1

Topic: Made to measure: Should we even share more information?

Dear all,

we all leave data within the global network, when we search or generic navigate through the global network and its amount of different services. Should we bother with the data left behing? We should for sure bother and think about that. Because the reasoning is easy: When is the point reached where all this data can be used against us?

The first and direct question: Do we really need more complex web-browsers?
The personal answer for me would be a direct NO. The world-wide web is just one of so many more services for sure. But we leave there the big amount of data. The more kind of convinience is implemented into the web-browsers the more kind of security-vectors are to see. The simple reasoning: More complex web-browsers need more dependencies with more structures and even more possible security-holes. How many libraries, how many frameworks, how many programming-languages in general until the point is reached for a breach? You can mulitply all of that for sure and the web-standards are so complicated until even now, that it is more and more getting impossible to implement another "complete" engine for accessing the world-wide web. Modern websites are defined with so much bloat these days while their elementary content is nevertheless just "text". But therefore: Animations, more not-optimized graphics, more video-input and with all of that also more dynmics in the background. The load of inbound javascript is so much beyond anything and make those websites horrific in the view of privacy and security. Why even bother to have web-browsers following this kind of way down? The answer is just the convinience of users.

Yes, breach of privacy and data is not seen direct, is not recognized direct. And nevertheless everyone will be not amused when personal data can be used against the own self. Just an easy but known concept: You share everything from your daily life, from your daily insights throughout services. And when somebody is following you throughout those websites and reconstruct a profile about you, your hobbies, your problems, your preferred way to do many other things? Too many ignore that nevertheless and the dangers coming: What about companies? Have you thought what companies can do with all the data? You don't think Meta and many others just archive all they can get, for "later".

This brings us to the next dimension: The right of being a "Ghost", is it needed?
First things first, to make clear: To name somebody direct as "Ghost" is not friendly and even though it is for me speaking a direct insult. In the concept of the global network and all those services included I think it is absolute correct that everyone has the right to be some kind of "Ghost". Not to be found. You have the right to choose what kind of information can be found or even if any kind of information should be found. But we should also immediately stop with thinking the other way around: Just because any kind of individual person is not found it does not mean the person has no history or has not done anything. That's the major point: We have reached the the point where we even measure personally. When a person is found with profiles on whatever kind of services it seems the person has done "things", engaged within "things". Can I review that? Can anyone approve that? Not possible. But nevertheless the impression is all that counts and so to name others "Ghost" is unfriendly as they prefer not to share more insights. We cannot and should never enforce that as we help to breach elementary points of respect. I'm not befriended with the whole world of humans and I don't want that, not just because there are enough groups and individuals out there willing to do harm to me. It is just stress and we forget about the worth of information, the complexity of it, the ways to help, the ways to even use language and words, their beauty and our possibility of expression for emotions and thoughts. Do we really think all can be shortened around in some nonsense meme-imagery and round about 280 signs? We try to simplify, but complex information is not possible to be simplified. So I say: Yes, everyone has the right to be invisible. Be careful what you share, what kind of sites you are using and what kind of services you trust.

Do yourself and everyone else a favor and do the best possible: Yes, kind of activism is needed for many things. But don't you think it is better to do instead of speaking about it? Where is the need to make images and summarize even every single aspect of your personal life? You breach not only your own privacy in the end, you breach it also for everyone else. You don't think so? Well, we can speak again when there is a need to have accounts at services like Facebook for example, or any other kind of platform comparable to share "insights".

The answer for question within th title from myself is therefore: No, we should not even share more information. We need to stop that.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

2

Re: Made to measure: Should we even share more information?

Some packages you should count in for Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre:

privoxy
dnscrypt-proxy
3proxy
squid

But this is just a summary of possible packages being available. There are definitely more and we should collect them also!
Technical emancipation means to protect and secure, not within quantity but quality. And better to answer the following question mostly with EVERYTHING: What do you have to hide?

Not everyone should know everything from an individual. For a democracy this is not a good situation. Yes, open data and open communication is another point. But this is meant for ALL people to attend within political discussions, to know the background of a decision to make. We speak here about personal data of every individual and when we go further that concurrent way this will not end good.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

3

Re: Made to measure: Should we even share more information?

It seems that more and more, communities are held within these hyper exposed regions of the web. Corporations will always outspend community-based technology, and so draw the majority there. But in time, there will be viable community solutions, there are people working on it. It will probably be impossible to get everyone off corporate media, but it is possible to make a thriving refuge.

for general troubleshooting: I'm running Hyperbola on a GPD MicroPC, my deblobbed firmwares are iwlwifi (I use a USB wifi adapter instead) and Bluetooth (which I don't miss because it is a security hazard) as well as i915 DMC firmware (which I can safely ignore) and the r8169 but my ethernet works perfectly (maybe even improved)

4

Re: Made to measure: Should we even share more information?

