3 ms·

Along the lines of “everyone is breaking some law”, there could be a shift from “technically illegal but generally harmless and tolerated” to “illegal and mindl

• mc32 7y ago
  The only “good” outcome of this is we get to know how pervasive surveillance affects behavior and whether the benefits outweigh the detriments. In other words does it result in a better or worse society overall. Even if it’s better overall I’d it worth the negative effects on affected populations? It’s a living laboratory.
  • homonculus1 7y ago
    The benefits would have to be impossibly valuable to outweigh the constant burden and psychological damage of living in a totalitarian panopticon. Given that society functions without it and is constantly improving anyway--crime rates, poverty, mortality continue to drop from socioeconomic and technological development without the need for the intervention of pervasive surveillance--I personally literally cannot conceive of a benefit that would actually be worth it.
    • mc32 7y ago
      True, I do not see it turning out well. But it would be a laboratory into behavioral control. Something like this would eliminate needs for safe spaces, anti/hate speech, etc. because this would regulate all this anti social behavior in the first place.