6 ms·

My personal prediction for the US is that Americans will continue to rail against Chinese-style government oversight of a social credit system while supporting

My personal prediction for the US is that Americans will continue to rail against Chinese-style government oversight of a social credit system while supporting private institutions that de-facto create the same system without government oversight, laws to mandate the information in the datasets pass a smell-test for truth, etc. We already have financial credit reporting agencies and private organizations scraping datasets for mugshots, court cases, and legal sanctions; couple that with some social media datasets and you've got a potential employer's dream tool for candidate screening. America tends to run so hard from the risk of a Big Brother scenario that they end up smacking into Snow Crash without even realizing it.

sonnyblarney 8y ago
These moral/technical equivalency memes I don't think hold water. Nobody in the US is going to censor your email so that if you say something about Trump it gets magically deleted. Court cases and mugshots are public information and a matter of transparency. When you murder someone, well, that's part of the deal. That's very different from the government measuring other, minute aspects of your life and making it public to everyone. If your social media posts are marked private - which is your choice - then for the most part they're not going to be available to arbitrary 3rd parties, moreover, there are definitely social media solutions you can use that don't share anything. There is an ongoing war over your information mostly for advertising by the way (not hiring) and hopefully some legislation will take care of that, and some dialogue over NSA/Snowden type things. Thankfully, there are actually laws, warrants, judges in the mix. Surely we have to judge China's actions from a completely different angle, as they have their own history, social system etc. - but the equivalency arguments just don't work. I think if you tried to text someone a message about Obama, and it was magically deleted by the US government, it would send shivers down your spine, and however political or not you were, you'd be signed up for the first protest/action - as would most of us. We all have some concerns about our system but it's manageable - what's happening in China is right out of a novel. Also note that 'it's just begun'. This is possibly only the first tranche. The de-facto objective may be to leverage tech to it's max - the result is effective total control over everyone's lives.
- fixermark 8y ago
  Oh yes, they're very different. It's just not necessarily the case that one is to be preferred over the other. I don't expect in a US structure my Obama texts would be hidden or deleted. I think they'd be put on blast by multiple competing systems that are semi-automated to seek out and publicize "undesirable" behavior, and I'd end up receiving death threats from anonymous sources, sanctions from my employer, etc. The outcomes are different, and I think the jury's out on which one is better. In fact, it's probably a personal preference.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    "I think they'd be put on blast by multiple competing systems that are semi-automated to seek out and publicize "undesirable" behavior, and I'd end up receiving death threats from anonymous sources, sanctions from my employer, etc." I disagree. I don't see any future where your gmails or SMSs are going to be sold to arbitrary 3rd parties so your 'future employers' can read them.
    - avmich 8y ago
      > I don't see any future where your gmails or SMSs are going to be sold to arbitrary 3rd parties so your 'future employers' can read them. Doesn't Google read gmails? Doesn't Google have agreements with 3rd parties related to using information from those gmails? Is it hard to imagine that, as with Facebook, Google making that information directly available?
      - sonnyblarney 8y ago
        Yes, it is hard to imagine, because it would be a direct violation of their privacy policy and they would be sued into oblivion. What FB et. al. do with your content is right in the fine print.
    - mAEStro-paNDa 8y ago
      It's different yes, but let's not pretend like this is a conversation around an "open-society" vs a "closed" one. They are not the same, but there is overlap. For example, the employment of academics in the US being in jeopardy if they choose to criticize Israel.
pwaivers 8y ago
There is a similarity and Americans can be hypocritical, however the Chinese-style oversight is more dangerous. Big tech companies cannot prevent you from traveling, living at certain places, and buying stuff. The Chinese system can. To me, the Chinese social credit system is far more terrifying than Facebook owning all of my pictures and social data.
- mAEStro-paNDa 8y ago
  I've posted this article before, in response to a similar comment. This system isn't exactly what you might think. I greatly encourage further discussion or criticism having to do with this piece and this system in general: https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/16/chinas-orwellian-social-credit-score-isnt-real/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/16/chinas-orwellian-social...
  - LMYahooTFY 8y ago
    Perhaps I'm misunderstanding a lot here? The article title flat-out says the "social credit score isn't real", and then outlines in a nuanced way exactly how it is real. Sure, there is plenty of negative rhetoric that surrounds the topic, but at best what I can understand here is that there is no (verified) single aggregate score being leveraged against anyone...? I'm not sure how this distinction is meaningful?
- throwaway-fut 8y ago
  Amazon can ban your account. You can get put on the No Fly list. Not to mention the Drone Strike List, > ...former CIA and NSA director Michael Hayden said in a public debate, “We kill people based on metadata.” > According to multiple reports and leaks, death-by-metadata could be triggered, without even knowing the target’s name, if too many derogatory checks appear on their profile. “Armed military aged males” exhibiting suspicious behavior in the wrong place can become targets, as can someone “seen to be giving out orders.” Such mathematics-based assassinations have come to be known as “signature strikes.” https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/how-to-survive-americas-kill-list-699334/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/how-...

