologies developed on plantations.5 Plantation management—and the relations of domination that structured the plantation—was anchored in a view of Black people as commodities, as something-not-quite-human. And the conditions of bondage on the plantation defined the category of “unfreedom” against which white workers could be classified as “free.”

...

In Dark Matters: On the Surveillance of Blackness, Simone Browne demonstrates that power over enslaved people was executed through bureaucratic technologies that divided enslaved workers, prescribed their routines and motions, and calibrated their movements with the goal of managing and controlling “every moment of enslaved life.”11 Her work clarifies the interplay between the strict division and quantification of life and labor on plantations, and how such segmentation served to make enslaved people observable to overseers and managers.12 The fragmentation of production, whether in the field or the factory, shifts power away from those doing the work to owners who benefit from defining and overseeing a coherent view of workers and the labor process. Such a view doesn’t emerge on its own. Rather, it is produced through records, metrics, and standardized assessments—and we must understand the term “record keeping” to be a synonym for “surveillance.” Monitoring and quantification of work and workers was the first, and arguably most important, step in populating plantation records. And these records’ demands for data and information in turn shaped how labor was divided and managed, in service of making work and workers as visible and quantifiable as possible.

...

Iskander illuminates how designations of skill—and the power that capital claims to define what is and is not “skilled”—work to produce and naturalize conditions of bondage, creating a hierarchy of “deservedness” that justifies conditions of precarity and domination for the “unskilled.”20 The concept of skill is also racialized. In a “free” labor context, “skill” is narrated as something (white) workers possess and serves as an index of the wages a worker can deduct from the profits desired by capitalists—a sum they can, in theory, negotiate or refuse. On the plantation, enslaved Black people were not ascribed the capacity for skill. They were narrated as incapable of possessing skill, and any prowess they displayed was attributed to biological differences that nonetheless marked them as inferior—animal capacity, not human ingenuity. Racial categories structure who is deemed able to possess skill to begin with, while marking a lack of skill as a condition of unfreedom and thus a condition of Blackness.21

[wrathsofgrapes]

Social Media, Sousveillance, and the Self (The Three S’s!) REVISED AND BASS BOOSTED

Preface: I posted this as a gaggle of thoughts some months ago, which you can see if you scroll down just a little bit on my blog. These thoughts were decently unorganized and months later, after slow broiling and marinating these thoughts some more, I decided to turn it into a real conjecture of sorts.

Very special thanks + shoutout to my philosophy professor Daniel Rodriguez-Navas for his careful, thoughtful, constructive, and encouraging guidance throughout the development this paper.

Most young people are socially expected to have a form of social media now, and especially expected to have some form of personal information be public. Many find it strange if one does not post photos of themselves online. Most of us, generation Z, are expected and encouraged to contribute to this massive user-curated database, and in exchange, we are able to receive more attention than what was previously fathomable in the form of likes, shares, and comments. This attention is addictive, debilitating, heart-wrenching and hyper-fixated. It has never been possible in human history to access this many people at once, to be heard by this many people and hear this many people. The digital space has never been “natural” - though depending on particular definitions of “natural”, the transhumanist may argue that the digital space is the next step in evolution; an extension of the human realm. But we were not eased into this digital realm, we were thrown, many of us at a very young age, into this realm with a violent and perverted amount of freedom, enticed by information overload and the addiction of attention. The societal over-exposure to the current climate and habits of social media platforms has had not only a detrimental effect on users’ physical health and self esteem, but has also created an uncanny simulacrum of the ways in which we interact and present ourselves with/to others in real life. The incorporation of social media in our everyday lives has solely transformed the ways in which we love, hate, cry and laugh, prioritize - at others and especially ourselves. 

The new product of attention has become a pinnacle of desire; and we pay with sensation, with shock, with beauty and individuality. When these technological experiments first came out, our young, malleable, dissatisfied minds were the first to latch on. Our parents critiqued this, which made the project even more successful. But it is not a phase like our parents said it would be. They caved. All it took was a few years of normalization - advertising, attention, and they too, became hooked. A 2021 Pew research center study found that 91% of US adults aged 30-49 use online platforms, slightly decreasing in ages 50-64 with 83%, and 49% in adults aged 65 and up. We no longer even have an ancient antagonist to complain about “kids these days”. It has become all free and liberated, no shame in this addiction because the algorithms have improved, proved to be impenetrable in its strategy. 

