4 ms·

Can I take an intent and swallow the blue pill to chill ? Sometimes I think that all "Facebook scandals" "data breaches news" "surveillance capitalism" is just

Can I take an intent and swallow the blue pill to chill ? Sometimes I think that all "Facebook scandals" "data breaches news" "surveillance capitalism" is just pieces of a layer of control that always existed since humanity. This layer function as a "useful revolt channels" that maintains status quo : Empowered humans dictate how information flows. I mean information was controlled before: - in tribes by "the druids" - Tsars, emperors, pharaoh etc and theyr closed near ecosystem of humans - middle age by religion and nobility and books - since industrial revolution, by capitalists by mass media - now it's big tech and "the data" (and netflix beeing part of it) so what is exactly new here ? Empowered humans dictate how information flows. Like before. Like in the future. the more things change, the more they stay the same," (Les Guêpes, July 1848).

codeulike 7y ago
This is indeed how it has been, but concessions like the rule of law and vaguely representative democracy were very hard won, and if not protected will slowly be clawed back.
davesmith1983 7y ago
You are talking about hypernormalisation. TBH only recently have people been able to do this due to how media works.
untog 7y ago
I think the difference is the sheer amount of personal data. In the era of the Tsars they tightly controlled what was reported in newspapers about war efforts etc, but that had nothing to do with everyday citizens. These days, Facebook holds an enormous about of information about all of us, and lets advertisers (including political ones) use it. A company like Cambridge Analytica could show me an ad saying "Candidate X supports position Y!", knowing that I too support Y. It could then show my neighbor, who is against Y, an ad saying "Candidate X is against Y". And if there's no oversight no one would be any the wiser. That feels significant to me, even if it is a progression of existing trends.
justadog 7y ago
Your argument is so general that it can be applied to almost anything. All the examples you give are very different, if you examine them. Books and mass media were revolutionary and both reguired a lot of new rules and regulation. It is not given that new technologies will be used in fair and sustainable ways. Facebook scadal is a result of people beginning to think digital technologies more critically. That seems like a healthy thing to me.

codeulike 7y ago

This is indeed how it has been, but concessions like the rule of law and vaguely representative democracy were very hard won, and if not protected will slowly be clawed back.

davesmith1983 7y ago

You are talking about hypernormalisation. TBH only recently have people been able to do this due to how media works.

untog 7y ago

I think the difference is the sheer amount of personal data. In the era of the Tsars they tightly controlled what was reported in newspapers about war efforts etc, but that had nothing to do with everyday citizens. These days, Facebook holds an enormous about of information about all of us, and lets advertisers (including political ones) use it. A company like Cambridge Analytica could show me an ad saying "Candidate X supports position Y!", knowing that I too support Y. It could then show my neighbor, who is against Y, an ad saying "Candidate X is against Y". And if there's no oversight no one would be any the wiser. That feels significant to me, even if it is a progression of existing trends.

justadog 7y ago

Your argument is so general that it can be applied to almost anything. All the examples you give are very different, if you examine them. Books and mass media were revolutionary and both reguired a lot of new rules and regulation. It is not given that new technologies will be used in fair and sustainable ways. Facebook scadal is a result of people beginning to think digital technologies more critically. That seems like a healthy thing to me.