5 ms·
Being stonewalled by bureaucracy with no explanation given is nothing new.
by lazyguy2 7y ago
Being stonewalled by bureaucracy with no explanation given is nothing new.
- vbezhenar 7y agoYou can shout at bureaucrats. You have some basic rights. You can demand escalation of your issue. You can't do much when your Google account is banned.
- Nuzzerino 7y agoSounds more like the USSR than the USA
- catalogia 7y agoYeah, but I can't slip the computer a bribe to make the problem go away.
- anoncake 7y agoUnder "communism", man oppresses man. Under capitalism, it's just the opposite.
- bostonpete 7y agoThe "opposite" version of that quote makes less sense to me than "other way around" or "reverse". The opposite of "man oppresses man" would be "man doesn't oppress man", no...?
- anoncake 7y agoMaybe, I just googled the quote because I didn't remember it exactly. But I think it's actually clear that "man doesn't opress man" is not the intended meaning precisely because that wouldn't make sense.
- Nuzzerino 7y agoReminds me of the quote, "Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world"
- ethbro 7y agoUnder post-capitalism, the automated systems serving capital oppress man? ... woman inherits the Earth?
- anoncake 7y agoIMHO attribuiting actions to automated systems rather than their owners hides who's actually responsible. If we don't accept abusing power we shouldn't accept abusing power using AI either.
- ethbro 7y agoI wouldn't be able to guarantee "capital" (i.e. people with access to large amounts of it) are smart enough to understand the outcomes of sufficiently complex systems. I think the mortgage derivative swaps crisis taught us that. Powerful fools are still fools, and there's nothing about the system as-is that prevents some fools from becoming powerful. In that sense, it's entirely possible we have bad outcomes from automated systems created by people who don't understand them. And that's the ambivalent case. The actively evil case is: "How much would I have to pay you to design an unethical automated system?"
- anoncake 7y agoYou're right, active evilness is not the only case or necessarily the bigger problem. Not knowing what you're doing doesn't mean you aren't acting unethically though when you risk others' welfare for your own gain. But actions your automated systems are still your actions, regardless of intentions and outcomes. If we hold people responsible for negligently causing damage, we should also hold them responsible for negligently causing damage using an automated system. And of course, we should positive outcomes a system causes to the people behind it as well.
- tyingq 7y agoIndeed. This feels eerily similar to my DMV experience of "which particular undocumented document did you fail to bring?"
- Gibbon1 7y agoA friend of mine works as a lawyer dealing with PUC's. Trope of faceless bureaucrats pisses him off because he see it from the other side. Because they'll actually listen to some 80 year old lady's complaint at a meeting[1] and then maybe try to figure out what they can do to not piss her off. [1] The meetings that people who rant about faceless bureaucrats never show up at.