Civil War General-Purpose Computing | Cory Doctorow | Talks at Google

Always interested in what Cory Doctorow has to say. While this particular blog post isn't about DRM, his work is benefiting everyone (except those who would rather enrich themselves at the expense of humanity). It's probably bigger than you think. I highly recommend reading up on what Cory has to say on DRM and the war on general purpose computing. It may change your mind. [LINK] [LINK] Also watch the various youtube videos of his talks, like this one: [VIDEO]

The book, "Little Brother," is available in multiple formats under Creative Commons licensing (free): [LINK] Also, you might enjoy Cory Doctorow's talk: "The Coming Civil War over General-purpose Computing" [VIDEO]

> are you okay with me being able to spend two weeks on the dark-web researching how to make and detonate a bomb using totally innocent chemical purchases, and then your spouse, parents, relatives, or you, being an innocent victim of my exploding the results, or would you want me to be stopped at some point after I started doing that? Yes, of course. Just as I am okay with people being able to spend ten minutes to take a knife from the kitchen and kill me. People are able to do all kinds of bad stuff, doesn't mean they actually do. The only alternative to a world where people are able to do bad stuff is totalitarianism, which is itself bad stuff (if only because I don't get to say what is considered good and what is considered bad), so not actually a solution either. Also, what you seem to think is just a logical impossibility. Either your communication can be read by third parties or it can not. You cannot build crypto that only leaks nuclear bomb plans, but keeps your medical information uncrackable. And you might be interested in some of Cory Doctorow's talks (or blog articles or maybe even books) on the general topic of "the war against general-purpose computing", like maybe one of these: [VIDEO] [LINK]

> How does the arbitrariness of those technological restrictions differ from the arbitrariness of the legal restrictions which I'm sure the author would insist upon, should you decide to republish their work? One of those is decided by a democratic process, the other is dictated by one party. > but that is a problem of execution, not one of concept. Actually, it is a problem of the concept. It is asking for computers to be robbed of their defining characteristic, and to be put under dictatorial control. See also Cory Doctorow's talks on the topic, like maybe this one: [VIDEO] (he gave this and similar talks in many places, you can find quite a few of them on youtube, I have no clue whether this particular one is good)

> Really? We're there now? It's become Apple's "responsibility" to police every last corner of iOS? I find it disgusting, but really Apple is the only one to blame for that when they started aggressively policing and removing apps, and then marketing to customers based on that. I've heard people on HN state ad nauseam that they love that Apple does this, and that it's one of the reasons they live in the Apple ecosystem. They want to be protected from running apps that might do something objectionable (according to Apple's standard), and are absolutely willing to trade their freedom for some security. I obviously don't agree with this at all (I refer you to Cory Doctorow's War on General Purpose Computing: [VIDEO] ) but it is a position I can understand.

There is this talk about the civil war on general purpose computing by Cory Doctorow: [LINK] He gave the same talk at Google: [VIDEO] It's slowly becoming reality.

In Cory Doctorow's talk at Google, he said that all routers today have interception technology in them. It's only a matter of being enabled or not in some countries or in others. But it seems so many have asked for it, that they don't even bother to build routers without that interception technology in them, so now their default router has interception built-in by default. [VIDEO]

People have warned that this will happen eventually, but I don't think that many believed it. We're witnessing the first real steps towards making pre-crime recognition a reality in the country. Good bye "innocent until proven guilty". Cory Doctorow has said in his "war against general computation" talk [1] that it's becoming cheaper and easier for authorities to just monitor everyone and store information about everyone, and then use algorithms to catch them, than focusing on who they they need to catch and following just that one. Now it's up to the people to stop this from becoming legal or from being done even illegally, not just in US, but in all countries, as I'm sure many others will try doing it, too. The ironic part is that the developed "democratic" countries may be the first to do it, because they are more advanced technologically. [1] [VIDEO]