- 32 Posts
- 635 Comments
1·20 hours agoother than the originator of the idea
The word does not belong to the person who “originated” (labeled) it. I’m sorry you don’t like the modern usage and have chosen to die on that hill, but the rest of us are here on the internet, not in the 19th century.
I’m sorry you refuse to make progress.
And criminals would also want to spread “FUD” about Flock Surveillance and other beacons of Safety and Security, those damned scoundrels
Fishface, I linked you to a particular part of the article. Did you miss it by mistake?
Here is the part you failed to read:
The Panopticon […] must be understood as a generalizable model of functioning ; a way of defining power relations in terms of the everyday life of men. No doubt Bentham presents it as a particular institution, closed in upon itself. […] But the Panopticon must not be understood as a dream building
If you are able to scroll down even further and continue reading, you’ll also discover workplace surveillance is considered a Panopticon… Even though it apparently fits into your definition of something that is “circumventable”, wherever you pulled that from.
You might want to take a quick look at Wikipedia, because you are trying to use inaccurate distinctions.
while imprisoned
No, it’s not placed in a prison, it’s about the structure of a surveillance society.
1·1 day agoIf you’re confused, perhaps you should read how monopolies work…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly#%3A~%3Atext=can+drive+or-%2Cbuy+out%2C-other+companies.+A
I’m sorry, do you understand that you are repeating the definition of the panopticon, but say you don’t understand how a panopticon is a panopticon?
Let’s turn our attention back to “what about Proton’s business model is evil”, where I told you two evil things Proton did that apparently aligned with its business model: Destroying two competitors.
The only apparent defense you have for these two evils is to say a different thing is not apparently evil (vendor lock-in?) but a lack of evil does not absolve evil . I’d rather focus on that than being dragged down into a pedantic debate about which types of Proton emails really do lock users in (as anyone who has ever signed up for a website with an email address will tell you, it does).
The Panopticon works by making you worry you are always going to be surveiled even if there’s a statistically small chance you are.
That’s the joke.
Not sure why the Lemmy Privacy Community didn’t quite understand it, besides the obvious
Again, you’re coming from the position that Corporation is good until proven bad, a position that I thought everyone was shown, time and time again, is a bad position.
What guarantees Proton will be good?
When Proton bought competitor SimpleLogin, was that good for the average person? How about when they bought competitor Standard Notes?
The people interested in privacy don’t assume something is good until proven otherwise. They assume it is bad until proven good.
I thought that was a weird opener, but then they bring up the same thing a second time halfway down the article.
Amazing that somebody can write an article citing Cory Doctorow while missing literally everything has ever said about AI
Keep in mind the Nitter developers are associated with Poast, despite attempts to scrub this.
a website that has become a haven for racist, antisemitic and misogynist posting also has close ties to Truth Social, the social media site founded by former President Donald Trump, according to a report published Thursday.
7·4 days agoI’ll be happy to check back in a month to see which toxic cesspit provides the best approximation of Photoshop-tier quality.
My bet isn’t with the Redditor whose profile reads “To AI haters: AI is just a tool… Adapt.” But their attitude is roughly as toxic as Adobe if you strip away the PR, so let them fight I guess
Can’t spell Proton without PR
I’ve seen at least half a dozen other projects that looked like this, received criticism, and the supposed author responded that way verbatim. It’s actually eerie.
For those not in the know, this can be risky too.
I don’t want a smart TV, but there’s only a couple non-smart brands left, and neither of them seem to have the best quality product on the market.
. That means less than 0.02% of those encounter a device search.
Grok, how does the Panopticon work?
I couldn’t disagree more. A surveillance state is bad, no matter which authoritarian or collective of authoritarians holds the reins.
“For our security” and “for the children” are the two excuses fascists use to excuse destruction of privacy and human rights in general