The very internet is bourgious

How can we win when we are chained to proprietary networks that charge outrageous fees for meager, controlled and censored internet access?

Attached: 33546.jpg (2272x1704, 783.35K)

Other urls found in this thread:

You're speaking my language, brother

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (2500x1250, 3.18M)

We cant but keep in mind that america is ridiculously bad. Most first world countries have cheap or at least affordable high speed internet.

AnPrims are pretty cool. But let's remember that AnPrim =/= ALL technology bad, but that maybe most technology is bad and that it is important to discriminate b/w what technology to destroy and obliterate completely, and what technology to keep and improve upon that serves fundamental human needs without impinging on human freedom.

Attached: 1559850600613.jpg (850x400, 87.22K)

idealist mf

Kaczynski was a poltard. He spent pages scapegoating "leftists" which he was only vaguely able to define.

GNU wins even if it does not appear so

Things are not what they seem

The material world is a matrix

lol no. I understand that seeing how many Zig Forums-tards like him would make you think that, but kaczynski was very clear about disliking fascists. kaczynski probably just meant tankies and PC-liberals tbh.

by identifying themselves with a powerful organization
or mass movement. An individual lacking goals or power
joins a movement or an organization, adopts its goals as
his own, then works toward those goals. When some of
the goals are attained, the individual, even though his per-
sonal efforts have played only an insignificant part in the
attainment of the goals, feels (through his identification
with the movement or organization) as if he had gone
through the power process. This phenomenon was exploi-
ted by the fascists, nazis and communists. Our society uses
it too, though less crudely. Example: Manuel Noriega was
an irritant to the U.S. (goal: punish Noriega). The U.S.
invaded Panama (effort) and punished Noriega (attain-
ment of goal). Thus the U.S. went through the power pro-
cess and many Americans, because of their identification
with the U.S., experienced the power process vicariously.
Hence the widespread public approval of the Panama in-
vasion; it gave people a sense of power. [15] We see the
same phenomenon in armies, corporations, political par-
ties, humanitarian organizations, religious or ideological
movements. In particular, leftist movements tend to at-
tract people who are seeking to satisfy their need for po-
wer. But for most people identification with a large organi-
zation or a mass movement does not fully satisfy the need
for power."
Kaczsinksy's main gripe with 'leftists' is obviously their drive for attaining power and imposing their beliefs, which he believes that they don't really believe. He is aware that many 'leftists' are unaware of this, so he writes in point 23, then 58:
to be an accurate description of everyone who might be
considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a ge-
neral tendency of leftism."
recent (mid- to late-20th century) form, is in part a symp-
tom of deprivation with respect to the power process."
So I think he is not so much a reactionary as Zig Forums-tards would like to think. Maybe he's talking about neo-liberalism for all I know. Maybe someone would like to tell me what 'leftism' was like in the era that Kaczinsky points out.

FOSS is the way

FOSS isn't enough. The power has moved up to the next layer, conceding now irrelevant territory.

Windows/desktop monopoly is broken. You are free to use Linux, free to use a nice federated protocol like email, but the other person WILL be using gmail.
Also your friends and family have a google doorbell and an amazon echo in every room.

Despite being only 14 percent of the userbase, leftypoltards make up 88 percent of the permanent bans.

Also Leftypol:

Wow, almost like we arn't a hivemind.

human needs. Instead, it is human behavior that has to
be modified to fit the needs of the system. This has no-
thing to do with the political or social ideology that may
pretend to guide the technological system. It is not the
fault of capitalism and it is not the fault of socialism. It
is the fault of technology, because the system is guided
not by ideology but by technical necessity. [18] Of course
the system does satisfy many human needs, but generally
speaking it does this only to the extend that it is to the
advantage of the system to do it."
To continue, Kaczynksi has a very narrow perspective. Although he appears to be sympathetic to ideas of localism and increased individual autonomy:
cal autonomy.” Local communities once did have auto-
nomy, but such autonomy becomes less and less pos-
sible as local communities become more enmeshed with
and dependent on large-scale systems…",
Kaczynksi ultimately dispels such ideas as being impossible in the current configuration of society (I'm still reading Althusser's 'Reproduction of Capitalism', while not having read 'Vol 2 and 3' of Marx -i only read Vol 1 of Capital- so forgive my abuse of words).
Kaczinski would probably regard Anarcho-Syndicalism the same way. Technology will ultimately defeat these ideologies as they mold to ultimately serve the 'system' Kaczsynski speaks of. the abolition of wage-slavery would only make the slavery to technology more obvious.