Yes, but I'm bit worried also because too many projects like Diaspora or Mastodon promised something they would never keep: Digital emancipation. That would be only possible if people recognize the major problem within all those platforms and "sharing" information. In the end there is no difference within open or closed platform for that. Better we work on places like here: Inform each other and discuss points to bring the global society forward with preserving information and data, but for common use. wink

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

5

Re: Made to measure: Should we even share more information?

I've lost my Hyperbola system. One can however contact via XMPP and tutanota mail. I highly recommend that you target some proper publicly available hardware. As usual, the direction Hyperbola goes in, I love it. It should however be extremely easy to set up. Like buying an embedded board or laptop and flashing an img file on sd card or as hyperinstaller helps installing it.

There's horrible IoT which essentially bugs everything everywhere! It's crazy the amount of control some governments are going for. There must be a solution which helps people take their own decision and yet allow governments to rule and make sure security is provided for everyone!

Law is a much wider and general thing than copyleft which is enforced by copyright under law. If we correct law clauses to ensure that evil are separated away from group and penalized and the righteous get support and increase in number atleast till critical mass, we'll have corrected the issues.

Let us adopt systems which allow us as well as others maximum freedom.

6

Re: Made to measure: Should we even share more information?

I strongly agree that in the digital chaos we live in, we must protect our lives, data and furthermore to retain our way of thinking, Post-modern capitalism is unable to provide people even the basics anymore. So, as the rich and powerful need to retain their status quo, and because the are afraid of possible revolutions, are trying through corporations and the state (that they usually have under their control) to control what people are thinking.
That is what all this algorithms are all about. To make people forget the real issues, war, hunger, instability, climate change etc.

Capitalism in the 50s was at least providing people with a real house and family. 70 years later, even in the "advanced world" it can only provide all this only as digital content (like Facebook's  metaverse).

But even with so much surveillance and corporate control, there are people still willing to fight back.

For me it is really important to fight both individually and collectively.  For example, to fight climate change we must stand against big companies and corrupted governments who only care about profit, They are the big polluters and no "green new deal" is a viable solution. That doesn't mean though that we shouldn't try to reduce waste and try to recycle as much as we can. Even as symbolic gestures our way of life educate our family, our friends, our neighbors and most importantly is keeping our heart pure and our mind active.

In the digital world, it feels that we must do the same. Resisting big tech means fighting against their dominance in our societies, but it also means to reject their software and influence in our own lives. In all this, hyperbola is really a beacon of hope...

As a father, it also has a deeper meaning for me. How I interact with the world, in real life and by using technology, is also shaping my kids views about he world. Not providing them with tablets and smartphones would be unfair if I and my partner were using them. Using free software means we are providing them with an ethical choice about technology and life in general. Using less "social media" also means we have more time to interact with each other and with the world around us.

let them build as many prisons as they want.
Even if the siege is closing in around us.
Our mind is like a wanderer, and will always be free.

7

Re: Made to measure: Should we even share more information?

Well, in the end I think it is about the choice and knowledge: The chaos results within the point our more technological day is making our perspective more and more focussing onto the false balances out there. As to think we miss something when we don't post or share something, as to think we need to "talk" instead to discuss. When looking into the platforms it is just that: People don't talk to each other, they talk foremost only with their "digital alter ego" and think this is any kind of "conversation" or "discussion". Nobody else did this to us, we haven chosen that. But this is for sure not irreversible, so we can go back. Also those "gifts" from companies: Are they needed? Not really, we can do different. So I think a possible way is to teach each other more about the smallest part: Friendships, relationships, families and groups. They can all fit into the puzzle to get a way more complex society back into the point where conversation matters. For now we have missed for sure the train and point. That's a big problem, because it gets worse for sure based onto our decisions. But we have also the choice to do different! smile

And just to underline: It is us in the decision. No one else is responsible for the outcome. When we decide to attack others being active for another, better tomorrow without any kind of reasoning? Is is us. When we use newest hardware and non-free applications without questioning? It is us. When we get pragmatic about non-free "presents" and clear problematic open-sourced projects? It is us and no one else. When we use questionable licenses? Well, same. The point is just that: Either we do different, find the possible sideways (and for sure they are there) or we should clearly look into the direction we are heading. We have given away responsibility into questionable organisations and think it is remarkable to follow them. Just us, no one else! wink

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!