Twitter and censorship

Twitter and the censorship

In a controversial post entitled Tweets still must flow((And they stole the third datalove principles, yay for us)), twitter said that they will now be able to censor some tweets regarding on the locality of the reader. That mean that someone in China won’t be able to see this tweet about Tien An Men celebration, or that a tweet with a svastika will not be readable in France or in Germany. And then, the whole twitter sphere get mad, yelling while running in circle.

And the storm will cease, people will forget and move on the next big thing. Twitter will expand and open a new office in China, because they’re doing business. It’s their objective remember? Business, after all twitter is a profit driven company that want money. They do not want your freedom or your safety, they want your money.

I always think that twitter wasn’t that bad, at least, toward my privacy. After all, my friend list is public (anyone can see it, even people without a twitter account), my lists and tweets are also public and they do not have any bits of personal information about me, except my pseudonym and an email to join me. Twitter is one of the few corporation that deal correctly about privacy (I can share my location, but it’s not active by default, I can use my GSM, but it’s not active by default, etc.) So, they provide a service to everyone (they even tolerates bots, even the one that only speaks to computers, that mean control command for botnets). It’s not purely neutral (it’s not distributed), but it’s a good start.

Then things changed

In the beginning (yeah, last year, maybe the year before), twitter had a great documented API that anyone could use to do anything they want, as long as they respect certain limitation in volume. Limitation a normally constituted human cannot be able to reach. So everybody could write a twitter client, or an app that use this twitter API. Then they decided they wanted more control over what people where doing with twitter. Things have moved since the green movment in Iran and, now that Twotter has grown, they want more control.

First things they do, was to forbid third party clients, like the one I’ve used to use to access twitter on my old Nokia phone. 2 years later, I still have no idea of how I can access twitter from the OVI store, so I cannot use it. They makes some huge change on the Twitter API too, without maintaining complete public documentation, this has break a lot of compatibility with, for instance, They still never explained how the trending Topics and they responds to legitimate questionning about this important future (that’s how you know what’s happening now and near you) with ‘trust us, we’re not censoring anything (and look at the support page about trending topics:, there is no precise enough answer that could be used to infirm or confirm tweets.

I’m not saying they’re censoring Trending Topics however. They sell trending topics (you can see sponsored one in top of your list). They want control over the trends because that’s how they earn their lives and that’s what they sell to Nike, Disney or BlueCoat for instance. Since two years now, and after 2 major change in the interface and the way they display content, they have exerced a lot of control on how things are moving, they’ve penetrate a lot of new market (in Middle East, Africa, South America, etc) where activists use twitter to circumvent censorship because it’s a US based company, and then the US law are the only one that can be used to censor twitter.

The Wikileaks case

Look at wikileaks for instance. In November 2011, Twitter was forced by the US Justice Department to hand over all the information they had about three people, suspected to be linked to the organisation. A secret order in fatc, that would be revealed to the people under investigation once the investigation is done. Twitter defend the case, but they finally had to give out those information (but they could warn the users they were under investigation). The story is in the NY Times if you need more details. Google do not fight those, they just maintain a page where they put the request from a judge they received, ordered by country. For facebook, I’ve still never heard of such thing.

The things happening there is that a US Company own parts of your identity and they are under the US law (with the patriot Act). That gives to this governement a reach to all the twitter user. Including ones that are not even US citizen neither on the US soil. This is not a twitter problem, this is a legal problem. The centralized system everyone use fall under specific national laws that supersede the local one (amongst the target of the wikileaks thing, there were an Icelandic representative, from a country which have the strongest law arsenal to defend the source protection and the whistle blowers).

Things get big

Twitter has received a lot of money from different sources. They wnat to grow bigger. They want to get in Pakistan, Iran, China or India. They want to have local offices, or not to be banned by a country because ‘terrorists uses it’. So they say they will follow the law of each and every country they will be used. It means that, if Bashar el Assad, the still ruling dictator in Syria, aks for content he do not like must be removed in Syria, they will obey (they will follow the local law). You’ll still be able to see those horrible video and massacre live, but people on the ground won’t be able to talk to each other, because they won’t be there.

