4 ms·

I agree with you. But I think there is a bigger "weapon". When dust size monitoring is pervasive, how can anyone acquire weapons or coordinate any resistance? D

I agree with you. But I think there is a bigger "weapon". When dust size monitoring is pervasive, how can anyone acquire weapons or coordinate any resistance? Dust is everywhere. And teams of nano-weapons can kill people (this has been reported as research for well over a decade, so anyone could reasonably assume that unreported research has gotten a lot further.) You don't need armies when nobody can effectively fight you or even acquire or build any weapon of any sort. So I don't worry as much about WW3 - since WW3 can be prevented with the pervasive monitoring technology on the near horizon. (There may be a WW3, but we have bigger problems coming up.)

starbeast 8y ago
When the map starts to reach the same size as the territory, don't you then need a map for the map? Pervasive monitoring sounds like one hell of a dataset to search through. Sure, you can use it to follow things you have already identified, but just because you have recorded something, doesn't mean that you know that you have recorded it.
- tttthrowaway 8y ago
  I think self-censorship itself is a problem. Just knowing that there are sensors around, many may remain silent.
- MrTonyD 8y ago
  Some people wonder why Cloudera (Hadoop and now Spark) had such high stock prices. But the real investors and the real clients were not public. Now, we all know that these systems are limited both in data volume and ability to run all the Machine Learning algorithms - but this problem is looking more and more solvable - and there are many who are trying outside of the public eye.
tttthrowaway 8y ago
Catharsis. I had been suspicious of similar things since early 2000s, thinking that the technology must be there. Surprised how only-ok sensors were while at research institutions (I avoided career paths even adjacent to military per principle). Perhaps this is naive: One matter I never hear of, and is underestimated is automation of the legal system, and its equalizing effect. I have high hopes for it, although to be fair, our society is as unequal as we are. But those who cannot win the battle will have everything they need. And those who never have enough will be put in their places, and ideally technologists and scientists can take over from politicians, if we aren't automated ourselves. Then I wish to submit a request for democratization of computing power to the legal skynet, which grants it, and that in theory gives me my freedom as much as a gun claims it does. I should be able to own dust sensors to monitor intruding dust sensors. High hopes. Some people make fun of elon musk for mars, but he has a point. But thanks for turning my fanthom chills into real ones. The downvotes are from those who believe otherwise, which is not bad at all to see. I wanted to mention something about certain areas of research on similar grounds, but I am not topping dust sensors by a long shot. Although my suspicions are probably correct then. Again, I am probably on the naive-spectrum, but deep down, I feel if I don't ever go after money, I'll have less of a say in how the world plays out, and I am more fair than most I know, so I have a responsibility (I currently do research for research's sake, attic-style, and unfortunately I am only moderately bright, but bright enough to see through the facade where I am living that many many things only exist and function so the rich may remain rich, despite new technologies).

starbeast 8y ago

When the map starts to reach the same size as the territory, don't you then need a map for the map? Pervasive monitoring sounds like one hell of a dataset to search through. Sure, you can use it to follow things you have already identified, but just because you have recorded something, doesn't mean that you know that you have recorded it.

tttthrowaway 8y ago
I think self-censorship itself is a problem. Just knowing that there are sensors around, many may remain silent.
MrTonyD 8y ago
Some people wonder why Cloudera (Hadoop and now Spark) had such high stock prices. But the real investors and the real clients were not public. Now, we all know that these systems are limited both in data volume and ability to run all the Machine Learning algorithms - but this problem is looking more and more solvable - and there are many who are trying outside of the public eye.

tttthrowaway 8y ago

Catharsis. I had been suspicious of similar things since early 2000s, thinking that the technology must be there. Surprised how only-ok sensors were while at research institutions (I avoided career paths even adjacent to military per principle). Perhaps this is naive: One matter I never hear of, and is underestimated is automation of the legal system, and its equalizing effect. I have high hopes for it, although to be fair, our society is as unequal as we are. But those who cannot win the battle will have everything they need. And those who never have enough will be put in their places, and ideally technologists and scientists can take over from politicians, if we aren't automated ourselves. Then I wish to submit a request for democratization of computing power to the legal skynet, which grants it, and that in theory gives me my freedom as much as a gun claims it does. I should be able to own dust sensors to monitor intruding dust sensors. High hopes. Some people make fun of elon musk for mars, but he has a point. But thanks for turning my fanthom chills into real ones. The downvotes are from those who believe otherwise, which is not bad at all to see. I wanted to mention something about certain areas of research on similar grounds, but I am not topping dust sensors by a long shot. Although my suspicions are probably correct then. Again, I am probably on the naive-spectrum, but deep down, I feel if I don't ever go after money, I'll have less of a say in how the world plays out, and I am more fair than most I know, so I have a responsibility (I currently do research for research's sake, attic-style, and unfortunately I am only moderately bright, but bright enough to see through the facade where I am living that many many things only exist and function so the rich may remain rich, despite new technologies).