A look into Kaczynski's end-goal:
volutions were failures. But most revolutions have two
goals. One is to destroy an old form of society and the
other is to set up the new form of society envisioned by
the revolutionaries. The French and Russian revolutiona-
ries failed (fortunately!) to create the new kind of society
of which they dreamed, but they were quite successful in
destroying the old society. We have no illusions about the
feasibility of creating a new, ideal form of society. Our goal
is only to destroy the existing form of society."
I mean, there's a lot going on here. If Marx was a technocrat, then Kaczsynski probably hates Marx.
tism is in the long run inconsistent with wild nature, with
human freedom and with the elimination of modern tech-
nology. Leftism is collectivist; it seeks to bind together the
entire world (both nature and the human race) into a uni-
fied whole. But this implies management of nature and
of human life by organized society, and it requires advan-
ced technology. You can’t have a united world without ra-
pid transportation and communication, you can’t make all
people love one another without sophisticated psychologi-
cal techniques, you can’t have a “planned society” without
the necessary technological base."
But he is sympathetic with Anarchists:
it on an individual or small-group basis; he wants indivi-
duals and small groups to be able to control the circum-
stances of their own lives. He opposes technology because
it makes small groups dependent on large organizations."
So, again, I see the distinction that Kaczynski want to draw b/w 'good leftists' and 'bad leftists'. But does Kaczynski think that Anarchists are not leftists though?

lets make out own internet

It would be easier to seize the one we already have

Uncle Ted is strong on theory for anarchoprimitavist scum

Found the oportunist

Ted is not an anprim, retard. He has entire essays attacking anprims

What is he then?

You're obviously more familiar with his work
Share an example comrade

I am aware of his one essay, "The Truth about Primitive Life", where he writes of AnPrims:
"So I agree with the anarcho-primitivists that the advent of civilization was a great disaster and that the Industrial Revolution was an even greater one. I further agree that a revolution against modernity, and against civilization in general, is necessary. But you can't build an effective revolutionary movement out of soft-headed dreamers, lazies, and charlatans. You have to have tough-minded, realistic, practical people, and people of that kind don't need the anarcho-primitivists' mushy utopian myth."
But I don't see what else one could call him.

commies fail to create yet again while ancaps paving the road to the future

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1280x720, 463.01K)

From "Letter to David Skrbina":
Do we call Kaczynski a 'Hunter-Gather' then?

Ancaps sure are good at making slick shitcoin scams.

Some more from a different letter to Skrbina:

Also, here's the link to the collection of essays.
I know everyone here hates Thought Slime but what do you think of this video?

I picked electrical engineering as my major just to learn how to build my own internet.

Step 1: Get a trillion dollars from military/intelligence front venture capitalists.

Not if they're English-speaking.

Tbh it's not even that. A lot of the infrastructure is just straight up government infrastructure they handed over to private companies because they are retarded.

"Let's have the public pay twice for this and only get paid to do it once ourselves"

that's too broad of a field if your focus is wireless mesh networks, the only practical way to create an inexpensive decentralised network

it's a good as far as highlighting communist nature of humans goes, but in his entire video he refutes his initial statement about there being no necessity of socialist stage to build up to communism.

It's simple, we must spread Open-Source Stalinism among STEMfags and incite the codemonkey revolution.

found this the other day:
from a quick skim, most seem to be actual leftists. I don't use reddit except to browse niche-news, so I can't participate, but I wish the tech field was significantly more class conscious and less obsessed with PC (unintended pun).

The fuck is this shit?

Attached: 1493013703172.gif (240x228, 857.69K)


You buy this ugly motherfucker.
It mines worthless buttcoins over the existing internet, then at some indeterminate time in the future you'll be able to buy an antenna upgrade, which will create an uncensorable decentralized replacement for the internet. You can then spend your buttcoins to get faster routing around the network.
States BTFO!!!111

Attached: 0*DFQZsJm2OK3f-mCU.jpg (1015x677, 72.13K)


Attached: ClipboardImage.png (837x313, 50.69K)


Attached: 17826592.png (500x569, 182.46K)

Peak ancap.

For a Chinese team they absolutely nailed the marketing though, to appeal to the whole American slacktivist libertarian thing.

Buy a magic box and it will BTFO of the state and commiefornia tech companies. Perfect value proposition.

Yeah this looks like a flaming dog turd, such a shame. What is there to do in this hellscape? Any real or true alternatives for us?

Attached: 1488698730395.jpg (1084x827, 973.45K)