encryption matters

You can use communication channels to transfer illegal info, or you can use them to communicate in private legally.

The only way to discover which exchanged info is legal and which is illegal is to monitor all of it; iow, to abolish private communication.

To separate out illegal from legal content, you have to observe it. This requires that the right to private correspondence must be done away with.

Thus, copyright monopoly is pro sharing of information (no privacy) when it belongs to somebody else, but against it when it belongs to them:

They maintain that they are allowed to access your private content, but you are not allowed to access theirs, unless you pay them for it.

The right to share knowledge and culture is dependent upon the right to correspond in private. That said, they can buy my content if they wish.

That is only fair: if I must buy yours, then you must buy mine; and I warn you ahead of time, just so you know—I am not at all cheap.

If you want to know what I am sharing or otherwise doing on the net, pay me; or else stop invading my privacy. End government surveillance.

Support corporate dismantlement. 

Where Are the Guillotines?

Scott Adams says he’s endorsing Hillary because he’s afraid, living in California, that his (thus far very accurate) predictions about Trump’s political success looks to crazy anti-Trump protestors (does he mean Mexican nationals and illegal immigrants?) like he’s a Trump supporter and he worries that, not supporting Trump’s opponent, he will otherwise make himself a target for violence. This is, of course, a very wrong reason for endorsing any candidate and, anyway, Scott is rich enough to be able to afford several bodyguards to protect him from all but a many-peopled coordinated assassination attempt—which is highly unlikely given his less than ubiquitous popularity.

So I suspect there’s a lot more to Adams’ endorsement than his stated reasons, like some reverse psychology, maybe? His whole focus since last August has been the explication of the art and science of persuasion, and I see buried in not so obscure a fashion within his seemingly rational approach to the subject lots of persuasive little machinations. So consider this explanation of his endorsement motive: People reading Scott’s blog entries might start getting and spreading the idea (he has a small but highly intelligent blog-fan base) that it’s dangerous to be pro-Trump, that certain groups of liberals (e.g., illegal immigrants?) might be every bit as much of a physical threat as hard-core red-neck conservatives are, and that choosing to support Hillary over The Don, especially because you might want to be safe from violence, is not perhaps so wise; i.e., there is a more or less equal danger from both sides. Consider all of that in light of the fact that Scott frequently conducts little word-experiments to judge reactions (he calls it A-B testing) or simply to see what might proceed from his odd proposals.

Add here into the mix the suggestions from Anonymous et al. that the conventions and events leading up to them are not going to be quite so peaceful as participants might like, and it’s somewhat easy to see how the issue of violence is a theme rife for exploitation. I’m doing just that right now. I want to see political violence, riots in the streets, physical clashes between right and left. Viva la revolution. I do not want to see business as usual for the next four or eight—or fifty—years. If we must have corruption, I want the elitists to suffer at the hands of a corrupted proletariat. Guillotines in the city parks. Mansions broken into, looted, and set ablaze. And, above all, political change. The oppression must end. The people are ready. Let’s rise up and overturn the regime. If Trump cannot do that, let him be elected so that he can become the scapegoat. Because Hillary is just more of the same, and Bernie is a hopeless case at this point, I am guessing. Unless, of course, Hillary crashes and burns as her sins of the past come back to bite her in her fat white pants-suited ass.

.