4 ms·

The video is describing mind control. Literally... I have no words. First they want to offer users to select how they want to change their behaviour. I guess t

The video is describing mind control. Literally... I have no words. First they want to offer users to select how they want to change their behaviour. I guess that's fine, we all want to improve ourselves. This segment lasts a couple of seconds and the rest of the time is dedicated to describing how the system can be made to predict and target "bad" behaviours of humans as a species. Who greenlit this. EDIT: I understand this is not a product, but clearly it means Google is seriously thinking about doing such things. This is just as scary for me.

delroth 8y ago
> Who greenlit this. > “We understand if this is disturbing -- it is designed to be. This is a thought-experiment by the Design team from years ago that uses a technique known as ‘speculative design’ to explore uncomfortable ideas and concepts in order to provoke discussion and debate. It’s not related to any current or future products.” So the answer seems to be "nobody".
fixermark 8y ago
Nobody. As clarified near the bottom of the article, the whole thing is speculative concept work. It doesn't reflect anything that's actually being built. I'd assume it's a useful exercise for a company with the kind of power a Google has to take a hard look at the limits of that power.
- casefields 8y ago
  Unless you're saying you're privy to inside information, YOU don't know what is or isn't being built inside Google.
  - fixermark 8y ago
    I took the statement from X at face value. "It’s not related to any current or future products."
xfs 8y ago
In a theoretical sense this is essentially how Google works. See Big Other: Surveillance Capitalism and the Prospects of an Information Civilization https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2594754 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2594754
hn_throwaway_99 8y ago
> EDIT: I understand this is not a product, but clearly it means Google is seriously thinking about doing such things. This is just as scary for me. I think this is bullshit. You are essentially accusing Google of "Thoughtcrime". I think Google takes plenty of actually questionable actions that deserve opprobrium, so I'd rather focus on that than internal deliberations.
- skummetmaelk 8y ago
  I'm not accusing them of thoughtcrime. However, if this much effort is put into creating a "speculative design" video there have clearly been deep discussions about the topic beforehand. It was not cast away even after these discussions. This is to me an indication that there are internal forces in Google seriously considering going after such applications. As an aside; this whole throughtcrime stuff is ridiculous. Just because someone has a right to say something does not mean you are not allowed to be disgusted by them or think they are bad people because of what they say. Imagine a coworker saying that women deserve to be raped. You would not think of him as a good person after that, even though he has every right to make that statement.
fixermark 8y ago
> I understand this is not a product, but clearly it means Google is seriously thinking about doing such things. This is just as scary for me. Adversarial modeling. With organizations like the Chinese government actually implementing schemes like this, you really do want other organizations---especially ones not particularly sympathetic to the Chinese Communist Party's interests---considering these topics.
- skummetmaelk 8y ago
  > you really do want other organizations considering these topics. Why?
  - fixermark 8y ago
    So they can poke holes in them, recognize the pattern when some other org actually implements them (because they already know what the thing looks like), and already either be aware of the ways the thing breaks down or wrenches an adversary could throw into the thing to make it break down, were one so inclined.
    - skummetmaelk 8y ago
      Naturally, and I would welcome this kind of analysis. Just not from a company that would benefit immensely financially speaking from eventually building such an application.
    - chillingeffect 8y ago
      Yes, but did you see any hint of poking holes in there at all? It was 100% behind the idea.
      - fixermark 8y ago
        It's a leak, so I don't assume we're seeing all sides of the story.

delroth 8y ago

> Who greenlit this. > “We understand if this is disturbing -- it is designed to be. This is a thought-experiment by the Design team from years ago that uses a technique known as ‘speculative design’ to explore uncomfortable ideas and concepts in order to provoke discussion and debate. It’s not related to any current or future products.” So the answer seems to be "nobody".

fixermark 8y ago

Nobody. As clarified near the bottom of the article, the whole thing is speculative concept work. It doesn't reflect anything that's actually being built. I'd assume it's a useful exercise for a company with the kind of power a Google has to take a hard look at the limits of that power.

casefields 8y ago
Unless you're saying you're privy to inside information, YOU don't know what is or isn't being built inside Google.
- fixermark 8y ago
  I took the statement from X at face value. "It’s not related to any current or future products."

xfs 8y ago

In a theoretical sense this is essentially how Google works. See Big Other: Surveillance Capitalism and the Prospects of an Information Civilization https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2594754 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2594754

hn_throwaway_99 8y ago

> EDIT: I understand this is not a product, but clearly it means Google is seriously thinking about doing such things. This is just as scary for me. I think this is bullshit. You are essentially accusing Google of "Thoughtcrime". I think Google takes plenty of actually questionable actions that deserve opprobrium, so I'd rather focus on that than internal deliberations.

skummetmaelk 8y ago
I'm not accusing them of thoughtcrime. However, if this much effort is put into creating a "speculative design" video there have clearly been deep discussions about the topic beforehand. It was not cast away even after these discussions. This is to me an indication that there are internal forces in Google seriously considering going after such applications. As an aside; this whole throughtcrime stuff is ridiculous. Just because someone has a right to say something does not mean you are not allowed to be disgusted by them or think they are bad people because of what they say. Imagine a coworker saying that women deserve to be raped. You would not think of him as a good person after that, even though he has every right to make that statement.

fixermark 8y ago

> I understand this is not a product, but clearly it means Google is seriously thinking about doing such things. This is just as scary for me. Adversarial modeling. With organizations like the Chinese government actually implementing schemes like this, you really do want other organizations---especially ones not particularly sympathetic to the Chinese Communist Party's interests---considering these topics.

skummetmaelk 8y ago
> you really do want other organizations considering these topics. Why?
- fixermark 8y ago
  So they can poke holes in them, recognize the pattern when some other org actually implements them (because they already know what the thing looks like), and already either be aware of the ways the thing breaks down or wrenches an adversary could throw into the thing to make it break down, were one so inclined.
  - skummetmaelk 8y ago
    Naturally, and I would welcome this kind of analysis. Just not from a company that would benefit immensely financially speaking from eventually building such an application.
  - chillingeffect 8y ago
    Yes, but did you see any hint of poking holes in there at all? It was 100% behind the idea.
    - fixermark 8y ago
      It's a leak, so I don't assume we're seeing all sides of the story.