XK doesn't cover everybody in a way that is entirely predictive, the data in it can only ever be a sample of the full true distribution. Because of this fact, there will always be outliers, forming a superset. Within that subset of outliers will be radicals, who by happenstance or skill will in whole or more likely in part, avoid effective profiling.
It is unlikely anyone on voat is within the superset formed by the full distribution.
The effective pool of people outside the global system's tracking, profiling, and disruption capabilities, shrinks each year with the commiserate growth of policy, manpower, and technology.
But the number of people in that superset is not zero.
Formally if the set of all trackable people is Z, and the set of people captured by that system is Y and the set of outliers who are trackable but fail to be predicted/profiled sufficiently is X then {X, Y} ∪ Z.
This also implies there is a set of people W, outside Z.
To be in W, you'd have to be either sufficiently resourceful, OR (inclusive-or) sufficiently well connected.
For some X and W, there is a subset V, that are opposed to the entire system that creates Z. By implication V is the greatest threat to Z, and W has every reason to utilize X to put an end to Z.
If we consider Z not merely as the set of people trackable and profilable, but as the set of people implementing Z, then some subset of Z intersects with V.
This does not imply that systems like XK (or broader, global systems we may not know about) will fail, but historical law suggests that as resistance grows (and it always grows) and externalities mount, the cost of maintaining a complex system eventually impinge on its efficiency and effectiveness, till it collapses in complexity.
The ends of things are always in the very beginnings, usually in how they respond to external or internal stresses or shocks, much in the same way metallurgists note that grain-boundary unzipping is what causes catastrophic failures after fatigues in metals.
[ + ] boekanier
[ - ] boekanier 0 points 34 minutesMay 13, 2025 00:55:37 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] HonkyMcNiggerSpic
[ - ] HonkyMcNiggerSpic 0 points 1 hourMay 13, 2025 00:12:26 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] observation1
[ - ] observation1 0 points 3 hoursMay 12, 2025 21:42:39 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] glooper
[ - ] glooper 1 point 2 hoursMay 12, 2025 22:46:30 ago (+1/-0)
The fed know EVERYTHING about you.
and now they have AI to parse it all in realtime.
[ + ] observation1
[ - ] observation1 1 point 1 hourMay 13, 2025 00:16:09 ago (+1/-0)
Ring camera but for the planet
[ + ] prototype
[ - ] prototype 0 points 45 minutesMay 13, 2025 00:45:06 ago (+0/-0)
It is unlikely anyone on voat is within the superset formed by the full distribution.
The effective pool of people outside the global system's tracking, profiling, and disruption capabilities, shrinks each year with the commiserate growth of policy, manpower, and technology.
But the number of people in that superset is not zero.
Formally if the set of all trackable people is Z, and the set of people captured by that system is Y
and the set of outliers who are trackable but fail to be predicted/profiled sufficiently is X then {X, Y} ∪ Z.
This also implies there is a set of people W, outside Z.
To be in W, you'd have to be either sufficiently resourceful, OR (inclusive-or) sufficiently well connected.
For some X and W, there is a subset V, that are opposed to the entire system that creates Z.
By implication V is the greatest threat to Z, and W has every reason to utilize X to put an end to Z.
If we consider Z not merely as the set of people trackable and profilable, but as the set of people implementing Z, then some subset of Z intersects with V.
This does not imply that systems like XK (or broader, global systems we may not know about) will fail, but historical law suggests that as resistance grows (and it always grows) and externalities mount, the cost of maintaining a complex system eventually impinge on its efficiency and effectiveness, till it collapses in complexity.
The ends of things are always in the very beginnings, usually in how they respond to external or internal stresses or shocks, much in the same way metallurgists note that grain-boundary unzipping is what causes catastrophic failures after fatigues in metals.