@veo_analizo2 Cuidado, se te pueden salir los pocos pensamientos por los ojos, de tanto ver. (Se te ve la ignorancia).
El arte imita la vida, La vida se inspira en el arte.
Ya si no entiendes eso, pues tas igual mijo.
@SirMichaelRocks Not magic, politics; agnotology.
Research what the majority ignores or takes for granted, and profit for it.
Don't make sudden changes, use the boiling frog thingy (Gradually changes).
Leadership 101, but current forms of governments are the opposite of good leadership.
El oligarca le paga al influencer para que te convenza de que votes al político que favorece al oligarca.
Y tú le votas porque eres un librepensador y a ti nadie te engaña.
Prohibition didn't stop drinking. It created the mafia.
The war on drugs didn't stop drug use. It filled prisons and funded cartels.
Banning encryption won't stop secrets. It'll just make criminals out of citizens.
This is the oldest pattern in civilization: ban a fundamental human behavior and watch it go underground. The behavior doesn't disappear. It just becomes dangerous, unregulated, and controlled by the worst people instead of the best.
Privacy is a fundamental behavior. People have always whispered. Always kept things from others. Always kept parts of their lives separate from other parts. This isn't deviance, it's architecture. The human psyche requires rooms with doors.
When governments push to ban strong encryption, mandate backdoors, or outlaw privacy tools, they're not preventing crime. They're creating a world where only criminals have privacy because criminals don't follow bans.
Law-abiding people surrender their encryption keys. Criminals don't. Law-abiding people use KYC exchanges. Criminals don't. Law-abiding people comply. Criminals route around.
The result? The people who need privacy most - journalists, dissidents, abuse survivors, activists - lose it. The people doing actual harm were never using compliant systems anyway.
Every privacy ban is a prohibition. And every prohibition creates the exact underworld it claimed to prevent.
The alternative: build privacy into infrastructure so well that it's not a choice. Not a political stance. Not suspicious behavior. Just how the system works.
The way cash always worked.
Iran X California
What I still can’t connect the dots on is this: Iran hasn’t attacked a single U.S. Navy ship that’s only 750 km from its coast, well within range of at least three anti-ship missiles.
The truth is that during few occasions, the US aircraft carrier was as close as 350 km to the Iranian coast.
At similar distances in Yemen, there were daily swarms, which even launched Sayyad and Quds Z-0 missiles with an 800 km range, and this has been confirmed in reports.
Iran probably didn’t because it knows that sinking an American warship would trigger massive public outrage in the U.S. and dramatically increase support for war.
If Iran didn’t dare attack ships just 750 km away, why on earth would it attack California, which is 12,000 km away?
In a war that the US is who is under insane pressure from Arab countries and the financial markets?
@pizzakei1@ShitpostRock2 Im with ya.
But take it easy, is not the majority (i mean, hopefully) and if you know any of their culture you will be familiar with terms like "honne" and "tatemae".
@SprinterPress Does anyone remember the drone fiasco over New Jersey? looking back at it, could be that they were training for precisely this: a false flag operation.
That or they will blame the cartels and start bombing Mexico.
@Max_Priegoo@LevelUPcom No es para proteccion de nadie, vea ejemplos como los de Reino unido, donde activamente se arrestan a personas por post de facebook u otras redes sociales.
No es proteccion, es control y vigilancia.
Iran WAS a democracy
Until the CIA overthrew the democratically elected president and reinstated the dictator
Who was then overthrown by the people
And that's when the Islamists took power-- in the vacuum
If you don't know those facts at the bare minimum, stfu about the war