4 ms·

In one model of human behavior we all just become better people because we self-censor. I think that may be true for the first generation of people experiencing

In one model of human behavior we all just become better people because we self-censor. I think that may be true for the first generation of people experiencing these effects in a society. Later generations will have more of a problem. The problem comes when they repress negative emotions and other status detractors because the cost of even being aware of them is too high. Then you have people who, in psychological terms, are prisoners of their shadow selves. They become anxious and depressed because they fear confronting it.

socialcooling 9y ago
Author here: I also worry about Learned Helplessness, where we believe that there is nothing we can do about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness In Silicon Valley the Technological Determinist view that technology has it's own will, that it is some unstoppable force, is the dominant but dangerous viewpoint. That idea is only creating a self-fulfilling prophesy. The reality is that we as a society have always taken the rough edges of new technologies through the creation of laws and new norms. For example, we pretty much put a halt to nuclear energy. We can and we must regulate the Big Data world much more. And the first step is that we must help people understand the problem.
- golemotron 9y ago
  I agree. We need to be more conscious of the Precautionary Principle, but having said that it is easy to see how technological determinism is an accurate view regardless of whether we like it or not. As an example, no one quite knew how much cars, television, or the ready availability of cameras on cellphones would impact society. But consumers were so excited by the upsides that there couldn't ever be debate about any downsides or call for regulatory frameworks until the downsides manifested themselves. The trick that we use is to hook the consumer faster than law can react. Uber did this successfully. Segway flubbed it. With Segway Kamen wanted a big rollout. It attracted attention and municipalities started passing legislation restricting Segways before they were off the assembly line.
api 9y ago
You just described the Victorian condition. I wonder if we're on the verge of a digital neo-Victorianism.
- golemotron 9y ago
  I think we are. I think societies exist over a spectrum. At one side you have societies that are loosely knit because people/families can take care of themselves with minimal social dependency on others. At the other end there are societies that where because of population density or economics, people need to convince each other of their social worthiness to participate. The latter become very competitive and the way that competition manifests is in rigid social mores along with the "outing" of people who don't conform. What we're seeing now is technology connecting us more and more and amplifying the potential disqualifiers. There is more social freedom when people have more independence.
Pigo 9y ago
How does everyone training themselves to think more alike create better people? As the Vulcans say "infinite diversity in infinite combinations." I find inspiration in new view points, especially when I disagree with them.

socialcooling 9y ago

Author here: I also worry about Learned Helplessness, where we believe that there is nothing we can do about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness In Silicon Valley the Technological Determinist view that technology has it's own will, that it is some unstoppable force, is the dominant but dangerous viewpoint. That idea is only creating a self-fulfilling prophesy. The reality is that we as a society have always taken the rough edges of new technologies through the creation of laws and new norms. For example, we pretty much put a halt to nuclear energy. We can and we must regulate the Big Data world much more. And the first step is that we must help people understand the problem.

golemotron 9y ago
I agree. We need to be more conscious of the Precautionary Principle, but having said that it is easy to see how technological determinism is an accurate view regardless of whether we like it or not. As an example, no one quite knew how much cars, television, or the ready availability of cameras on cellphones would impact society. But consumers were so excited by the upsides that there couldn't ever be debate about any downsides or call for regulatory frameworks until the downsides manifested themselves. The trick that we use is to hook the consumer faster than law can react. Uber did this successfully. Segway flubbed it. With Segway Kamen wanted a big rollout. It attracted attention and municipalities started passing legislation restricting Segways before they were off the assembly line.

api 9y ago

You just described the Victorian condition. I wonder if we're on the verge of a digital neo-Victorianism.

golemotron 9y ago
I think we are. I think societies exist over a spectrum. At one side you have societies that are loosely knit because people/families can take care of themselves with minimal social dependency on others. At the other end there are societies that where because of population density or economics, people need to convince each other of their social worthiness to participate. The latter become very competitive and the way that competition manifests is in rigid social mores along with the "outing" of people who don't conform. What we're seeing now is technology connecting us more and more and amplifying the potential disqualifiers. There is more social freedom when people have more independence.

Pigo 9y ago

How does everyone training themselves to think more alike create better people? As the Vulcans say "infinite diversity in infinite combinations." I find inspiration in new view points, especially when I disagree with them.