• TehPers@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Are you sure? Those seem like the only two options to me. Clearly the purpose of the article is to convince people to feed their children to the rich.

      Seriously, I’ve seen an increase in these weirdly extremist comments recently. One would have to wonder if they are the ones serving another’s interests.

      • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 minute ago

        I don’t think anything Onno said is “extremist”, I just think it’s so vague that what they think might be happening is indecipherable. Makes it more likely to be rage/engagement bait, imo.

        But it’s not extreme to think that perhaps, given the current anti-anonymity push among governments worldwide, and the fact this uses DHTs and P2P routing, governments might love to tarnish those things in peoples’ minds in order to more readily accept banning of bittorrent, onion routing, TOR, etc, which can help bypass a lot of the dangerous government net restrictions and surveillance being put in place.

        Do you think that government intrusion into media, or the existence of online influence campaigns, are “extremist” conspiracies rather than proven realities?

        • searabbit@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          51 minutes ago

          Maybe the interests we serve are the friends we made serving another’s interests along the way…to serve interests? Or something like that