3 ms·

Over the longer term, privacy is dead. Sensors are proliferating at a rate web servers were 20 years ago and a state of continual recorded surveillance is where

by xiaoma 10y ago

Over the longer term, privacy is dead. Sensors are proliferating at a rate web servers were 20 years ago and a state of continual recorded surveillance is where we are headed over the next 20 years. The main question is, how equitable will that surveillance be? Governments and powerful multinationals will have access to the personal information of ordinary people. Will the converse also be true? As unpleasant as the prospect of sub mosquito-sized recording devices everywhere is, it matters greatly whether if law enforcement, moguls and politicians are subject to the same scrutiny as those without power.

k-mcgrady 10y ago
>> Over the longer term, privacy is dead. Privacy will die if we let it die. It's not an inevitability. We have the power to prevent it (through law imo, not tech). As for it being equitable I don't see how that could ever happen. Having access to everyone's private information would be of zero use to me but would be very useful for governments and companies.
- xiaoma 10y ago
  >" It's not an inevitability" It's ironic you use this word given that Kevin Kelly's new bestseller which focuses on this and two other trends is called, The Inevitable. https://www.amazon.com/Inevitable-Understanding-Technological-Forces-Future/dp/0525428089 https://www.amazon.com/Inevitable-Understanding-Technologica...
  - ionised 10y ago
    One man's book does not decide the future.
pessimizer 10y ago
Law enforcement, oligarchs and politicians will be subject to orders of magnitude more surveillance than ordinary people, who generally don't do anything that matters and aren't worth blackmailing. Most people will have to deal with an algorithmic dragnet which selects people for special attention, but important people will have full-time employees or teams of employees writing reports and proposing strategies. > Governments and powerful multinationals will have access to the personal information of ordinary people. Will the converse also be true? Absolutely not. In whose interest would it be to give ordinary people anything?

by xiaoma 10y ago

k-mcgrady 10y ago

>> Over the longer term, privacy is dead. Privacy will die if we let it die. It's not an inevitability. We have the power to prevent it (through law imo, not tech). As for it being equitable I don't see how that could ever happen. Having access to everyone's private information would be of zero use to me but would be very useful for governments and companies.

xiaoma 10y ago
>" It's not an inevitability" It's ironic you use this word given that Kevin Kelly's new bestseller which focuses on this and two other trends is called, The Inevitable. https://www.amazon.com/Inevitable-Understanding-Technological-Forces-Future/dp/0525428089 https://www.amazon.com/Inevitable-Understanding-Technologica...
- ionised 10y ago
  One man's book does not decide the future.

pessimizer 10y ago

Law enforcement, oligarchs and politicians will be subject to orders of magnitude more surveillance than ordinary people, who generally don't do anything that matters and aren't worth blackmailing. Most people will have to deal with an algorithmic dragnet which selects people for special attention, but important people will have full-time employees or teams of employees writing reports and proposing strategies. > Governments and powerful multinationals will have access to the personal information of ordinary people. Will the converse also be true? Absolutely not. In whose interest would it be to give ordinary people anything?