We're just starting to learn what living under constant surveillance inside our digital panopticon does to a person and to a population. It'll likely take a few generations before we discover the extent of the harm.
A major effect I theorize is that mass surveillance aids 'players' in political orgs weed out 'naive' party members that might be harder to corrupt.
I've got this suspicion that many of all these insane ideas are a dog whistle for 'bad people' to find eachother among 'good people' and later if they have control some sort of filter process to lurk out dissident 'good people'.
I could certainly be used to identify people who might not be much of a problem yet, but who could rise to a level of power/influence which might threaten the status quo. Best to cut them down early before they have a chance.
When I moved to Hawaii, that was my first time in small-town America and my first time living on an island.
It was impossible to be alone and everyone knows everything if you have any friend group. That bothered me, at first.
For the first… month… I felt like I had to be on my best, most generic, behavior. It made my think twice about hookups and which women to pursue. I distinctly remember being in the backseat of a car playing with glowsticks with a lady, and I was just like “nah.” and left. For superficial reasons along with not being that interested, but thinking about the social consequences more than I would in a big city. I would have made out at least otherwise.
But after that I went super polarizing and things got way more fun. More partying, more raunchiness, more visibly. Some of my other tech transplant friends had an issue, but the far more attractive people I wanted loved it.
and that's why I don’t think constant surveillance will have that specific outcome. Maybe less murder and assault? But people might define themselves and self segregate more greatly than before
Living in a place where everyone knows everyone else generally isn't a problem until it becomes one at which point you're screwed and could be forced to move. It's also massively different from having your every movement recorded, kept on file forever, and analyzed remotely by AI bots working for total strangers looking to make endlessly growing profits and with reach so great that moving away is no longer an option.
> until it becomes one at which point you're screwed
yeah that was the other weird side of things, the community is nice but each one has this one gatekeeper to everything, and if they're temperamental you get ostracized from everything
which means that even people pleasing everyone isn't a good social strategy because you had to choose a niche group anyway if you wanted favor in any regard
> It's also massively different from having your every movement recorded, kept on file forever
I wonder how people will adapt to that then. I disagree with the quote in the headline
The GDR taught us many things but what stands out for me is:
There is little creativity without freedom of expression.
People redirected their efforts into privat projects, rather than building something for the public.
The “lay down” movement in china starts to move along similar lines.
>Larry Ellison, the exorbitantly rich cofounder of software outfit Oracle
Take note of the name. People like him should be forcefully removed from society.
We're just starting to learn what living under constant surveillance inside our digital panopticon does to a person and to a population. It'll likely take a few generations before we discover the extent of the harm.
A major effect I theorize is that mass surveillance aids 'players' in political orgs weed out 'naive' party members that might be harder to corrupt.
I've got this suspicion that many of all these insane ideas are a dog whistle for 'bad people' to find eachother among 'good people' and later if they have control some sort of filter process to lurk out dissident 'good people'.
I could certainly be used to identify people who might not be much of a problem yet, but who could rise to a level of power/influence which might threaten the status quo. Best to cut them down early before they have a chance.
[dupe]
More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41562750
Billionaires under constant surveillance seems like something that would be more popular in a democracy.
When I moved to Hawaii, that was my first time in small-town America and my first time living on an island.
It was impossible to be alone and everyone knows everything if you have any friend group. That bothered me, at first.
For the first… month… I felt like I had to be on my best, most generic, behavior. It made my think twice about hookups and which women to pursue. I distinctly remember being in the backseat of a car playing with glowsticks with a lady, and I was just like “nah.” and left. For superficial reasons along with not being that interested, but thinking about the social consequences more than I would in a big city. I would have made out at least otherwise.
But after that I went super polarizing and things got way more fun. More partying, more raunchiness, more visibly. Some of my other tech transplant friends had an issue, but the far more attractive people I wanted loved it.
and that's why I don’t think constant surveillance will have that specific outcome. Maybe less murder and assault? But people might define themselves and self segregate more greatly than before
Living in a place where everyone knows everyone else generally isn't a problem until it becomes one at which point you're screwed and could be forced to move. It's also massively different from having your every movement recorded, kept on file forever, and analyzed remotely by AI bots working for total strangers looking to make endlessly growing profits and with reach so great that moving away is no longer an option.
I'm far more worried about the unholy union between government and big business than I am about either alone.
> until it becomes one at which point you're screwed
yeah that was the other weird side of things, the community is nice but each one has this one gatekeeper to everything, and if they're temperamental you get ostracized from everything
which means that even people pleasing everyone isn't a good social strategy because you had to choose a niche group anyway if you wanted favor in any regard
> It's also massively different from having your every movement recorded, kept on file forever
I wonder how people will adapt to that then. I disagree with the quote in the headline
> playing with glowsticks
... is this an eupheism for something?
its not
[dead]