My point is, you’re yelling because you’re afradi Twitter will censor things. You should not be afraid of that. You should be afraid that twitter had previously censored tweets due to justice decision that should not apply to you. You should be afraid that all of those datas are centralized, teh same way megaupload, Google or Facebook are. You should be ashamed to reinforce it by using it to protest. You should be ashamed because you have not used a decentralised solution, either by using one that already exists such as or, or by setting one up with friend ( installation is documented). I know it’s hard, and I am to blame to because I use twitter, but move to a free cypherspace, you’ll see, they’re some nice people hanging there, is you’re looking for me, I am just right here:

Data must flow Enter the decentralized cypherspace

The version 1.0 of this post was written on 2012/01/27 by okhin. Relaesed under no licence or the WTFPL.

Let’s talk about Privacy, Intimacy, Anonimity and Identity

Let’s talk about privacy, intimacy, anonimity and identity

I wanted to write about those topics for a while because I think they’re important topics, eseentially nowadays due to the ever growing ubiquitous surveillance. I think that most of them are not perceived the same way by everybody, so i’ll try to write down and define what I put behind the concept of identity, privacy, anonymity and intimacy.

So, we’re going to start with some definitions, see how they are linked etc. I wo’nt use many links, because it’s what I think it’s probably not original and unique, but that’s how I fell things are working. Also, we are going to eat Information Theory.

The identity problematics

We walk in the world as an emitter and receiver of signal (part noise, part information). This signal is directed toward one((unidirectional communication, also named unicast by network engineers)), some((multidirectionnal communication, named multicast in network operation)) or all((wide communication, or broadcast)) receivers in range.

The etymology of ”Identity” comes form the latin identitas (sameness) annd indicates what information are emitted by the same entity, thing. That means two things. There’s a track to previous information emitted by this entity, and the receiver can link the emitter to this entity. The identity is then the sum of all the information about an entity an emitter can perceive, and an entity can have multiple identity, in general one for each space (public or private) the entity evolves into.

One thing about information, if they’re not archived and indexed, they will disappear with time. Who remember who Jessi Slaughter is?

What’s my name?

The name is the unique handle of an identity. It can be a unique number, a common name, a description, etc. The name of an entity is how you will access all the information you can find about it. This is the bit of information you need to know to find out who an entity is and then accessing all the information available about this identity in the space you’re standing.

If an entity has no name, and is in fact anonymous, then you won’t be able to find any information about it. But then, the ‘Girl with Nice Boobs who was at the party yesterday’ and the ‘Bunch of people that sing in the subway’ in a name. A temporary one, but it’s still a name. You can discuss about those person with other people who were in the same space at the same time, but the information will probably be wuickly dissolved in the flux of data we live in.

A name stand for an identity. Or should. The tricky part is the homonyms. Two (or more) different identities covered by only one name. To find out which entity you’re communicating with, you will try to find context that is, previously stored information that you can then use to find out which entity your dealing with. You deal Homonimy the exact same way that Usurpation. Using the information you can find about an entity, you can know who they are to you, independently of their name.


The trust is the biggest thing in social relation. It exists in principally three states. You trust an entity, you distrust it or you have no idea of the trust you should have into the entity. The trust is the accountability. When something you trust gives you an information, you know the information is correct. If someone you trust claims a name, you won’t check his history back to confirm or infirm it. Someone you trust is alos someone who will probably not takes information about you out of the space you are communicating.

The people you distrust is easy, you won’t believe them and try to verify every information they send because you can find a source of information you trust to confirm or infirm their identity.

The world is small anyway, so you can probably build a trust chain to this entity and confirm or infirm the identity link for an entity you do not trust.