What we now value is increasingly impacted by the digital sphere, riddled with advertisements for particularly desirable lifestyles. With a life revolving so much around the aspect of the digital realm, and with the digital realm being created on the foundation of capital pursuit, value is no longer personal. Life and culture are no longer personal. The personal is no longer personal. Lee Artz, author of “Global Entertainment Media: A Critical Introduction” describes how world culture no longer stems from local cultures, created by people. Instead, TNMCs (TransNational Media Corporations) create a culture based off of the pursuit of production and wealth, skillfully peppered with some features of local culture for the sake of relatability and familiarity, sold under the guise of “cultural diversity”. 

The transaction is subtle - we buy a fix of attention, a sense of connection in exchange for personal information, the more intimate the better. Post a photo of yourself - better if you are wearing less, better if you are doing something vulnerable, intimate, better with more controversy. A 2018 study by Bell, Cassarly and Dunbar examines the extent to which young women aged 18-24 posted self-images that were sexually suggestive and its correlation with the amount of “likes” and online engagement one would receive. The results concluded that this type of positive engagement on sexually suggestive photos encouraged young women to post more of them. As young people have been subject to this reward system for longer and whilst our young minds are still developing, we have a heightened sensitivity to this type of social reward. The oversharing of one’s sexuality and body essentially transfers ownership, or feeling of entitlement to the consumer, who possesses the power of encouraging it, or negatively engaging.

It’s not only sexualization that receives this engagement - the new phenomenon of oversharing personal information on the internet, especially now that less people are choosing to stay anonymous on the internet than ever before, has become essentially a new norm. Simply opening the Tik Tok app will present you with people in their homes, talking to the camera about intimate, vulnerable, and often embarrassing stories in full detail. The fascination with this seemingly raw and unfiltered form of content, or sexualized content, taps into a different type of perversion in the human psyche; this type of content, because it is in a way so humiliatingly honest, welcomes the most brutal responses. Though many love informational oversharing, with netizens commonly expressing that it makes them feel better about themselves, or relieved in its relatability, a 2022 study concluded that informational oversharing stems from anxiety and alienation from society, where people desperately try to find intimacy, attention, and relatability in their vulnerability.  “Better to shock than to bore” - or relevance over irrelevance, has become the subconscious logic. Relevance is emphasized more than ever now, where even “normal” people have a fixation on “staying relevant”, much like a celebrity would traditionally have. The “digital footprint” is no longer about reservation or preservation, it is about sensation and impact. That’s the new age of fame, and it is stupidly easy, stupidly addictive. 

I feel like this newfound addiction to attention and instant gratification has shifted our collective values. We value privacy much less, in favor of attention. Social media platforms have taught us that we can receive a great amount of attention, validation, and discourse just by trading one’s privacy, the value of which has been artificially decreased by TNMCs just as the value of fame/exposure has been artificially increased. 

The strategy of self advertisement is now learned by young adolescents before, or even instead, of the strategies of self preservation and self protection. No real cyber literacy is taught - it is simply learned through experience. Older generations and very young children do not have the years of developmental experience infiltrated by the digital space to garner an awareness of the real-life-to-digital dissonance. The two are not as easily separable to someone naive to the difference of impact they have. The digital space gives one, in a way, the illusion of ultimate privacy, almost like it encourages the exploitation of your deepest vulnerabilities. You can tell your innermost secrets out loud, alone, in the comfort of your own room, and be heard and seen by millions. Accounts of very young children or older people often go viral because their personas online are often either the most vulnerable pure reflection of their reality, or they are presenting themselves in a very obviously curated way, where they naively act like how they think people on the internet should act. These types of accounts are almost always loved by the public in an exploitative or patronizing way, where the humor lies in the fact that they do not act on social media in the way that shows a sense of “getting it”, part of this dreadful post-ironic, terminally blasé attitude that has plagued those with experience-based, shame-based digital literacy. I propose that this attitude is formed out of self protection, or a need to present oneself as somebody who is impenetrable in vulnerability.