sonnyblarney 8y ago

These moral/technical equivalency memes I don't think hold water. Nobody in the US is going to censor your email so that if you say something about Trump it gets magically deleted. Court cases and mugshots are public information and a matter of transparency. When you murder someone, well, that's part of the deal. That's very different from the government measuring other, minute aspects of your life and making it public to everyone. If your social media posts are marked private - which is your choice - then for the most part they're not going to be available to arbitrary 3rd parties, moreover, there are definitely social media solutions you can use that don't share anything. There is an ongoing war over your information mostly for advertising by the way (not hiring) and hopefully some legislation will take care of that, and some dialogue over NSA/Snowden type things. Thankfully, there are actually laws, warrants, judges in the mix. Surely we have to judge China's actions from a completely different angle, as they have their own history, social system etc. - but the equivalency arguments just don't work. I think if you tried to text someone a message about Obama, and it was magically deleted by the US government, it would send shivers down your spine, and however political or not you were, you'd be signed up for the first protest/action - as would most of us. We all have some concerns about our system but it's manageable - what's happening in China is right out of a novel. Also note that 'it's just begun'. This is possibly only the first tranche. The de-facto objective may be to leverage tech to it's max - the result is effective total control over everyone's lives.

fixermark 8y ago
Oh yes, they're very different. It's just not necessarily the case that one is to be preferred over the other. I don't expect in a US structure my Obama texts would be hidden or deleted. I think they'd be put on blast by multiple competing systems that are semi-automated to seek out and publicize "undesirable" behavior, and I'd end up receiving death threats from anonymous sources, sanctions from my employer, etc. The outcomes are different, and I think the jury's out on which one is better. In fact, it's probably a personal preference.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  "I think they'd be put on blast by multiple competing systems that are semi-automated to seek out and publicize "undesirable" behavior, and I'd end up receiving death threats from anonymous sources, sanctions from my employer, etc." I disagree. I don't see any future where your gmails or SMSs are going to be sold to arbitrary 3rd parties so your 'future employers' can read them.
  - avmich 8y ago
    > I don't see any future where your gmails or SMSs are going to be sold to arbitrary 3rd parties so your 'future employers' can read them. Doesn't Google read gmails? Doesn't Google have agreements with 3rd parties related to using information from those gmails? Is it hard to imagine that, as with Facebook, Google making that information directly available?
    - sonnyblarney 8y ago
      Yes, it is hard to imagine, because it would be a direct violation of their privacy policy and they would be sued into oblivion. What FB et. al. do with your content is right in the fine print.
  - mAEStro-paNDa 8y ago
    It's different yes, but let's not pretend like this is a conversation around an "open-society" vs a "closed" one. They are not the same, but there is overlap. For example, the employment of academics in the US being in jeopardy if they choose to criticize Israel.

pwaivers 8y ago

There is a similarity and Americans can be hypocritical, however the Chinese-style oversight is more dangerous. Big tech companies cannot prevent you from traveling, living at certain places, and buying stuff. The Chinese system can. To me, the Chinese social credit system is far more terrifying than Facebook owning all of my pictures and social data.

mAEStro-paNDa 8y ago
I've posted this article before, in response to a similar comment. This system isn't exactly what you might think. I greatly encourage further discussion or criticism having to do with this piece and this system in general: https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/16/chinas-orwellian-social-credit-score-isnt-real/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/16/chinas-orwellian-social...
- LMYahooTFY 8y ago
  Perhaps I'm misunderstanding a lot here? The article title flat-out says the "social credit score isn't real", and then outlines in a nuanced way exactly how it is real. Sure, there is plenty of negative rhetoric that surrounds the topic, but at best what I can understand here is that there is no (verified) single aggregate score being leveraged against anyone...? I'm not sure how this distinction is meaningful?
throwaway-fut 8y ago
Amazon can ban your account. You can get put on the No Fly list. Not to mention the Drone Strike List, > ...former CIA and NSA director Michael Hayden said in a public debate, “We kill people based on metadata.” > According to multiple reports and leaks, death-by-metadata could be triggered, without even knowing the target’s name, if too many derogatory checks appear on their profile. “Armed military aged males” exhibiting suspicious behavior in the wrong place can become targets, as can someone “seen to be giving out orders.” Such mathematics-based assassinations have come to be known as “signature strikes.” https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/how-to-survive-americas-kill-list-699334/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/how-...