Next, let’s move onto to the next lesson: institutional corruption. Now listen up, because this is an important one. It concerns the corrupting influence of money. When organisation A (Mozilla) gets all of its money from organisation B (Google) that creates influence…https://twitter.com/aral/status/979235466330476545 …
-
-
Show this thread
-
The thing is, if Google stops paying Mozilla ~ half a billion dollars/year, Mozilla goes bankrupt. In common parlance, this is referred to as Mozilla being Google’s bitch. But even if Mozilla wasn’t entirely funded by surveillance capitalism, any funding would be influence…https://twitter.com/aral/status/979236018665730049 …
Show this thread -
Now look at how Mozilla positions itself: a not-for-profit working to protect privacy, human rights, & democracy in the digital age. Hmm, and it gets all its money from one of the biggest threats to privacy, human rights, & democracy in the digital age. Can you say “whitewash?”https://twitter.com/aral/status/979236834046894080 …
Show this thread -
What if Greenpeace got half a billion dollars from Exxon Mobil every year and would go bankrupt if it couldn’t get paid by the fossil fuel industry. Would you be as naïvely trusting of it too? And the issue of institutional corruption goes far beyond Mozilla…https://twitter.com/aral/status/979237747796869120 …
Show this thread -
Institutional corruption is the reason we cannot regulate toxic corporations effectively. The same influence of corporate finance that taints Mozilla also taints public policymaking via lobbying and revolving doors.https://twitter.com/aral/status/979238418122190848 …
Show this thread -
In the Brussels bubble, for example, it’s hard – in the words of Orwell – to differentiate the pigs from the humans sometimes.https://twitter.com/aral/status/979239312834334721 …
Show this thread -
Given that institutional corruption is an existential risk to democracy, to have a
@Piratenpartei MEP’s assistant label criticism of it as “libertarianism” is either the product of extreme naïveté or, quite frankly, both highly baffling and hugely worrying. Class dismissed.https://twitter.com/aral/status/979240643036884992 …Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
As much as I agree with you on Mozilla & the rest of the Google/fb/Uber/airbnb/Microsoft, etc., funded privacy advocates like access now & those attending RightsCon for their piece of the pie, I'd like to see you walk in to the Cato Institute and look for your fellow "leftists".
-
For the purposes of this discussion, I think you’re better off separating between Libertarians (Cato and Mercatus) and civil libertarians (ACLU and EFF). You will find plenty of left-leaning folks among the civil libertarian crowd.
-
You are right, that is a fact. But as said, the dicussion is political and has to be conceptually grounded, with the precisions this demands. The fact that we are largely speaking about American politics, gives me the first clue to addressing this debate and the notion of "left".
-
Apologies, since we were using the US-based Cato as the basis for comparison, I used other American orgs. That said, Kaer either has no idea what “libertarian” means or just using as generic smear as
@Aral argument re: Mozilla/Google/FB had nothing to do with it -
Yes, I ge the nuances there. I was provoked by the notion of "leftist" libertarian, not the more obvious Mozilla whitewash comment. But these are interestingly intersecting topics, when you think about how privacy advocates politicize tech, vs someone like Morozov, for example.
-
That is a truly fascinating intersection of debate. Don’t always agree with him, but Morozov is brilliant & for years asked questions nobody else was. FWIW -I lean toward the only American branch of philosophy, Pragmatism, and have an allergy to strict ideologies.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
wew lad since when is someone calling out surveillance capitalism something that a right libertarian would do? surveillance voluntarily solicited through EULA doesn't violate the NAP. christ, are libertarians all shittier now? (t. former very serious read everything ancap)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I am not sure, let’s ask you some questions right back to determine that. Would you argue any payment corrupts Mozilla (we’re not talking theory, you’re making very concrete accusations), regardless of their actions?
-
Your money and 100 millions others money like you wouldn’t corrupt Mozilla. 1 only powerful entity giving you the money for your existence, they can do whatever they see fit with Mozilla. They would impose Mozilla their own concept of privacy. It’s just simple math and economics.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.