The internet is where anything is said mostly without real life consequences - and this is another large aspect of why the digital space is addictive. One gets addicted to the honesty, which coaxes you into delving into and producing opinions that one would not think of producing in real life. Because of this honesty, people often purposefully think of things to critique and reasons to attack. But this is also a product of the oppressive real-life social norms of courtesy and the overbearing expectation of niceness. The digital realm is, in a way, a solace where we can reject that. But that freedom of communication is simply on the other extreme end of the spectrum of healthy communication. The pendulum never stops in the healthy middle. I often like to think of all my social media comments as if they were being said to me, in person, by the people behind these profiles. They usually have photos of themselves publicly posted. They say vile things because I am not real. To them, and funny enough, oftentimes to myself as well, I am just a monkey that is dancing on the circuit board inside their phones, in their pocket, accessible at any time and able to be deleted at any time. I am so beautifully insignificant, so temporary, and yet it inexplicably gives me a sense of a permanent presence - a stable one, that will not fade. I am not immune to the fetishization of fame.

Schlosser identifies self presentation versus self disclosure; self presentation being a goal-oriented, strategic, and curated presentation of the self, with self disclosure being sharing factual information to another about oneself, regardless of its impact on one’s social reputation. She finds that the internet gives affordance for self disclosure due to the option of anonymity, but also discourages disclosure through unfiltered and open audience feedback. Through personal observation, I believe that the issue is more complex, and calls for a more nuanced discussion than whether social platforms promote or discourage presentation or disclosure - because this discussion suggests that there is no blurred line between the curated self and the objective self. Even in a non-social media context, it is hard to differentiate between genuine and performative behavior, since it is so hard for a subject to differentiate and admit to it. With how engrossed most people are within their digital selves, I will argue that it is all presentative - and that even content that feels like disclosure is self presentation. Is there really no motive in disclosure, as Schlosser puts it? 

Maybe disclosure is innocence - a naieveté that is ironically revered and unironically feared. With the internet being an automatic concrete archive of one’s opinions and expression and a machine that almost always guarantees a consequence, there is a saying that has emerged in recent years: “be careful of what you say on the internet”. This is referring to the fear of getting “canceled” for saying something problematic, or to the possibility of publicly embarrassing oneself whether in action, speech or aesthetics. When people have an understanding of this ruthless internet system, everything one says and does on the internet is purposefully curated, with extra care in the desired effect of the content. Even when content is created for the purpose of self-degradation or self embarrassment for humor, it is still careful to not be too vulnerable, or too weird. 

Referring back to my earlier observation of how content from young children or older people who do not necessarily “get” the internet often go viral, I think that maybe this form of simple, naive, innocent and vulnerable content is the only true disclosure that exists on the internet - unintentional disclosure. Unintentional disclosure also can come forth in times where one may try to present a lie to consumers, and are proven false. I believe that this is why these videos and posts go viral - we all truly do love disclosure. We love honesty and vulnerability, proof of humanness and unintentional subjects of endearment. I do believe that my current generation is striving for real human connection, closeness, and earnest communication in this epidemic of loneliness, spearheaded by the cave-like illusion of comfort that technology brings. We’re just scared - I know I am - because who wouldn’t be, as involuntary test subjects for mystifying technologies? 

Altman and Taylor proposed the social penetration theory (SPT), where surface-level relationships can develop into much deeper ones, where the seal of intimacy gets penetrated, in a sense, through the sharing of personal information - self disclosure. The goal within self disclosure is social penetration, which is more present than ever in the context of social media, except social media does not give the affordance of other strategies to gain social penetration - such as a slow, gradual relationship, face-to-face contact, and mutual acknowledgement. Since content creators do not have these other affordances, I will argue that they feel the urge to go to extremes with a performance of self-disclosure, for the main goal of social penetration, creating parasocial relationships. 

