jizzy [any]
That would require an alternative to capital with which change can be affected, and that doesn’t really exist. You can point to some amount of collective conscious coming out of online discussion, but it’s not worth jack shit in a situation where Capital has decided to invest.
That only matters if you care. I do not care one bit if people stalk me so much that they can dox me. I can’t be easily hurt under capitalism. I’m not going to make it easy for anyone and I don’t think anyone would care enough to stalk me to that extent but if they do then have at it.
Profesionally, our counsel suggested filing criminal charges federally and it’s likely we’ll be proceeding this way.
Sounds like a decent but elaborate troll, I think this line gives it away too much.
I’m also not sure what legal recourse they actually have. Nobody forced them to update their dependencies without checking them. What crimes exactly are broken by an open source developer modifying a package to do something like this? If their modifications otherwise broke this NGO’s data collection/deleted files by accident, is the developer liable? Almost certainly not, I haven’t checked node-ipc’s license but I don’t think you can spin a CFAA charge if the code is open and the developer is free to modify as they see fit…
For one of my jobs, I worked for a foreign company as a consultant and my actual job title in English in their HR system/email signature was “Superior Talent” - I guess to remind the trogs in their employ that they had failed and required external resources to get things done.
Found the badge lol https://i.imgur.com/niNXkiQ.png
Capitalists, particular in the US, love to dunk on Revolutions which had purges of any kind (even the very inoffensive purge of Batista-loyalists in the early years of the Cuban Revolution). Or state censorship of any variety.
They’re deliberately missing the point, by avoiding any meaningful discussion of what rights to autonomy a Communist state has. Ignoring the historical context in which the US invests billions upon billions of dollars in anti-Communist, pro-capital propaganda in these countries to the point where it’s necessary for the state to clamp down. Absent massive amounts of buying power/capital, what mechanism does a state have to fight incredibly well-financed, insidiously crafted and emotionally exploitative foreign propaganda? The only option is force, which the capitalists then decry as inhumane… I have a background in developing anti-censorship software, so I usually surprised people when I’m very neutral on Chinese state censorship (even today, in the very much not-Communist PRC).
Naturally, I make similar concessions for removing those financed by foreign capital. And I understand the deep paranoia that this stuff breeds. It’s hard to allow a “marketplace of ideas” the closer in time you are to the Revolution, because it’s impossible for the Revolutionaries to tell if you’re just a harmless thinker misled by capitalist propaganda, someone who is genuinely worse off under communism because you were part of an oppressive class or just because you were a skilled labourer, or if you’re an asset of foreign capital. It breeds deep paranoia which I think persists in the policies of states which shouldn’t really be considered communist any longer. It has a lasting effect essentially, PRC and Russia are good examples of post-Communist states with lasting censorship regimes.
Things are reasonably going to be unstable post-Revolution, capital will immediately seize on that uncertainty to propagandize a population with the best outcomes of capitalism, and the state very naturally lacks the tools to combat that with 0 use of force. But the truth is much harder for most people to accept: Those capitalist states are naturally unsustainable and do as much as possible to obfuscate the human suffering inherent both domestically and within insidious neocolonial if not outright colonial systems of enslavement.