Problem is the Civilized people are owned by the uncivilized money hungry
1 Like
Well, huge respect on this comment, which demonstrates the real real problem, which affects the technical aspect of our discussion.
Let me explain.
When a user reports his computer is crashing, or boots to a black screen, there is no immediate answer and solution. One has to ask why? and look for the actual cause, because, obviously, a black screen on boot is only the symptom.
In the same sense, the question of the topic “Are we all terrorists, because we use privacy technics?” needs to be reverse engineered, so we find the real cause.
In terms of the new narrative of Privacy concerned computer users are suspicious by default, people that help others to improve and enforce privacy in their computer usage are equally suspicious or guilty. Here come the technical aspect that is impacting this technical forum, as well as the distro maintainers.
Would you (rhetorically) assume our beloved @dalto is guilty for sharing his knowledge on privacy or encryption?
A money hungry individual is apparently uncivilized by default or so, in the sense of believing that human nature is beyond and against animal nature. Since this belief belongs to the spiritual world, if we want to investigate the problem, we have no other way than to think (and talk?) about it.
To fast-forward the boring details, the mere difference between civilized (human) and uncivilized (animal) is the so-called moral principles, which is summarized in the fear of death or pain.
A moral/civilized individual has the ability to prefer death or pain, in order to protect their higher moral principles, whichever they are.
A less civilized individual, in the scale of their morality, will not easily accept death or pain, even to protect common human ethics, if that behavior affects their own self.
Fear is the real reason those new narratives are introduced.
More technically, AFAIK, Linux OS itself and the Open Source philosophy is a prominent example of moral behavior, obviously a pure political act, or say a defense of the poor.
If you develop and publicize Open Source Software, you are a political activist.
So, a new narrative of Technical knowledge sharing is a political act is not unexpected. We are political beings by nature, and thus we have a say on what happens around us and impacts more humans than our personal selves alone.
Conclusion
Returning to the exact current topic, in the same way that democratic civilizations accept unfair deaths and pain, mistrials of innocent people, unsolved trials, guilty criminals escaping justice, not being over invasive to citizens lives, protecting their individual democratic rights, similarly they have to accept the same for the technical related failures.
Peace and sharing! 
1 Like
WOW
Didn’t think that deep honestly.
My point was that we set a set of rules for society based on behaviors that others have displayed to people they feel to be lesser than. I was talking purely in a criminal since and not a spiritual one.
I am not against privacy and I hope that is not how I came across apologies if that is. I have things I to like to keep private like medical records, bank information and other accounts that can do personal harm to me and only me. This is a basic privacy function for most people. As far as Privacy and Law I have no answer. I like most just want to be able to do this life as enjoyable as possible.
I said owned because the laws we are subject to follow are necessary for those who don’t. One screws up we all pay.
1 Like