

Ah, no your argument is definitely on the same page then, but at different ends of that page.
So your disagreement goes to degree of breaking and ability for remedy.
Their argument is, the degree of targetting and surveillance has surpassed normal constraints while the ability for a remedy within the normal constraints of the social contract is no longer possible.
To take your example if a murderer is arrested and tried then order is restored and with it the social contract begins to heal. If the murderer however isn’t arrested and tried, then continues to murder, then what alternative remedies are available to be resorted to.











Whats up with all the weird spelling in that article? The = signs in place of letters are very prominent.
Is it some sort of anti-ai thing they’re trying?