Trust is not bidirectionnal and is personnal. That’s not because you trust me that I trust you. ANd that’s not because I trust someone taht you should trust it by default, but it will gives it more trustability (because you trust me and I’m telling you that this entity is really who they claim to be), so that will help you to decide if you want to trust this entity.

What’s privacy then?

Privacy opposes to publicity. If something is not in the public space, that means it’s in a private space (or that it’s in no space, which is not possible due to some contrsaints such as physics).

So, what is public then? From etymology it is linked to the people((From the latin poplicus which is a derivative from populus, the people)). That mean everybody can access and see a public thing. At least, there is no authorisation needed to access something public.

For instance, when you walk in the street, you are in a public space. When you enter a bar or a restaurant, you’re still in a public space. When you pay the fee to access a museum or a night club, you are in a public space (it’s not an authorization, it’s a cost). When you surf the web reading at datas that do not requires a password to access to, you’re in a public space.

That mean that everybody in the same public space as you can access all the information you’re emitting. Wether it being you’re apparent age, skin color, gender (not your sexual identity however), the thing you’re saying or the song you’re singing. If you are in a public space, everybody can access and see and track all the information you’re emitting there.

So, the privacy opposes itself to the publicity. That is, you’re in privacy, and so in a private space, when you access a non public place. A place that requires you to have an authorization of a kind. It could be a good old key for your house or your locker, a password to access a private sharing space online, a simple door closed with a sign on it stating ‘Access forbidden’ is a delimitation between a public and a private space.

Privacy is then a matter of limiting access to the information you emit. If you have the key to enter a private space, you can access the private information.


The intimcay, again from etymology, comes from the inside. This is what’s inside an entity, that’s all the information you’re not emitting. It’s when you opt-out totally, with no emitter of information you cannot control, and all the one you control shut down. You generally add your closest friend into this intimacy, as long as all the ‘special’ people, those are people that won’t tell those information to anyone.

The intimacy is the part of yourself that no one knows about, except the specials ones. Intimacy is way more than privacy, privacy is intresting, as it allow you to communicate with people of choice without being put in danger for what your saying. It allow you to have multiple identities and to use them in multiple social circles. Intimacy is what’s out of all social circle.

let’s explore the world!

We now have our concepts defined. Almost. So, now, let’s go online, because everything is funnier if you add network and computers to it.

Let’s enter the world of information

So, it’s easy to get a grasp on the private/public problem in the physical space. I can live with a bunch of people in an open space like a loft, or a squat, but still have some private space (the one I close with a key I own). What’s hard is when you add some layers, and, for instance the cyberspace. I can sit in a private space (my room, locked) and accessing a maybe-public space.

The thing is, independently of the thing you’re gonna access, every bits of information that goes out of your device of choice will go through different intermediaries before reaching the data you want to access. The origin and the destination of the packets are know, as long as a lor of other stuff. Those information are needed to route the packets through the diferents network, but they are data you emit in the public space (anyone on the route of yourpacket can see it and access to this information).

Wether you’re accessing your facebook page (which is more or less private, dependings on the settings you choose), your webmail (which is private, given the fact that only you is supposed to have the password needed to access it) or your mails, reading a website, downloading a video using P2P protocols, etc, you will emit a lot of information that a lot of people (or computers) can read.

So, remember what I told about the lock in the previous part? You need to put a lock on the information you want to keep private. You can’t lock all the information in the packets, some of them are needed to grants you access to the resource you’ve asked for. Those are mainly routing and protocol information, because that’s the way computers works, they need to talk a lot to each other to get things done. But the others informations, the ones you want to keep private, you can lock them to deny anyone the possibility to read them without a key of a kind.

That’s the cryptography goal. Forbidding a data being physically readable by anyone and restricting it to whoever got the key.

So, you’re in the private space only when you use string cryptography. yeah, encrypt everything you want to make private. If something goes online without encryption, it belongs to the public space.

A wild corporation appears!

