longer.blue

--. INTRODUCTION .-- The West shall now realize that civil liberties are far from a product of capital. Now that its objectives have changed, and to prove their loyality to it, our politicians have begun to cause a major crackdown on imaginary enemies in the virtual world, presenting increasingly authoritarian measures that can and will be used to clamp down on boiling legitimate resistance - without even addressing the very issues it aims to defeat. The Internet can be a scary place sometimes. It is a statement that the general consensus would most likely agree on. With the introduction of various Online Safety Acts in the UK, the USA, the EU and Australia along with the ongoing Collective Shout situation however, one must ask if these measures are even effective, and if not, what their actual purposes really are. --. 01 SYNOPSIS .-- On paper, the primary purpose of these Online Safety Acts is to expand age verification measures on the Internet, which up until now have been quite easy to bypass. With the exception of the US, the administrative regions would require various tech and social media companies to enact e.g. Face ID recognition software, age determination software, or in the case of the EU, more effective usage of the Digital Identity Wallet. The main goal at large is to better protect and prohibit underage Internet users from accessing and consuming content reserved or targeted to an adult audience. Now, judging from already existing measures, there are a number of issues that arise from the new ones that caught my concern. The main problem being the performance of the softwares in question. (#EDIT: Three main problems are subjective performance, immediate bypass, big leak waiting to happen) ... (TBA) ... After concluding that these measures will actually do very little and even cause new problems to arise for children and adults alike, we have to ask what purpose the numerous Online Safety Acts then have if protecting underage users, the VERY ISSUE that is regularly brought up, clearly wouldn't work properly either on the Internet or in real life. So, what is the ACTUAL problem at hand here that we are maybe too oblivious to recognize? --. 02 REAL ISSUES .-- What is crime? ... (TBA) ... Now with the arrival of the Internet, these groups are still an integrable part of society, but their vulnerability to crime, combined with their despair to just being able to live, inevitably ... ... (TBA) ... --. 03 A SYSTEMATIC QUESTION .-- (#EDIT: only include the part of systematic seclusion) The Internet is, like every produce on this planet at this moment, currently fully part of the predominant capitalist system. Without diving too deep into the complexity that is this failing system, it's also one that is designed to push out people that do not add monetary value to its profit motive. Yes, not real value, MONETARY value, while incentivizing private enterprises to drop labor into the deep end whenever they want. To survive, the laborer thus relies on welfare to either get back at producing monetary value or just to get over financial hurdles imposed by product scarcity because, often than not, the employer does not pay them back an equitable wage, as the system would increase the hurdles to keep out the profit motive from reaching the consumer side. It's a system that's, again, DESIGNED to trap a considerable amount of people in welfare. And these are the people politicians from all over the world are targeting at. Since politics knows that the system doesn't allow them to ever satisfy the welfare populace, it decides to push that specific demographic into marginalized communities with whatever resources they allocate towards making that happen. Without help, these groups are most vulnerable to crimes that are NOW being affiliated with uncontrolled Internet usage. ... (TBA) ... --. CONCLUSION .-- ... (TBA) ... This is how fascism is born and nurtured. This is how ... is a designed systematic failure. This is how ... will not fall, but rise, much to the interest of capital, who are doing their absolute minimum to maximize collateral damage in our societal structure. At the end, comedically, I think we have arrived at a spot in time in which WE are entitled to tell THEM to GET THE FUCK OFF THEIR SCREENS, HAVE SOME BALLS and TACKLE THE REAL PROBLEMS OR GET KICKED OUT.