The parasocial relationship is the driving force of the use of influencers in modern day advertisement. Simulating intimate, honest relationships is what the content creator strives for, because that is what creates the most engagement and makes for the best product endorsements, encouraged and funded by TNMCs. It is what the consumer also loves to consume, because without the added aspects of social penetration such as a slow, gradual relationship, face-to-face contact, and mutual acknowledgement, the consumer is able to have a fundamentally not whole but idealized version of the curator, where the curator’s personality can seem much more wholesome, specified, honest and relatable than the personality of anyone that the consumer could know in real life. 

The influencer blurs the line between “normal” person and celebrity. Celebrities used to be elusive creatures, where a sighting of them outside of a movie or magazine was considered fascinating - because celebrities used to be untouchable. They were Gods rarely among men and worshiped for their unapproachability. The influencer in the digital age has fundamentally transformed the concept of fame into one based not necessarily on traditional talent, but on social penetration, controversy, and very importantly, attractiveness. Even traditional celebrities are now, in recent years, joining social media platforms to engage with fans in a parasocial way - to show that celebrities are just like us! They eat food, shit it out, and have bad hair in the morning! We have all found out how profitable it is to be human - but not too human - that now, even the Gods have come down to earth to cash in. 

Even if consumers are aware of these dynamics in their media consumption, they will still often choose to engage positively in this system. 54% of young Americans would even become an influencer themselves if given the chance, because of how it is advertised and idealized. The parasocial relationship has created a simulation of what a person should be, due to the lack of affordances for actual human connection whilst simulating a version of human connection that is advertised as better than a real human connection - but I will argue that in reality, digital social penetration, or maybe even the illusion of it, fails to satisfy real social needs, but instead of this dilemma spurring people to seek out in-person connections, the instant and effortless gratification of a digital parasocial relationship makes users simply seek out a surplus of it.

My image, or at least the image I carefully project, has been seen by millions. Millions now have a specific perception of me - two-dimensional and dictated by an altered fraction of my legitimate self, locked in time. But what is the legitimate self? The digital age has created a larger gray area in the concept of “self” and “individual”, widening the hole that capitalism has created, where one is not only a product, but a walking advertisement. We now express and define the self through sousveillance, and often do not know ourselves without it. The self has come to be defined as the density and reaction of digital perception. Sometimes people no longer know who they are after their popularity leaves them. Late stage capitalism, bass-boosted by new technologies, has made individuals to be solely defined by reaction - because reaction is what creates transaction, what creates currency, whether it be a fix of mental gratification or actual money. I cannot think of anyone who would possibly like to admit it, but there is certainly a present attitude of “if you don’t exist online, do you even exist? Why wouldn’t you want to be online?” Why wouldn’t you want to partake in this addictive algorithm, endless scrolling, information overload, stimulation overload, and the promise of attention? You are weird if you don’t.

 With the value of personal information going up, and the value of privacy going down, with people believing that they are so insignificant that their information does not matter - I will refrain from using that as a main talking point. The promotion and investment into the advancement of social technologies almost feels like state-funded propaganda, but I also will not get into that talking point in fears of sounding like a crazed conspiracy theorist. The main issue is how it has shifted our entire social attitude, and has deeply affected the social dynamics of communities and circles in real life. Human connection is strained by image and obsession. It is strained from a disembodiment of the self and the environment. We now have to control our social lives online (transcending location and social boundary) as well as our social lives in real life. Because of how personal one’s social page seems, and how unintimidating and easy it is to contact anyone, there is no secrecy left. And some of the world’s greatest stories revolve around the beauty of secrecy.

This conjecture is not just to say that everybody should return to analog, and that the digital age has not had its glorious moments - but social media tries to convince you that the main purpose of your patronage to their platform is connection, fun, and inspiration, while the purpose is really all capital. And because we, the 21st century, have become test subjects for these new, cruel, untested technologies, there was truly no restriction or boundary on who was deemed able to access essentially this panopticon of positive/negative reinforcement, and content from every dark crevice of the world. This promotion of self exploitation has wedged its way into being a priority for many. Friends become friends and lovers become lovers based on aesthetics, image, and attraction. The curation of a profile is just as important as the curation of the real self. The curation of a profile becomes the self. The line between who one is online and in real life is becoming more and more blurred; people try to mold themselves to act in the way they are able to online. Online, one is free to lust and lie and hate and obsess and love. Online, one can be confident, sexy, loud, carefully vulnerable, relentlessly controversial, smart, beautiful, mysterious, careless, carefree, detached, ethereal and unreal. But maybe humans were not meant to be all of those things, all at once.