Corporations, at least internet ones, suck at two things. Security (but that’s the burden of everyone) and transparency. When you land on a ‘secured’ website of a company, they will require you to proove your identity while they’re doing the same (using ssl certificates). They’re not asking you for a key (an authorization), they’re using your identity as a key. They’re using the whole set of data they can build about you as the key to access their services. You cannot know what data they have on you, you cannot opt-out those data, they’re building a strong identity of you. And they’re following you everywhere they can, without telling you.

So, they build an identity about you, one you don’t know anything about and they’re building it using data from a private space that they’re not supposed to share with everyone else (except if you explicity opt-in). They’re archiving everything information you emit, stocking it in extremly redundant servers becasue tehy do not want to lose any bits of identity about you. And then, they will replace the wall of the private space they made by polarised window, giving everyone who can afford it to penetrate theprivate space without the key and without your consent. When someone goes into your place without authorization, generally you call the authorities or shoot the trespassor. You’re not allowed to do it for corporation taht sells personnal data, some of them they shoudl not have.

I mean, they do not need your name for running their business. The only reason they need it is becasue they want to cross check into other database – private space – what you’re doing when not undr their radar. That’s what real-name policies are, they’re a meta identification token spanning all the databases taht uses the same policy. And that’s why they’re so bad.

The financial data stored in non banking websites is bad to. They do not need it. They need to know, in the worst case, who buys what to who and when. Not the bank name, the card number or any othr details on it.

So, corporation are robbing your identities. They lure you in confy private space, then put you on national broadcast. I’m not even speaking about the risks of a data leak or a breach in the infrastructure. People accuses hacker when information about them isleaked. But hackers did not archived this information in frist hand, they did not make huge files to track people and to spy them and to rape and destroy their privacy. What hackers do is finding a part of a public space that was hidden behind a curtain. So, next time someone is doxing you, asks the company why they had those information about you in clear text.

You can access a company server, if they store all the private information (or what they define as private) in an encrypted format you won’t be able to read it. That’s the way to go, if you want an information to be private, then encrypt it. If it touch toyour intimacy, do not publish the information. The internet and computers have an endless memory of extreme precision.

Protect yourself. Encrypt everything that moves. Give momentum to everything that do not move.

Version 1.0 of this entry was written by okhin on 2012/01/26. Use it as you wish. Or follow the WTFPL.

Megaupload is dead. So what?

Megaupload is dead. So what?

So, a justice court from a country abroad has decided that megaupload must be put to an end, along with their sistersite Megavideo, and so they’ve took it down yesterday evening. This is sad, and it’s a bad day for individual freedom. But it is not unexpected and you were warned this would happen and you choose to do nothing. But first, let’s look at what has been put offline.

 God bless Megaupload

Megaupload (for the one of you who don’t know what it was), was described as a filesharing website where everyone can find what they want. Be it illegal porn, clandestine copy of movies or TV show, applications or other software, cracked or fully legal, and every thing that can be put in a digital format and brings online (and believe me, that’s pretty much everything you can use with a computer or a smartphone). So, it looks like a good idea. Except for two or three little and neglectible point of details.

First, Megaupload is a company. Yeah, you’ve got free account, but they do everything they can to makes you buying a premium to have unlimited download (at least, as long as you paid the monthly 10$ fee for it). Yeah, Megaupload is a company whose jobs is to makes you pay to access files. Doesn’t it make you think about something?

Second, extreme centralization. They have more than one server, and kind of work like in a cloud, but your files are still in only one place. You share a link to access it, not a file. It’s more convenient you say (but sharing a .torrent is convenient to, and easy to do). So megaupload begins to have all of the illegal files the majors and governements were looking for in only one place. Big, obvious and easy target (since it’s a company).

