hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
Found a detailed writeup on its founder:
Unpacking the Great Reset & 15 minute tin foil tropes
- Thread starter Rob Ray
- Start date
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
Found a detailed writeup on its founder:
That's good but some factual mistakes in that though, for a start refers to 'The Stirrer' as Helen Steel's blog, which afaik it isn't, it the folks behind all the Essex Heckler stuff.
I stay away from communities of conspiracy theorists, not because of the actual conspiracy theories, but because it's their "solutions" that can sometimes be so totally bonkers, they're dangerous.
Just about any revelation is a conspiracy theory at some point.
Even if I think someone is wrong, I will listen to them, even a flat earther. I cut a moon landing conspiracy theorist short, when he tried to use social pressure on me by saying "What you actually believe the Americans went to the moon? LOL".
I think it's healthy to be taken in by conspiracy theory, to later be proved wrong. It's must be a humbling experience that forces people to review how they should investigate thoeries.
Joe Rogan admitted he was taken in by the moonlanding conspiracy theories. I haven't seen his full pod-cast to that and I would like to, because I would like to know how he dealt with it all once he realised he was wrong.
I think everyone at some point or other has been taken in by misinformation on the internet. But what worries me, is that while there are conspiracy theories I have dodged, that I haven't been taken in by (moon-landings, flat earth, 5G masts) .. I do admit, that I have no trust in the WEF and I do believe there is a conspiracy to form a one world government, ignoring democracy - And I constantly ask myself, if this is a conspiracy theory that I have been taken in by.
My point is, not so much what my views are, is that I should be humble enough to be deeply concerned that I haven't been through what Joe Rogan has been through.
I would rather be someone who has been taken in by a conspiracy theory, found I was wrong and learned from that mistake than someone who has never knowingly been made a fool out of a conspiracy theory.
And that's what I worry about. I've never accepted that I've been taken in by a conspiracy theory.
Anyway .. 15 minute cities.
No one is against the idea that city planners would put everything a person needs within 15 walk, that seems fair enough, it's a good thing.
What a sizeable chunk of the population are against, are cameras being put up all over the place to track the movement of vechicles.
Leaving aside the debate about whether the likes of the WEF are trying to imprison us all within 15 minute cities, the infrastrucutre would be in place for a future tyrant to restrict the movement of people - at least in my view.
One technology on it's own can be quite harmless, but the careless proliferation of centrally controlled combinations of technologies, is very bad.
ULEZ would be quite harmless on it's own ... but in combination with tech such CBDCs and centrally controlled AI - it's a future dictator's wet dream.
No one is against the idea that city planners would put everything a person needs within 15 walk, that seems fair enough, it's a good thing.
What a sizeable chunk of the population are against, are cameras being put up all over the place to track the movement of vechicles.
Leaving aside the debate about whether the likes of the WEF are trying to imprison us all within 15 minute cities, the infrastrucutre would be in place for a future tyrant to restrict the movement of people - at least in my view.
One technology on it's own can be quite harmless, but the careless proliferation of centrally controlled combinations of technologies, is very bad.
ULEZ would be quite harmless on it's own ... but in combination with tech such CBDCs and centrally controlled AI - it's a future dictator's wet dream.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
only 10 years after the infrastructure was put in place
They didn't see the threat 10 years ago. Now that they do, they are dismissed as "Conspiracy Theorists".
For me, the turning point was CBDCs. I wrote a letter to my MP (No I won't say which one) about my concerns with CBDCs and she simply said that CBDCs might not happen. That was a totally spineless response. Not even an insight as to whether my local MP thinks CBDCs are a good or bad thing, or whether my MP would vote for or against CBDCs given the chance.
ULEZ in principle ins't a bad thing, but IMHO it needs to be rebooted and done in such a way that is more protective of people's privacy and rights.
ULEZ can be done in such a way, that it's all encrypted beyond the reach of anyone, until such a time has elapased without payment .. then publicize the number plates of non-payers for everyone to see.
