5 ms·

The author writes about how describing humans as predictive engines will 'encourage us to reduce our fellow humans to mere pieces of machinery' ^ this is prett

by 0thgen 6y ago

The author writes about how describing humans as predictive engines will 'encourage us to reduce our fellow humans to mere pieces of machinery' ^ this is pretty much a fluff statement. it's basically a hand-wavey sliperry slope argument that can be made about any theory in animal/human research. i could also make the claim that thinking about humans as predictive learning engines will encourage to consider our deterministic nature and have more compassion for eachother <-- both my and the author's claims lack any substantial evidence

passivate 6y ago
A few non-fluff sentences: "Consequential decisions in law enforcement, military and financial contexts are increasingly influenced by automated assessments spat out by proprietary predictive engines." "These prediction engines have primed us to be receptive to the idea of the predictive brain. So too has the science of psychology itself, which has been concerned since its founding with the prediction and control of human beings. ‘All natural sciences aim at practical prediction and control, and in none of them is this more the case than in psychology today," "Advertising agencies would fund their own experiments by researchers such as Watson to test the laws of the consumer-machines that they targeted, rationalising their understandings of phenomena such as habitual product use, targeted messaging and brand loyalty." " Simulmatics has become, in Lepore’s words: the mission of nearly every corporation. Collect data. Write code: if/then/else. Detect patterns. Predict behaviour. Direct action. Encourage consumption. Influence elections. " "Scientists might believe that they are simply building conceptual and mechanical tools for observation and understanding – the telescopes and microscopes of the neuroscientific age. But the tools of observation can be fastened all too easily to the end of a weapon and targeted at masses of people. If predictive systems began as weapons meant to make humans controllable in the field of war and in the market, that gives us extra reason to question those who wield such weapons now" >" thinking about humans as predictive learning engines will encourage to consider our deterministic nature and have more compassion for eachother" OK, let us consider that too. What would be the underlying mechanism of this? How would we be primed/conditioned into adopting this behavior? Examples? Proposed models/theories/etc?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- wombatmobile 6y ago
  The author wants society to be more compassionate and less exploitative. That's all. Why? To make life more enjoyable and less challenging for everybody. Imagine a world in which the resources of e.g. Facebook were dedicated towards increasing happiness and usefulness through connecting people to sources of emotional satisfaction, rather than increasing shareholder wealth through targeted advertising. How? The author doesn't say. The challenge is to think of an economic system in which vendors can act selfishly but consumers benefit virtuously. One example is the car industry. Before Henry Ford brought mass transit and higher wages to society, individuals had less freedom, fewer choices, and more dependency on feudal overlords. The problem so far with the digital economy is that it hasn't yielded the same transition in society, at least, not so obviously. In many ways it's the opposite. More engagement leads to more frustration and unhappiness. The rise of surveillance capitalism is negative for personal development because it is based on an economic model of exploitation i.e. spying to make ads sell more stuff. To change this, advertising would have to change so that the KPI are not just clicks and conversions and blind revenue. The KPI should be consumer satisfaction and personal development, and societal development. That's not impossible. It just hasn't been done yet.
  - passivate 6y ago
    Agreed. I wonder if this loss of compassion is caused by our inability to scale it. We tend to be more communal when the community is small. For e.g. People often reminisce about a time when 'everyone knew everyone' whether its in a professional context at work, or in an online forum, etc, It falls neatly in line with this often proposed notion that people from smaller towns / remote areas are more friendly, etc. If we accept the above, certainly there is a potential path forward. But in the current climate capitalism (and society) has primed us to always look for ways to scale, always look for ways to engage and interact with as large of an audience as possible. Maybe that has to change?

by 0thgen 6y ago

passivate 6y ago

A few non-fluff sentences: "Consequential decisions in law enforcement, military and financial contexts are increasingly influenced by automated assessments spat out by proprietary predictive engines." "These prediction engines have primed us to be receptive to the idea of the predictive brain. So too has the science of psychology itself, which has been concerned since its founding with the prediction and control of human beings. ‘All natural sciences aim at practical prediction and control, and in none of them is this more the case than in psychology today," "Advertising agencies would fund their own experiments by researchers such as Watson to test the laws of the consumer-machines that they targeted, rationalising their understandings of phenomena such as habitual product use, targeted messaging and brand loyalty." " Simulmatics has become, in Lepore’s words: the mission of nearly every corporation. Collect data. Write code: if/then/else. Detect patterns. Predict behaviour. Direct action. Encourage consumption. Influence elections. " "Scientists might believe that they are simply building conceptual and mechanical tools for observation and understanding – the telescopes and microscopes of the neuroscientific age. But the tools of observation can be fastened all too easily to the end of a weapon and targeted at masses of people. If predictive systems began as weapons meant to make humans controllable in the field of war and in the market, that gives us extra reason to question those who wield such weapons now" >" thinking about humans as predictive learning engines will encourage to consider our deterministic nature and have more compassion for eachother" OK, let us consider that too. What would be the underlying mechanism of this? How would we be primed/conditioned into adopting this behavior? Examples? Proposed models/theories/etc?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
wombatmobile 6y ago
The author wants society to be more compassionate and less exploitative. That's all. Why? To make life more enjoyable and less challenging for everybody. Imagine a world in which the resources of e.g. Facebook were dedicated towards increasing happiness and usefulness through connecting people to sources of emotional satisfaction, rather than increasing shareholder wealth through targeted advertising. How? The author doesn't say. The challenge is to think of an economic system in which vendors can act selfishly but consumers benefit virtuously. One example is the car industry. Before Henry Ford brought mass transit and higher wages to society, individuals had less freedom, fewer choices, and more dependency on feudal overlords. The problem so far with the digital economy is that it hasn't yielded the same transition in society, at least, not so obviously. In many ways it's the opposite. More engagement leads to more frustration and unhappiness. The rise of surveillance capitalism is negative for personal development because it is based on an economic model of exploitation i.e. spying to make ads sell more stuff. To change this, advertising would have to change so that the KPI are not just clicks and conversions and blind revenue. The KPI should be consumer satisfaction and personal development, and societal development. That's not impossible. It just hasn't been done yet.
- passivate 6y ago
  Agreed. I wonder if this loss of compassion is caused by our inability to scale it. We tend to be more communal when the community is small. For e.g. People often reminisce about a time when 'everyone knew everyone' whether its in a professional context at work, or in an online forum, etc, It falls neatly in line with this often proposed notion that people from smaller towns / remote areas are more friendly, etc. If we accept the above, certainly there is a potential path forward. But in the current climate capitalism (and society) has primed us to always look for ways to scale, always look for ways to engage and interact with as large of an audience as possible. Maybe that has to change?