Third, you know Megaupload because you want to see How I Met Your Mother. So, you were paying a media company because you did not want to pay for another media company. You were enforcing a monopoly because you are against a monopoly. You were saying that the whole media industry produces shit, only because that gives you legitimity to pay for the same shit (but to another one). Megaupload was a form of global licence, and it’s a bad idea (unless you can defines precisely who is an artist and who is not and tells me exactly how you can redistribute it with equity).

Fourth, you were using megaupload because you were scared by a government which tries to hunt down pirates that use peer to peer filesharing. Those system are extremely resilient, there are multiple copies of the same files all over the network and it cannot basically be shut down by a single justice decision. Yeah, Megaupload was a solution that government indirectly promoted by scaring people.

And I can continue for a long time, but people told me that endlessly raging is useless. I’ll just redirect you to a good article written by Bluetouff on which wrote all of this, at the end of the year. (and yeah, use a seeks node to find more about it, I won’t do it for you).

Rage against the machine

So, last night it was shut down. And a lot of people were raging after it, accusing governement to tackle their liberties. Yeah, right. But that was a lot of people told you like, two days ago about SOPA and the black out stuff. Or the precedent years about ACTA, or when they try to makes you understand why HADOPI or ARJEL are extremly dangerous for our liberties (and for no community gain). So I tweeted this (and launched an easy troll I must confess):

Et donc #megaupload ferme et vous êtes perdus? #Decentralisez. #onvousaveeprevenus #alleemourir / And so #megaupload close and your lost? #Decentralize. #wetoldyouso #godie

Some people were answering and told me that they were fighting for their liberties. In fact, they’re not. Else, they would have fought fiercely when copwatch was taken down. Or when all of the websites we try to mirror with streisand (and I do not have all of them here) where taken down by one state or another. Or when Wikileaks was under an heavy attack from institution. If people really want to fight for their freedom, they’ll be in the street with the Occupiers, they will be asking their governement answers and justice for the infamous acts of some police forces. They will use their right to throw out their governement to choose a new one.

But instead, people (most of them, a lot of people are acting, in more or less usefull way, in more or less fun way and in more or less legal way) were just saying, "I do not care. I can still use Megaupload to see that stuff." Or Allostreaming (they will be shut down soon to, French governement has assigned all the major ISP to think about an effective blockade (details here). But now that megaupload is gone, what will you do? You’re to scared to use P2P, Direct download is now dead, streaming will follow, and (you can bet on this) major companies will provide you a not so good implementation of a global licence and you’ll accept that and you’ll be screwed. And they’ll win.

You made this happen

Yeah. You. Not someone else, not the major, not the governement or banks or aliens. You. By trading your liberties for confort (look at the iPhone, you cannot have anything that may looks like pornography on it. And Apple will soon sell school books. Same for google and for each and every monopolistic dragon that sleep on a treassure of data to mine. Each time you enter a URL in the google search bar, each time your’d rather download copyrighted material instead of free and opened one you’re playing their game. We warned you. Richard Stallman has been doing this for a long time and he was right, the EFF or LQDN were trying to give people enough knowledge about those shadow agreements to empower those people.

But you always choose the easy way, trusting companies or governement because they won’t hurt you. This is the cute cat theory. AS long as you can access your porn and your cute cats, you won’t protest. Yeah, that means those websites will be the last ones to be shut down by governement. And that’s why activists uses them to communicate. But then, you’ll focus only on cute cat access, not on information access. There is almost no media coverage of the Occupy movement here, but people does not care because some star does something trashy (or an election campaign running but without any programms from the candidates at least than 100 days to the election) and they control the focus and you are happy with it.

That’s why I’m a bit raging and yelling at people Y U NO DOING SOMETHING BEFOR IT HAPPENS!?! [insert cat picture here].

We spend an amazing amount of energy to try to warn you, for nothing. You let this happening.

Well, in fact, I was quite suprised that the US government shut down the Megaupload stuff. I mean, when you do politcian politics, you learn tha the people only need bread and games (since Caesar in the antic roma at least). But I think that with the crisis, a lot of people do not have bread anymore, so they probably thinks they can stop the games now because citizen will have other things on their mind. It’s either because they think they’ve lost the battle of the control and are tired to play games, or they think we have abandonned the ship and it’s time to show us who’s the boss.