Author’s note: If you read to the end of this, thank you, and if you’d like access to the bibliography please PM me! I would have liked to make this longer - there’s so many things I could have gone on and on about. I’d also love to hear any comments or questions or general feedback.

[feckcops]

Secret Amazon Reports Expose the Company’s Surveillance of Labor and Environmental Groups

“Updates on labor organizing activities at warehouses include the exact date, time, location, the source who reported the action, the number of participants at an event (and in some cases a turnout rate of those expected to participate in a labor action), and a description of what happened, such as a ‘strike’ or ‘the distribution of leaflets.’ Other documents reveal that Amazon intelligence analysts keep close tabs on how many warehouse workers attend union meetings; specific worker dissatisfactions with warehouse conditions, such as excessive workloads; and cases of warehouse-worker theft ...

“The new intelligence reports obtained by Motherboard reveal in detail how Amazon uses social media to track environmental activism and social movements in Europe—including Greenpeace and Fridays For Future, environmental activist Greta Thunberg's global climate strike movement—and perceives such groups as a threat to its operations. In 2019, Amazon monitored the Yellow Vests movement, also known as the gilet jaunes, a grassroots uprising for economic justice that spread across France—and solidarity movements in Vienna and protests against state repression in Iran ...

“‘It’s not enough for Amazon to abuse its dominant market power and face antitrust charges by the EU; now they are exporting 19th century American union-busting tactics to Europe,’ Christy Hoffman, general secretary of UNI Global Union, a global federation of trade unions that represents more than 20 million workers, told Motherboard. ‘This is a company that is ignoring the law, spying on workers, and using every page of the U.S. union-busting playbook to silence workers' voices’ ...

“‘Amazon's systemic use of military surveillance methods against unionists and activists is deeply alarming,’ said Aubry, who is also a senior member of France's France Insoumise, France's main radical left party. ‘Amazon and Jeff Bezos act as if they were above the law because they have accumulated unprecedented levels of wealth and power. This has to stop.’”

[shinobicyrus]

We are joined by Antony Loewenstein — author of The Palestine Laboratory: How Israel Exports the Technology of Occupation Around the World — to discuss his extensive reporting on the Israeli occupation of Palestine, the policing tactics and surveillance technologies that are tested on Palestinians before sold as part of lucrative global export industry, and how the dynamics of occupation never stay within their cordoned zones but always expand to capture increasingly more people and places.

This came out five months ago, so before the current conflict. It was very enlightening and shattered a lot of the perceptions I had grown up with around Israel. Particularly, Israel's history of coopering with brutal regimes and their selling their skills and technology to the highest bidder. Oftentimes as a middle-man for the United States.

[saracausey1]

[auressea]

^^^ THIS! has been an intentional, deliberate PLAN - put in place in the early 90s.. it's not and never has been a 'slippery slope' of new technologies. This is an Economic plan to gain complete control of capital, and part of a plan for mass surveillance.

I worked for one of Canada's Big 3 Banks for 6 years during the earliest implementation of this plan- which started with Credit Cards and 'Credit Score Companies'.

[futurefatum]

How Elites Will Collapse America Like Rome (Tone: 100)

September 3rd, 2024 by @TomBilyeu How Elites Will Collapse America Like Rome: BlackRock, Trump vs Kamala & Market Crash | Whitney Webb ABOUT THIS VIDEO: This video discusses the potential collapse of the United States, drawing parallels to the fall of the Roman Empire. Whitney Webb, an investigative journalist, explores the role of influential entities like BlackRock in shaping U.S. fiscal…

[tmarshconnors]

Against Britcoin and The Digital Pound

As the digital age advances, the concept of money is evolving beyond physical coins and banknotes into the realm of digital currencies. One such development is the proposed "Britcoin," a digital version of the British pound. While this initiative promises to bring convenience and modernity to financial transactions, it also raises significant concerns. It's crucial to scrutinise the implications of Britcoin and advocate for a cautious approach to its adoption.

