4 ms·

One can argue deprivarion of privacy for the powerless masses can lead to a society so hopelessly controlled and manipulated by the elite class that return of s

One can argue deprivarion of privacy for the powerless masses can lead to a society so hopelessly controlled and manipulated by the elite class that return of slavery with an even worse level of brutality suddenly becomes a practical possibility. Slavery as you portrayed it went away but people who possess the desire to see it back in place are still alive and well. I don't mean lack of democracy but lack of ability for the masses to have their voice heard or will respected

cinquemb 8y ago
For me, I think this can be summed to: asymmetric use of $x against $y can lead to $z. My question, not for you but in general, what tool (or what functions of such tool will be nessisarcy) for lowering chances of $z (if indeed $z is agreed to be undesirable by many in all forms and not just for virtue signaling) as applied to privacy and its exploitation for large gains skewed in favor for the few?
bilbo0s 8y ago
What you're talking about is not slavery. It might be loosely termed "institutional oppression". Basically, an oligarchic dictatorship. Money and information are used to coerce your conformity and obedience. BUT, a person can legally opt out and just live with nothing. Slavery is when brute physical force is used to coerce conformity and obedience. A slave can NEVER legally opt out. and the slave ALWAYS lives with nothing, because he IS property. I'd imagine most humans would choose to live with being forced to behave in society to get money, and then going home, rather than to have to live with cradle to grave slavery. To equate them is just, kind of, being a little sensationalist.
- badrabbit 8y ago
  No,i meant slavery as in 1800s whiplashing and lynching slavery. Institutional oppression is what you think I meant,what i meant was a dystopian future where privacy erosion has lead to a world where your every move and intention is analyzed for conformity by the elite class. You can optin and opt out,elect leaders or overhtrow dictators because you can organize in groups,think and plan without your adversary knowing your every move. If someone controls what information you consume and every reaction you have to a given scenario or information then they can control you to the point where even the brutal form of slavery can be thought of as acceptable.
  - bilbo0s 8y ago
    But in your hypothetical future you can still legally opt out, and live with nothing. A slave can never legally opt out and choose to live on his own with nothing. You are saying that there exists a level of information control that would justify slavery in the minds of the masses. I'm saying there is no such level of information control. (In fact, it would never even be justified in the minds of all the elites.) We just need to agree to disagree. But I really think you're doing a serious reach in order to make a connection from privacy to slavery. And the sensationalism around this issue is what is keeping the masses right now from taking it seriously. We need to be explaining actual consequences to the masses, not shouting alarmist nonsense at them and then calling them stupid for not listening.

cinquemb 8y ago

For me, I think this can be summed to: asymmetric use of $x against $y can lead to $z. My question, not for you but in general, what tool (or what functions of such tool will be nessisarcy) for lowering chances of $z (if indeed $z is agreed to be undesirable by many in all forms and not just for virtue signaling) as applied to privacy and its exploitation for large gains skewed in favor for the few?

bilbo0s 8y ago

What you're talking about is not slavery. It might be loosely termed "institutional oppression". Basically, an oligarchic dictatorship. Money and information are used to coerce your conformity and obedience. BUT, a person can legally opt out and just live with nothing. Slavery is when brute physical force is used to coerce conformity and obedience. A slave can NEVER legally opt out. and the slave ALWAYS lives with nothing, because he IS property. I'd imagine most humans would choose to live with being forced to behave in society to get money, and then going home, rather than to have to live with cradle to grave slavery. To equate them is just, kind of, being a little sensationalist.

badrabbit 8y ago
No,i meant slavery as in 1800s whiplashing and lynching slavery. Institutional oppression is what you think I meant,what i meant was a dystopian future where privacy erosion has lead to a world where your every move and intention is analyzed for conformity by the elite class. You can optin and opt out,elect leaders or overhtrow dictators because you can organize in groups,think and plan without your adversary knowing your every move. If someone controls what information you consume and every reaction you have to a given scenario or information then they can control you to the point where even the brutal form of slavery can be thought of as acceptable.
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  But in your hypothetical future you can still legally opt out, and live with nothing. A slave can never legally opt out and choose to live on his own with nothing. You are saying that there exists a level of information control that would justify slavery in the minds of the masses. I'm saying there is no such level of information control. (In fact, it would never even be justified in the minds of all the elites.) We just need to agree to disagree. But I really think you're doing a serious reach in order to make a connection from privacy to slavery. And the sensationalism around this issue is what is keeping the masses right now from taking it seriously. We need to be explaining actual consequences to the masses, not shouting alarmist nonsense at them and then calling them stupid for not listening.