Comment by aleph_minus_one
1 day ago
> Surveillance was the political topic of 2020, so there was quite a few talks about that, migration is the political topic 2025, so there are a lot of talks about that
There is one important difference: surveillance is a deeply computer-/hacking-related topics while migration isn't.
So I would say a talk about surveillance (as long as it is relevant for hacking topics) typically has its place while it is much harder to find a reason why a talk about migration has relevance for a hacking conference.
The linked surveillance talk has nearly 0 references to computers and is all about media/reporting
> The linked surveillance talk has nearly 0 references to computers and is all about media/reporting
(link to the talk: https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-8969-die_sprache_der_uberwacher )
Surveillance has relevance to core CCC/hacking topics (privacy is a central topic against which hackers fight), so I can understand why the organisers decided to include this talk in the schedule: they considered it to be a good idea that the audience should also get a "non-computer perspective" on a topic that is highly relevant to hackers.
But I agree that for the decision to include or not include this specific talk, the organisers have to apply an exceptionally good judgement: if they make a "wrong" decision here, people will immediately (rightfully) complain that the talks are too political (or if they "wronged" by non-inclusion of this talk, the other side will complain that important topics are omitted).
> Surveillance has relevance to core CCC/hacking topics (privacy is a central topic against which hackers fight)
Great, who exactly is making those rules for all hackers?
People have complained about this for atleast the last 15 years where I have been active, to political, not political enough.
Stop complaining, start creating.
1 reply →