First, our understanding of political risk has to change. We are no longer dealing with actors who are constrained by norms, expectations, or even basic human decency.
Second, the institutional safeguards that we assumed would provide protection look increasingly fragile. If those in power are willing to ignore them, their effectiveness is limited. They have, quite literally, thrown the international rules-based order aside. So far, there is nothing to replace it.
Third, the psychological impact is real. Living with the possibility of extreme events, including those we once thought impossible, alters how people think, act, and relate to one another.
And fourth, inequality and exploitation are likely to deepen. When crises are used as opportunities for enrichment, the costs are borne by the many, while the gains accrue to the few.”
Relieved that genocide had not happened in Iran, @richardjmurphy@mas.to regards opposition to the promotion of fear and hate as the only means by which we can hold on to our sanity and prevent political failure.
“Here’s me in the UK, which is probably the least prepared country in the world for an energy price crisis, right? Massively dependent on imported energy, hasn’t built up its own energy storage, doesn’t have an enormous amount of reserves of energy like other countries like Japan or Korea have, which it probably should have done, and yet when there is an energy price crisis, what happens to me? I make hundreds of thousands of pounds because I own the energy. If you are watching from America and you are paying more for energy, despite the fact that there is a fuck-ton of oil in your country, that’s because you don’t own your oil, I do. And the point I’m trying to make here is when I come out here every fucking week and tell you guys ‘You need to care about wealth distribution’, it’s not because I am some fucking communist tree-hugging hippie. It is because if you do not own your resources, then when the price of the resources go up, you are fucked.”
“But when you frame it that way, you understand that social media isn’t the problem: the extractive profit motive is the problem. And then, banning under-16s is like putting a plaster on a bullet wound. Sure, maybe it helps a bit, but you’re still bleeding out. The real question is, how do you stop the bullets?”
“Treating people as things can begin in many ways, but I think one of them is the idea that things can be people. The motivated muddling of categories so prevalent in writing and thinking about AI, beginning with the very name ‘artificial intelligence’, is intentional and serves the narrative that this software can and will take over for human workers, doing their jobs cheaper, faster, better and without requiring rest or dignity. The AI industry is selling a dream of digital slavery—infinite human labor with no actual human involved.”
“Replace ‘:poke’ with ‘Pokémon,’ or save some time by replacing ‘:greeting’ with a stock email template. That’s the basic idea, but Espanso goes much further. It’s one of the most powerful utilities I’ve used, and if you’re willing to do a bit of legwork to set it up properly, it can be one of the most powerful tools on your PC, too”, writes Jacob Roach.
If you have previously installed from apt.syncthing.net and are currently running Syncthing 1.x, upgrading to the stable-v2 channel is straightforward.
“A society cannot meaningfully debate policy, science or justice if information is locked away behind paywalls or controlled by proprietary algorithms. If we allow AI companies to profit from mass appropriation while claiming immunity, we are choosing a future in which access to knowledge is governed by corporate power rather than democratic values.” Bruce Schneier warns of a future in which access to knowledge is subordinate to corporate interests.
“Das Asylrecht setzt voraus, dass wir das Leid anderer als rechtlich relevant anerkennen. Wenn Empathie politisch diskreditiert wird, verliert das Recht seine Basis. Die Asylpolitik der Gegenwart lebt von dieser Empathieverweigerung. Sie setzt auf Distanz, auf administrative Neutralisierung. Wer Zuständigkeits- und Zulässigkeitsregeln so ausbaut, dass bereits die Möglichkeit der Antragstellung zur Odyssee wird, stiehlt sich aus der menschenrechtlichen Verantwortung. Insofern ist die deutsche und europäische Entwicklung der Abschaffung des Asyls nicht nur ein juristischer, sondern ein anthropologischer Vorgang. Die Diskussion soll unser Bild der asylsuchenden Personen verändern. Sie werden als gefährliche Regelbrecher gelabelt und ihr Schutzbedarf dadurch unsichtbar gemacht. Diese Entwicklung ist gefährlicher als jede Verfassungsänderung.” Constantin Hruschka beschreibt den Rechtsbruch als Beweis der staatlichen Souveränität mit den sich daraus ergebenden Folgen für unsere Demokratie.