Should ANPR records be kept by anybody? 10 years ago, I didn't see the harm. Today? Fuck no, encrypt it and focus on the protection of people's rights as well as the environment.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
In fact it's rather more than 10 years ago as I was at the surveillance studies conference in Sheffield in 2008 and saw a presentation about anpr. It all stems from the decision during the poll tax that computer evidence was admissible in court
Oh I agree. And it's great that you've ashown concern for civil and digital rights for so long.
But there are valid concerns about what's being planned in places like Oxford.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
it's too late for all that, it's done and dusted. there is no way in hell you'll stop it now, not when it's so widespread around the country. not when so many cop vehicles are equipped with anpr devices. the battle has long ago been lost.
It's not too late. You wouldn't say to JSO, that we should continue drilling for oil because the planet is doomed.
Equally, we shouldn't keep putting up new cameras connected to crap centralised databases.
ANPR on it's own isn't bad. It's how it's implimented. The software and database behind ANPR can be rebuilt in such a way that protects people's rights and privacy.
That's the beauty of a certain tech that I keep telling you about, but you seem to think it's just some grift. It isn't. It's the ONLY way that we can protect everyone's privacy and rights digitally.
If someone isn't insured, then the ANPR itself has access to that info to let the fuzz know that they should be pulling someone over, but it should be technically impossible for ANYONE no matter their authority, to be able to trawl through the entire database or to be able to work out the movements of a car.
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
Ffs
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
As
Would Wayne Cousens have been caught if they hadn't been able to trawl through entire databases tracking his movements?
I assume that along with DNA matching the ability to track the movement of vehicles and their occupants makes it much harder for the likes of Sutcliffe and West and Robert Black to trawl the streets abducting and murdering women and children. I assume than Cousens could so easily be free to murder again, if we took your approach.
Would Wayne Cousens have been caught if they hadn't been able to trawl through entire databases tracking his movements?
I assume that along with DNA matching the ability to track the movement of vehicles and their occupants makes it much harder for the likes of Sutcliffe and West and Robert Black to trawl the streets abducting and murdering women and children. I assume than Cousens could so easily be free to murder again, if we took your approach.
Yes he would have been caught. The reason being is that it wasn't ANPR cameras that caught him out. Loads of private camera footage linked him and his vehicle.
His car was hired from a car hire firm and the police would have obtained a mountain of data from them. I would like to think / hope the car hire firm asked for a warrant for the data before such data was handed over.
All of that would have costed real money which was well spent to catch a killer.
The danger with ANPR connected to crap centralised databses that too many people have got access to, it's just begging to be linked up to some kind of digital currency or even the banking system, so that a future over-reaching state can fine people for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, being dressed wrong, walking across the street without a green man ... etc etc etc.
If it doesn't cost serious money to investigate and prosecute, the system is wide open to being used to persecute.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
I don't drive a car and I don't walk the streets wearing a number plate, so I can't see how I could be identified by an ANPR camera and fined for jaywalking or some horrendous sartorial faux pas.
I doubt you've never heard of facial recognition.
Centrally controlled cameras + Digital ID + CBDCs are a receipe for disaster.
It's the combination of that tech that if left unchecked, could have us sleep walk into a totalitarian nightmare.
I do not trust ANY of the
Last edited:
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
You don't get facially recognised by an ANPR camera, or at least that's not their primary objective, that's why they are called ANPR cameras: they track number plates. As far as facial recognition they are no better than of the other cameras, the ones you seem to be okay with.
ANPR cameras are a seperate issue.
You claimed that you would be OK, not your problem, because you're a pedestrian. I told you why it is all still a problem for you without mentioning ANPR cameras.
Digital passports and CBDCs are a problem for everyone including you.
I said I was OK with cameras when they was introduced 10 years ago. No one was pushing for digital passports and CBDCs back then.
