4 ms·

> this drive to amass data will only lead to human suffering and oppression down the line On a large scale, science (and economics) is a drive to amass data, w

> this drive to amass data will only lead to human suffering and oppression down the line On a large scale, science (and economics) is a drive to amass data, which has led to vast reductions in human suffering. Amassing data lets one (and mankind) make decisions not on random conjecture or feeling, but on a solid footing, which results in better decisions on how to allocate resources. Not gathering data where it's possible to do so results in more human suffering from making sub-optimal decisions from bad inputs.

mlady 6y ago
I think there's a sweet spot somewhere. We're tending towards too much data now with hourly employees working from home but have their screens monitored for constant activity, even if it isn't value-producing.
- xkeysc0re 6y ago
  Exactly. The positivist drive to quantify and accumulate "data points" about everything as though life is just an optimization problem is dangerous and only serves entrenched forces. Quantification is a means to control. Some things - in my opinion - ought not to be controlled.
snds 6y ago
I suspect the parent comment is referring to amassing personally identifiable information
hezag 6y ago
> Amassing data lets one (and mankind) make decisions not on random conjecture or feeling, but on a solid footing, which results in better decisions on how to allocate resources "Better" is extremely relative. Better for whom?
- ChrisLomont 6y ago
  Well, to start, the tens of billions of people in total that have been fed over the past century by modern farming. The tens of billions total that have been pulled from poverty over the last 50 years. The billions right now getting vastly better medical care than their ancestors. What percentage of people would you claim worldwide or over the past 100 years are worse off as a result of science and economic advances? Care to list why they're worse off in total?

mlady 6y ago

I think there's a sweet spot somewhere. We're tending towards too much data now with hourly employees working from home but have their screens monitored for constant activity, even if it isn't value-producing.

xkeysc0re 6y ago
Exactly. The positivist drive to quantify and accumulate "data points" about everything as though life is just an optimization problem is dangerous and only serves entrenched forces. Quantification is a means to control. Some things - in my opinion - ought not to be controlled.

snds 6y ago

I suspect the parent comment is referring to amassing personally identifiable information

hezag 6y ago

> Amassing data lets one (and mankind) make decisions not on random conjecture or feeling, but on a solid footing, which results in better decisions on how to allocate resources "Better" is extremely relative. Better for whom?

ChrisLomont 6y ago
Well, to start, the tens of billions of people in total that have been fed over the past century by modern farming. The tens of billions total that have been pulled from poverty over the last 50 years. The billions right now getting vastly better medical care than their ancestors. What percentage of people would you claim worldwide or over the past 100 years are worse off as a result of science and economic advances? Care to list why they're worse off in total?