What can you do?

Hang yourself. Really. If, at this point, you still don’t know what you can do, go hang yourself.

Or you can try to beat them at their own game. They do want us to pay to watch/listen at stuff? So be it. But then, do something usefull with your cash. Instead of giving them 10$ a month, give this cash to crowd funding entertainment project, like Pioneer One (a web serie that follow high standards of quality, and they’re at their 6th episode, only funded by crowd funding). Go on kickstarter they have a lot of project that can use your 10$. ANd most of them will reward you for that (being your name in the generic, a special edition, or whatever). There is more and more media licenced under Creative Commons, you can find a lot of free (as in freedom) music online. And some quality one. You can go to a concert. Stop feeding them. Stop copying their shit you would not pay for.

And if you still want your dose, the media junkies must go on The Pirate Bay. No governement has managed to shut them down. They are not a company. Their distribution system (bittorent) is decentralized. No one has still be condemned yet for using the .torrents. Don’t be afraid by them, they aren’tworth it.

Think. Use your brain. Use your civil duty to think. Change, have fun doing it and then change the world.

Licence and stuff

This version 1.2 of the txt has been written by okhin on the 20th of January of 2012. You can do anything with it, as long as you just tell people who wrote this text. If you really need a licence, it’s the WTFPL.

Why I won’t black out

Why I won’t black out

About this

First, a little introduction. You’ve got to know that if this text exists, it’s definitely not my fault but his. Proof:

11:41 < Gordontesos> alors blogue ! So, blog !

So, I’m a system administrator, a Telecomix agent, a total geek and probably someone that has some issues with people. I will probably hurt your feelings, but I do not want to take precautions and preserve people and, in fact, I do not care. I’m already making people cry with the stuff below, so learn to manage your feelings. Either you can think, and that won’t be a problem for you, either you can’t and then… well, why are you here?

Oh, no comments available. First, I’m too lazy to filter out spam, and I believe it must be my burden, not yours (so, I won’t use a captcha system which is almost useless, or a registration system). Instead of that, you can reach me on, on some IRC chans, on twitter, by mail (okhin AT okhin DOT fr), we can (and should!!) have divergent opinion, and if you want to answer, write your own part, kick me, destroy my argumentation and tell me where is it, that way I can exchange with you, publicly or not, your choice (but tell me before). We should debate and exchange, but I do not think a comment is the good way to do it.

And I’m not a native english speaker, so if you find grammar, typo or other stuff, send me an email with corrections and I’ll integrates them (and if you want credit for, you will got some).

Back to the topic

SOPA, PIPA, HADOPI, LOPPSI, LCEN, DADVSI, WHATEVER… Every now and then, governments try to lock up the internet, then people get angry and react and protest and put some black on their websites, their avatar and stuff like that. Even big companies try to do that. But guess what? You can still read this, even with the blackout. So, what’s happened?

A government (in the SOPA case, the US government) thinks that some websites can be dangerous for their citizens (or for national security, for their interest… whatever the reason used, it’s fallacious) and, those websites being out of US jurisdiction, they want to filter them out. To censor them. To deny people the right to access some information, even if it’s not under the US jurisdiction (because they want to shut down the DNS on .com, .org or other zones like that). They have been trying to do this for a long time (more or less every year in the last 10 years), mostly because they’re afraid of people being able to think by themselves. They’re trying to develop the idea that some thoughts are dangerous. They want to tell apart the harmless thoughts and the dangerous ones. They want to tell which citizen has the right to think freely and which one does not.

Don’t get me wrong. This is horribly bad and I’m fiercely opposing it. But I won’t black out anything. In fact, I’m working the other way around. I’m using my freedom of speech to expose my ideas in one persistent place, a thing I’ve never done before (and believe me, I’ve been living in the Cyberspace for a long time now).


