dan_bk

> this could easily lead people to re-evalute their life choices in a more permanent manner than normal

What if more people would realize that they're constantly being controlled by fear created by commercial and governmental interests? This loss of power probably contributes to the fact that such substances are mostly banned.

At the same time, no EU country has the courage to do what Switzerland is discussing now (Germany's Merkel has even publicly refused to even discuss the matter). This is one reason why it is also a good thing to NOT have every country join the EU - centralize power and it becomes very interesting as a target for corruption.

How is any of that relevant? Completely off-topic.

Your forgot

5) PROFIT !

Because that is what this is all about (excessive wealth == power).

> On top of the browser I use these add-ons to reduce tracking further; also, note that private browsing mode and the do not track setting will not stop you from being tracked.

(Almost) nobody can escape the tracking, as long as fingerprinting remains possible: https://panopticlick.eff.org/

Google's/Facebook's/Twitter's JS scripts are literally on every site. Fingerprinting allows them to increase their ROI since it builds more precise profiles on you. The advertising industry is happy and the government is happy. So forget about them not fingerprinting you.

> Yes, this is a dummy account; my regular account here has 4497 karma, but is linked to my real name.

Are you aware of browser/device fingerprinting? [0] Technology (i.e. we) has/have killed privacy (unless you take extreme steps to protect it).

[0] https://panopticlick.eff.org/

Remember all the "act-surprised-and-disgusted" posts of these involved companies, right after Snowden had started his revelations? Personally, I remember Zuckerberg's "What the F#ck" post very well.

> there are thousands of amazing plugins

It would be excellent if they were compatible with Lime...

The UK spends $12 million [0] of tax payer money just to monitor this 1 person. I do think that's stupid, but they are probably not stupid enough to let him slip through, after all this.

[0] http://rt.com/news/178276-assange-police-cost-embassy/

> 76 points and no comments?

This could very well be the effect of the recent proof that everybody is effectively under surveillance now (it's called "the Chilling Effect").

> Our investigation found that many of the companies are involved with a web of powerful multiple data broker partners who, unknown to the EU public, pool their data on individuals so they can be profiled and targeted online.

I would like to see the consumers' faces the day they understand that companies like Google have been tracking their every step on the Web via background requests to Google's properties such as Google Analytics - for ages.

You don't even need to go as far as the Seychelles to dodge taxes - there's the inter-state tax dodging version called "Delaware" (although the incentive is a bit weaker).

> a certain degree of internal propaganda going on in US media

The movie industry is one of the very powerful tools for shaping the public opinion in the US. This obviously includes TV series ("24" is an example for not-so-subtle manipulative material).

The arguing is just 1 variable in the system. It was bound to happen because it was caused by other variables (i.e. us being online, someone posting the article, etc.) and it will interact with other variables to lead to some amount of change. It's not something that "we control". (Our brains do, but they are the result of other variables, such as our genome, environment, etc.)

Let's put it like this:

My explanation would be only 1 variable in your system (out of an infinity of others, if you assume that you can always continue to "zoom in").

Now, if that 1 variable does anything to your decisions or not depends on all the other variables as well, i.e.: You may have gotten a very religious education which may lead you to accept beliefs put forth by other as "the truth", without questioning. Since one major point of religion is "free will", I'm not sure "my explanation" would do anything to your decision making.

> If its true, it has no effect.

As discussed, it would mean, for example, that we cannot judge anyone (and at the same time claim to be rational).

To give an example: The death penalty should no longer exist, because it is solely "justified" by judgement along the lines of "person X is evil and therefor doesn't deserve to live". There are no evil people, only people who do what they have to do, given the variables in "their system". That means there should be no "punishment", but emotionally neutral measures to prevent the suffering from happening again (i.e. locking the person up). It's pretty clear to me that a much more humane society will be the result of this understanding. And who wouldn't want that?

Edit: "rational" in the sense of "logical".

I don't convince, I argue.

If the logic has a flaw, please let me know, I'm interested in being as close to the "truth" as possible.

Yes, we can!

All there needed to be was for the handful of initial variables that were set at the "beginning of our universe" to have such values that their interaction over time would lead us to rational thinking and therefor our understanding that there is no "free" will.

Simply put: If I explain to you why free will is an illusion and you stop judging, then it wasn't a "free" will. It was a cause-and-effect situation.

> If there is no free will then watching the universe over time is just like playing back a movie, maybe with some unpredictable plot twists due to randomness.

Yes, rational thinking dictates exactly this conclusion (the apparent randomness being introduced by our current understanding of quantum physics).

> And while I think that there is no free will [...] in everyday life I just keep pretending I have free will.

Well, Rome wasn't built in one day. Our whole culture was built upon the illusion of "free will" (same goes for other beliefs like magic, gods, etc). It's a good exercise to remind oneself about this when we get all worked up over something or somebody.

That's an easy one:

If somebody explains you the reason why judging does not make any sense and you understand it and apply it to your life, then it wasn't "free will". It was causality - you're doing it because of a "variable" (the explanation) that was part of your "system". Obviously, there is a huge number of other variables participating in your decision, not just one, and you could track them on a micro level (molecular) as well as on an macro level (i.e. your family, friends, wealth, etc.).

Not sure I understand your question correctly.

We should stop judging.

Because nobody has been able to show "free will" is more than just another belief (as in religion) and it is therefor no basis for rational discussion. And if free will does not exist, our concepts of "merit" (on the positive side) or "guilt" (on the negative side) are worthless and should be abolished.

That's why there should be no judging at all.

(Note: No judging does not mean nobody goes to prison for crime. It simply means we must redefine "punishment" as "a neutral sanction" or better: "protection from happening again".)

If you want humanity to progress then you should encourage critical and rational reflection. It's the capacity of thinking which society often lacks.

Exactly my thought as well.

I believe we keep telling us stories about a "free will" because we're afraid of that thought because we misinterpret it. Most people answer unreflected things like "that would be like living in a prison". Also we have learned to judge everything and everyone. How can we expect people to completely drop all kinds of judgement?

Wow, that was flagged off the frontpage quickly...

Friendly reminder - there's a free, pro-privacy and open-source solution available:

http://piwik.org/

> This is exciting.

Not really convinced about that. What's important/exciting should be what we do about it, not how many messengers we have. We really have enough information by now to know what's at stake. Meanwhile, if you remember a couple of months back, the NSA sent out an internal memo stating that they simply intend to "winter the storm", and that seems to be what's happening until now (besides a few more or less symbolical proposals from the gov't).

> [...] it will encourage more whistleblowers.

Not convinced either. Again, we already know that deep changes would be needed. Also, whistleblowers, in this case, are obviously ready to die for their cause. There are not many people like that. And the World's support for people like Snowden has been completely absent or at least appallingly weak. And then, there's the fact that the NSA is currently in a huge lock-down process, which makes me think we won't see another Snowden, when this is done. That's why I believe, either there is change now or pretty much never.

The final stopgap should always be rational thought.

> Mr. Zuckerberg retorted that he preferred to think about it as an “on-ramp to the Internet”

And the gov't of course welcomes the initiative as it lifts the rest of the world onto the surveillance platform.

Is USD 1.00-2.00 really enough of an incentive for people to do this (instead of keeping the Stellars), considering they (normally) can do this only once (b/c 1 FB account)?

(Edit: it seems more likely to me that, if this was done over MT, the people working on MT were in turn using botnets for scale.)

And if he wouldn't be in shackles, he would probably not stay alive for very long, considering what kind of concentrated power he has exposed (and let's not forget the fact that probably have of the population have been brainwashed to think he's the traitor).