pull down to refresh
141 sats \ 5 replies \ @Gar 4 Dec 2023 \ on: deleted by author meta
General purpose computers. (I hope I'm wrong)
I've had this thought recently. It's the logical outcome of where things are headed currently (anti encryption, anti open source, anti free speech, etc)
reply
I feel ya. Very possible that rulers will want to do this. I think of it as it very similar to how states want to restrict guns to non-military grade weapons. Even though the logic there is flawed as well as the history being ignored.
Anyone that is a supporter of freedom should not only support the right to bear arms but the right to bear technology. They are connected. Its my view that the best way to preserve and defend a right is to exercise it. Use encryption. Use firearms. Use General purpose computers, and use Bitcoin.
reply
Hmmm. You've got my attention. Why do you think that?
reply
Well, with a general purpose computer, one can do their own public key cryptography. This represents a very powerful capability for the individual.
Modern cryptography was once classified by the US government as a munition and sanctioned for export.
Of course we won that battle in the crypto wars of the 1990s thanks to some very brave nerds who saw the importance of it. Have we won the war though?
One can detect the trend where computers are becoming more and more curated and controlled walled gardens. Phones and tablets are locked down and Windows and Macs are becoming more and more so. Apps are getting canceled from app stores. Could they someday outright prohibit some apps? Ban running your own software?
Sure seems like some in power would like that capability.
I could envision some future dystopia where TSA wonders what kind of troublemaker I am because I have a linux laptop with a LUKS partition.
"What do you you use this for sir?"
I could be running my own large language model on there with computing capacity of 10^23 integer or floating-point operations per second or other such prohibited naughtiness.
reply
You have hit on a great parallel.
reply