First things first. I’m small. I have no impact on governments, because they are doing everything they can to deny me the right to speak my mind, the right to tell them why I’m in discordance with them. So google, or the ISPs, or the traffic operators, shutting down their operations. Yeah, that will show people what those so-called laws can do by provoking a worldwide net-panic. Me or my fellow hacktivists, bloggers or whatever, will have no impact on a political agenda, at least using political means. That’s not what we are good or trained for.

Second, black outing is just reacting. It’s a simple protest. I know it’s people’s right to protest, but I think their duty is to act. To do things. Not to fight a battle on the ground chosen by your opponents, because then you can’t win. They’re too big, they can ignore us (have a look at China for instance). Even in the Middle East, the situation does not change because of people going in the streets, but because of people starting thinking and doing stuff. I’m in favor of action. Decentralized, unorganized, chaotic action. Yeah, sure, blacking out will probably bring people to think about it, but look at the Occupy Movement. Or Indignados. Or whatever. 6 months later, they’re still out there and nothing has changed. Sure, I’m being pessimistic. But also rational. We’re good at rational stuff (you know, the "in case of emergency" plan your boss paid you to write, stuff like that, we’re the best one at that) and I’ve never been trained for managing feeling, political agenda and other stuff.

I respect the devotion of civil liberties groups such as the EFF or La Quadrature du Net, but they’re fighting a battle that was lost long ago. Lemme tell you what will happen next. The US government will tell us: ‘Ok, I got your point, SOPA is soooo bad. However, we need a way to fight pedophiles, drug dealers, IRS frauders, and that’s why we think this law is better than SOPA.’ And everybody will say ‘Yay, we’ve done it, they’ve changed their mind’. And when the dust comes to a rest, you will realize that you’re screwed, they have reduced your liberties, but they are the good guys because they make concessions. That’s how negotiations work, you just need to ask each and every marketer. To negotiate something, you have to lose something before entering the negotiation.

So, where does it leave us?

That leaves us to a point where governments write bills about freedom of communication. Either to defend it (there’s some discussion around Net Neutrality in the EU), or to amend it (SOPA, PIPA, WHATEVER). The thing is, they’re defining bills on freedom of speech, on Internet. They try to shove the meatspace into the cyberspace, into a place where we do not need them. Their role should be to give people access to their basic needs and freedoms. That’s all. That’s the purpose of states and law. From where I stand, the law is a concession made by individuals to be able to live into a community. It should not be something that hampers them, but rather something that empowers them (and protect them from inequalities).

So, those bills limiting our freedoms (and not for giving us a better community, but for spying on us and/or giving more money to lobbies), are outlawed from where I stand. I won’t give them power over me or substance by fighting these. If I’m doing so, I’ll open the door for another bill on the regulation of our freedom of communication. This is not acceptable. So when you black out, you’re telling SOPA is bad because of those (perfectly good) reasons. But you’re also telling ‘Hey, maybe they can make a better offer?’ And they will make you a better offer. But that’s not acceptable. They say they don’t negotiate with terrorists. We should not negotiate with them.

When someone bangs at my door, my phone or my mail, trying to sell me something I don’t want, I just tell him ‘No’. I do not need to argue about it, it’s No. I’m not interested in this kind of stuff. If he insists, I’ll slam the door at his face. If he comes back, I won’t open the door or answer the phone. We’ve already told them numerous times that we do not want bills about freedom of speech. Time to slam the door at their face (and to break their foot if they want to use it to force you to keep your door open).

Surfing under the radar 

Let’s take the initiative. Let’s move in unexpectable ways. Let’s do fun things, and let’s have a good laugh (not necessarily at them, humiliating them makes them stronger than denying them the right to exist). The point is that we have basically lost the battle when we have moved to centralized systems (yeah, I’m speaking about Google, Facebook and Twitter, but also of the .com registry). I plead guilty too: after all I have a national domain name (.fr) and a twitter account. I’m no better than some people outside. In fact, there’s a lot of them doing amazing stuff you’ve never heard about. So, they gave us the choice between the Blue and the Red pill. I’d rather do that.

