We have been observing and monitoring an increase in states’ adoption of authoritarian practices and policies. These practices are facilitated by new and emerging technologies or embodied in their very deployment to stifle dissent, assert control and diminish human rights.
  • pineapple@lemmy.mlEnglish
    0·
    11 hours ago

    Advocating for privacy without class consciousness ultimately leads to nothing.

  • JLD@lemmy.zip
    0·
    1 day ago

    I spent months speaking up against this, and I learned something sad: nobody cares. So now the way I think about it is that apathy leads to its own punishment. It’s depressing.

    • custom_username@reddthat.com
      0·
      23 hours ago

      I feel like the average person is too obsessed with convenience and/or not smart enough to draw certain technologies to their logical conclusions. At least you’ll be able to say “yeah I warned you about that 10 years ago”.

    • JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.socialEnglish
      0·
      1 day ago

      I suspect that the ‘apathy’ thing might be more complex than appears on the surface. For example, there might be a certain amount of mental self-protection going on there, even though that probably sounds paradoxical in terms of taking vital action against a future surveillance state.

      • JLD@lemmy.zip
        0·
        22 hours ago

        I understand, but now I am the one protecting my mental health. I won’t be a proxy anymore. Instead I’ll take out my popcorn and watch the collapse.

          • eldavi@lemmy.mlEnglish
            0·
            3 hours ago

            Sick of warning everyone who won’t listen.

            welcome to the club. lol

            my version is w politics and apathy ABSOLUTELY is the main driver, but like @[email protected] i’m not a marxist so popcorning it is an option to me too; but unfortunately my familiarity with marxism makes me aware it’s going to bite me in the ass like it will my neighbor.

  • cpbsy@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    1 day ago

    From the article:

    Key findings

    • In both democratic and authoritarian contexts, technologies are being deployed in ways that erode, and in some cases effectively dismantle, human rights.
    • Technology use risks facilitating or amplifying repressive practices and systems, and becoming an instrument of authoritarian governance.
    • Surveillance technologies are being expanded and entrenched with the purpose of exerting control over entire populations and/or specific groups of people such as journalists and human rights defenders.
    • The authoritarian use of technology is ultimately having a ‘chilling effect’.
    • Some technologies are disproportionately intrusive by design and should not be used.
    • Technologies’ use is often incompatible with the rule of law, lack redress and raise mass impunity risks.
    • A lack of transparency facilitates the authoritarian use of technologies.