What is Britcoin?

Britcoin, the proposed digital pound, is envisioned as a state-backed digital currency, aiming to complement physical cash and existing digital payment systems. This initiative is part of a broader trend where countries are exploring central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) to streamline monetary transactions, reduce costs, and provide a government-backed alternative to cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin.

The Promised Benefits

Proponents of Britcoin highlight several potential benefits:

Efficiency and Speed: Digital transactions can be executed instantly, improving the efficiency of financial operations for both consumers and businesses.

Financial Inclusion: Britcoin could offer financial services to unbanked or underbanked populations, providing them access to secure and efficient payment methods.

Reduced Costs: Digital currency can potentially lower the costs associated with printing, storing, and transporting physical money.

Enhanced Security: With advanced encryption and blockchain technology, digital currencies can offer robust security against fraud and counterfeiting.

The Concerns

Despite these advantages, the introduction of Britcoin raises several red flags:

Privacy Issues: Digital currencies are inherently traceable, which could lead to increased surveillance of financial transactions by the state. This threatens individual privacy and could be misused for unwarranted tracking of personal spending habits.

Centralization Risks: The control of Britcoin by a central authority, such as the Bank of England, centralizes financial power, potentially leading to misuse or policy decisions that may not reflect the best interests of the public.

Cybersecurity Threats: As a digital entity, Britcoin would be susceptible to cyberattacks. A breach could have catastrophic consequences, destabilizing the financial system and leading to significant economic losses.

Technological Dependence: A move towards digital currency increases dependence on technology and infrastructure. In cases of technical failures or power outages, access to money could be disrupted, affecting daily life and business operations.

Economic Inequality: While intended to promote financial inclusion, Britcoin could exacerbate existing inequalities if its implementation doesn't consider those without access to digital technologies or the internet.

The Need for Vigilance

Given these potential drawbacks, it's imperative to approach Britcoin with caution. Here's how we can advocate for a balanced and thoughtful consideration of this digital currency:

Demand Transparency: Push for clear and transparent communication from the government and financial institutions about the development and implementation of Britcoin. Public consultations and debates should be encouraged to address concerns and gather diverse viewpoints.

Privacy Protections: Insist on robust privacy measures to ensure that users' financial data is protected from misuse and unwarranted surveillance. This could involve stringent regulations and oversight mechanisms.

Cybersecurity Measures: Advocate for the highest standards of cybersecurity to safeguard against potential threats. This includes regular audits, risk assessments, and investment in cutting-edge security technologies.

Inclusivity Plans: Ensure that plans for Britcoin include provisions for those without access to digital technologies, such as rural populations and the elderly. This could involve providing alternative methods of access or maintaining physical cash options.

Legal Frameworks: Call for the establishment of comprehensive legal frameworks that govern the use, distribution, and regulation of Britcoin. These frameworks should protect users and ensure the stability of the financial system.

While the advent of Britcoin represents a significant step towards modernizing the financial landscape, it's essential to proceed with caution. By understanding the potential risks and advocating for robust safeguards, we can ensure that the digital pound serves the public interest without compromising privacy, security, or inclusivity. The fight against a hasty and ill-considered rollout of Britcoin is not about resisting progress but about ensuring that progress benefits everyone fairly and equitably.

[immaculatasknight]

Don't be evil

[airwavesdotblog]

Navigating Turbulent Waters: What to Expect During a Global Economic Collapse.

April 28, 2024 Based on a recent article titled “Realistic Things to Expect During a Global Economic Collapse” from MSN. Here’s a concise summary and analysis: Stock Market Volatility: During an economic collapse, stock markets can experience extreme fluctuations. Investors may witness rapid declines in stock prices, leading to panic and uncertainty. Currency Devaluation: The value of national…

[emptyanddark]

weekly reading list

things i've read this week i found interesting.