The simplest way to do this is to enter the CypherSpace (yeah, CamelCase are sooo CyberPunk). Enter a Space of fully encrypted information (or noise). Abandon the clear text communication that anyone can listen, intercept, alter and/or block without you being able to detect it. Assume one or more pseudonyms or enter anonymous, they are mostly friendly people. Do not think about legality, because it will be forbidden (if it’s not the case, I gave them some months/year to make crypto system illegal). Speak your mind, frankly, without caution, you cannot avoid hurting people. Use TOR every day, always, even for getting your porn or your lolcats. Use OTR when you chat and [PGP][] when you mail. Move to decentralized platform (such as for microblogging, diaspora for your social activities, host your own mail or ask a fellow hacker to do so, use seeks for your search needs). The tools needed to build this better place we all hope for already exist, so grow your own freedom. Don’t wait for states or companies to do it, because they won’t do anything else than selling you dreams.

You can go deeper (as they say in the movies). Build and use darknets and VPN to enforce even more anonymity. Have I told you about TOR? They have .onion. There’s also I2P and the .eep sites. You can set up a darknet easily using open software such as tinc, and you can encrypt it from end to end. You will go below the radar of the government if you use those tools on a day to day basis. Use them before it’s too late. Use them now. Mail your mother to wish her a happy birthday using a strong RSA 4096 bit key.

Host your domain name in out of range registry such as the 42 registry, the telecomix one, or start your own. Use free DNS resolvers (not opendns they’re liar, neither the google ones, they’re under the law of the US government) such as the one used by telecomix. Learn how those things works, try to build your own, ask for help, show them to your neighbor. Talk to them.

That brings me to the educational issue.

Crypto for the people

As I’ve said before, most of the tools needed to communicate safely and to bypass monitoring and censorship exist, and are easy to install (believe me, making a Syrian use Tor with bridges while they do not speak English and you do not speak Arabic is a proof that TOR is easy to use). People do not use it because they do not know it exists and they do not know why they would even need to use it.

That’s where enter education. You should teach your girlfriend, boyfriend, mother, father, duck, cat, etc. why they need to encrypt every and all bits of information (and noise) they emit and receive. That’s the hardest part and the most exhausting one, but organizations like EFF and La Quadrature Du Net are quite effective at it. As long as the people are open-minded and curious, showing them why they need to protect themselves online will be the hardest part. Then, they’ll ask the how-can-I-do-that question, and they will end up knowing a bit more how the Internet works, how a computer works, and being able to spread this knowledge to others. We need to be patient with the people that seek help. That won’t make you technically better (while you teach, you tend to learn slower, especially if you need to start from 0 every time you do it), but the documentation needed is still out there (but black-outed. See? that’s not a so good idea) and you can try to improve it, to translate it or to write it if it doesnot yet exist.

The real issue will reside in people who do not want to learn or understand. The ones that are happy like that, watching Fox news, TF1, feeding what used to be their brain with propaganda information telling them that everything is ok. You have two options. Try to save them, but that will kill you. You’ll cease to exist because all your spare time will be spent trying to give some dumb-ass some notions of self-respect, while they’ll consider you as a freak with dangerous thoughts. That will eat you, you’ve been warned. The other option is to live with that and to let them die. Yeah, that’s not fair, that’s not human, whatever, I do not care. But you can’t save people who do not want to be saved.

So, what will YOU do?

 Licence, copyright and version

This version 1.3.1 text has been written by okhin on the 18th of January of 2012. You can do anything with it, as long as you just tell people who wrote this text. If you really need a licence, it’s the WTFPL.

Kudos to zorun who mades me some proofreading.