4 ms·
Isn't society supposed to democratically control the impacts of various things upon itself?
by eli_gottlieb 8y ago
Isn't society supposed to democratically control the impacts of various things upon itself?
- TeMPOraL 8y agoIf by "democratically" you mean through the market, then yes, it's how this works. EDIT: what I mean is, roughly, markets are how we usually screw ourselves up in the first place.
- dekhn 8y agoNo, they mean through legislation.
- onceKnowable 8y agoBullshit, the market doesn’t demand your right to privacy. Nor does the market care about your property right. The democracy you live in enshrines those rights on your behalf.
- mindcrime 8y agoThe democracy you live in enshrines those rights on your behalf. And it's doing a great job of it.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] [1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_(2001%E2%80%932007) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_(... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_security_letter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_security_letter [4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO [5]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra [6]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Edgar_Hoover https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Edgar_Hoover [7]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/05/how-nsa-transforming-law-enforcement https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/05/how-nsa-transforming-l... [8]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
- stevew20 8y agoBeautiful timing.
- onceKnowable 8y agoNone of those actions were the result of an informed public debate. In fact, they’re all actions that show that an informed public debate regarding new technologies is needed to protect the public from not only unscrupulous businesses or external threats but to protect the public from their own authorities. Without public debate and a public that demands robust protection in the fit of laws, misused technologies represent a threat to everyone until that debate is had.
- 2close4comfort 8y agoNot when the market has no moral compass with which to guide. Democracy is controlled by the market, and when you teach a computer to learn to pick the cars out of a picture so you can "prove you are not a bot" watch Real Genius you do have a moral obligation to what you take part in creating. If you say my piece is small and I can't stop them from making a facial recognition system/plate reader/password cracker then you are putting your financial gain above what your work does to others. You are part of the problem.
- eli_gottlieb 8y ago> Democracy is controlled by the market This is the problem, because you know what else is controlled by the market? Your employment. I fully encourage going on strike if asked to make surveillance tech, but you will be fired for it. Then some other firm will be hired, and, oh well. If "the market" controls democracy, to the extent that the "democratic" government demands surveillance tech because someone on the market wants to sell it, that's the problem to be solved, not a shortage of research scientists martyring their careers for no effective gain against the larger social pathologies.
- 2close4comfort 8y agoYES! Totally agree but they can't continue to give the market the weapons that are being used to maintain that repression.