Until we have safeguards, there shouldn't be new ANPR cameras or facial recognition cameras going up.
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
No, do you?
I can’t get into this now but Staker one does actually have a point with the above. facial recognition will doubtlessly improve. Ubiquitous surveillance is already here but then link that too automated systems and give access to unaccountable agencies access. Well who’s in favour of that.
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
The onward march of facial recognition tech
Thought I'd start this to keep a general track (and because it's a better use of my time than indulging Staker), now that mask wearing has declined and roll-out seems likely to accelerate. Prior related threads: San Fran cam ban (2019) | 50% of US adults in facial recognition databases (2016)...
www.urban75.net
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
Possibly, but StakerOne contradicts themself trying to make their point. It's also not clear if their concern is for people walking the street or vehicle owners,the interest in the latter crops up fairly late on after ramblings on the WEF and Oxford. As I said above, I'm very happy that video surveillance enables the likes of Cousens and Steve Wright to be taken off the roads and locked safely away, even though I don't relish the thought of Big Brother watching me.
Even if I did appear to contradict myself in some kind of crossed wire communication, none of that negates my over-arching argument.
I don't know if I'm posting this for the third or fourth time, but video surveillance in isolation isn't the problem.
What is a problem are the kind of technologies that are supported by the likes of the WEF, Blair, Hague and load of others, that would tie into such video surveilance systems to create a world where the cost of persecution is next to nothing.
I and my fellow "nutty lunatic conspiracy theorists" simply want safeguards against technologies that could be used to persecute dissent by a bad-actor, including even elected bad actors.
Can you not conceed that the cheaper it comes to persecute, those in power (regardless of their political colours) would get drunk on such power and persecute dissent?
tim
EXPLODED TIM! (Help me!!!)
The former was caught very quickly because surveillance technology enabled him to be identified. The latter murdered 13 women and attacked a further 7 before he was caught in the pre-surveillance era. It seems like a good argument for being able to monitor who drives where.
Elpenor
Dancing as fast as I can
And let’s be honest - plenty of people have video doorbells, cctv systems on their residential property, and dashcams. And most adults walk around with a camera in their pocket if not their hand
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
Couzens was not caught at any point in the five or six years after he was first reported for indecent exposure, despite the police being given the numberplate of the car he was using. I don't think "if only the police had more powers and technology, they would've been able to solve this otherwise unsolvable case" is the only lesson that can be drawn from the Sutcliffe case.
It isn't a good argument for being able to monitor who drives where. It's a good argument for keeping footage from cameras - basic surveilance technology.
He was identified from cameras that police thought were relevant to a crime. He wasn't caught because of some database of footage, he was caught because of the raw footage itself.
It's not like they said "This Couzens chap needs investigating lets find him through our surveilance database...", it was more of ... "Ah this camera on the A3 shows who the murder suspect is, let's enhance his mug and find out who he is..."
That would have cost ££££.
What would have made it cost next to nothing, is facial recognition and AI ... once they get into full swing, there's nothing from stopping a future overbearing state from simply fining people.
We are sleep walking into a world where a persons face can autiomatically be matched on a database, for an AI to automatically scour the database to see what you've been up to and then decide whether anything you are doing is "suspect" and take automatic action, for instance preventing you from doing anything like travelling until you can tell the AI why you was doing what you did then take appropriate action. You could appeal, but that costs money and you will need someone to put up a bond for you if you don't have the money to compensate the government if you lose.
Zero trust. Zero cost enforcement.
If you think what the tories are doing is bad now, wait till you see what ANY government would do with that kind of power. You only need look to China.
All over the world, there are certain types of people, who love all of this shite. To them, there is a certain allure of full spectrum control over citizens, one of them being zero crime. But with all of that, comes zero tollerence of dissent or even the exchange of ideas.
With all of that, just about the only police there would be is some kind of snatch squad directed by an overbearing, all seeing AI.
Similar threads