In Syria, the West’s Humanitarian Claims Crumble to Dust by Jonathan Cook: as the death toll from the earthquakes hitting Syria and Turkey exceeds 46 thousand lives, don't forget that the people of Syria have been living under the collective punishment by western powers choking them with sanctions. humans can't control forced of nature but the amount of damage and human sufferings is entirely political (as it appears in Turkey infrastructure was compromised by corruption)

The Foundation of Monte Albán, Intensification, and Growth: Coactive Processes and Joint Production: authors Linda Nicholas & Gary Feinman propose their hypothesis about egalitarian, collective "good" governance in Oaxaca valley settlements.

Surveillance Capitalism by John Bellamy Foster & Robert W. McChesney: outlines the history of cooperation between USA government and private companies to present issues of surveillance capitalism.

Of Flying Cars and the Declining Rate of Profit by David Graeber about creativity, innovation and imagination.

The Case for Free-Range Lab Mice by Sonia Shah: a long-overdue discussion about the limited benefit of using lab animals in biological & medical research. the questions about this practice are not only ethical, but practical.

The Evolution of Meaning – from Pragmatic Couplings to Semantic Representations: author Kevin Mitchell writes about the distinction between deriving pragmatic and semantic meanings, and proposes evolutionary theory about their development.

Three Ideas from Linguistics that Everyone in AI Should Know by Gary Marcus and Elliot Murphy: large language models don't in fact, use language, at least not as humans use it. they merely spit out words & phrases that are statistically likely to be next; the author of this article focuses on 3 key elements of language that are absent from LLMs: reference, cognitive models and compositionality.

Africa's Forgotten Colony in the Sahara by Paweł Wargan: from European imperialism, to Moroccan nationalist interests and the greed of multinational mining corporations, this articles introduces a bit of the modern history of Western Sahara and the plight of the Sahrawi people.

The Carbon Triangle: analysis by Jeremy Wallace who identifies interactions between three major economic actors in contemporary China: finance, land and real estate, and how they impact the environment.

interview with Clara E. Mattei, the author of The Capital Order: How Economists Invented Austerity and Paved the Way to Fascism

Inside Google’s Quest to Digitize Troops’ Tissue Samples: James Bandler answers the question: what's more creepy than the US' DOD's largest collection of human tissues going back over a century? reply: Google wants to make money off it.

Lever News covering the catastrophe that is US rail, in the name of profiteering, from Rail Companies Blocking Safety Rules, Biden DOJ Backing Norfolk Southern’s Bid To Block Lawsuits, all this after they screwed overworked rail workers for daring demanding more than one (1!!) single day of paid sick leave per year, amid rail companies high profits and terrible working conditions.

[roach-works]

im working on a thought here but i think a crucial component of supporting and advocating for liberal and progressive ideas is you have to trust people to muddle through mistakes. i see a lot of people that clearly want *safety* for marginalized people but their proposals amount to putting everyone in a padded room with their hands on a well lit table forever. we have to sanitize media, we have to protect people. we can't hurt anyone, we can't risk anyone-- but we can constantly constantly surveil each other and make new rules against ever doing the wrong things. you know, the bad things, the dirty things, the things that hurt you and make you sick and ruin everything for everyone forever. it's our moral duty, isn't it? to make the world cleaner and brighter and safer?

i think, probably, it would help a lot of us to take a deep breath and consider that you have to make mistakes in life. and so does everyone else. you learn things and you fuck up and you pull through. and you can warn people, if you think they're going to make a mistake, but i don't think you have a right to stop them from doing whatever damn fool thing they're up to.

i think that's what's really bothering me about current progressive discourse, and a lot of the proposed policies. a lot of kids are really scared right now that any single mistake is fatal, and while they're not totally wrong-- the economy sucks, there's still a plague going on, and america is a carceral panopticon--it's still not their *right* let alone their moral obligation to build a system where no one has the freedom to fuck up.

i don't know what the solution is here. a world with more resources would be great. a world with less deadly risk, too. but i'd settle for a world where we recognized and applauded everyone's human right to do weird stupid bullshit and learn better--or not--on their own time.