5 ms·

Hey, they got that system in place already in China! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System Go t

• inglor_cz 5y ago
  Ultimately, human desire to control and measure other humans is not limited to totalitarian regimes. On the contrary, totalitarian regimes grow out of this naturally occurring phenomenon. We should be a bit vigilant about such concepts creeping into freer societies. They will usually do so either under guise of combating crime, or increasing efficiency. But there is no freedom without some slack.
  • sebastianconcpt 5y ago
    Good point. Reminded me of that talk of Ronald Reagan about Freedom being one generation away from extinction https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDouNtnR_IA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDouNtnR_IA
• skocznymroczny 5y ago
  Don't worry, Western world is catching up to the same system. It's called a vaccine passport. The so-called pandemic may end someday, but the mechanisms will stay and you will have to show your individual QR code to go into the restaurant, store, leave the house, stray away from your house for a longer period of time. Sure, at first it will be about preventing the disease, then they will expand it to "keeping criminals away from our communities", then they can expand it to people who "foment dissent in our safe communities".
  • tigershark 5y ago
    Stop spreading disinformation and conspiracy theories here please.
    • gruez 5y ago
      How is it disinformation? Is it because it's not currently being used for evil purposes that we can't say it will theoretically be used for evil purposes in the future? Should we label all the anti-apple CSAM blog posts as "disinformation" because apple says it will only be used for CSAM and definitely wouldn't use it for political purposes?
      • tigershark 5y ago
        “The so-called pandemic may end someday” What is “so-called” in a pandemic responsible for the deaths of millions (tens of millions most likely) people in the world?
        • skocznymroczny 5y ago
          The infection rate is highly arguable, because it relies on extrapolations of PCR test results, which are unreliable for detecting number of infected. PCR detects remains of the virus, not active infections.
        • mikem170 5y ago
          I would agree, covid fits the medical definition of pandemic. Saying it is a "so called" pandemic is not accurate. But are you any better than the person you called out with your projection that covid will cause "tens of millions most likely" people to die? I know of no real evidence to support that statement, based on what is known of coronaviruses specifically. There's many who would consider your statement to be misinformation, also. And fear-mongering.
    • cjfd 5y ago
      Stop calling opinions and projection of a possible future 'disinformation and conspiracy theories'. That you disagree with something does not make it disinformation. Nor a conspiracy theory.
      • deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  • higherup 5y ago
    And for every step, WE WILL CHEER THEM ON.
• refenestrator 5y ago
  And you can lose your job for posting a controversial opinion in the US, completely privatized. It's a way more stable system. Allow a very narrow band of opinions in practice while claiming that everyone's free to think whatever they want in theory.
  • persedes 5y ago
    I've heard that sentiment, but does that actually happen? At least without the company being sued for violating someones freedom of speech. The last very public case I'm aware of was Damore at google, which they must've settled outside of court.
    • voakbasda 5y ago
      Are you familiar with cancel culture? Free speech does not apply in private companies. Post something stupid on the inter webs, and you will lose your job and have no recourse.
      • collegeburner 5y ago
        It's not just that they target jobs but they also try to keep people from getting new ones after being fired. Ironic that these same people are often the ones saying that housing and food are human rights then they effectively try to take them from people for disagreeing.
  • boredumb 5y ago
    sure but you have the ability to post under a moniker that isn't tied to my SSN that private places are able to query against.
    • refenestrator 5y ago
      Look at the news the last two weeks, blanket condemnation of the Afghanistan withdrawal despite 70÷ approval for it and the fact that all of these educated news people have been around watching for the last 20 years. Yet we can't get a microphone, airtime or column inches for anyone in favor of the withdrawal. I'm free to post pseudonymously though!
• yorwba 5y ago
  > Hey, they got that system in place already in China! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System From your link: "By 2020,[needs update] it was intended to standardize the assessment of citizens' and businesses' economic and social reputation, or 'Social Credit'." It's 2021 now and the "Social" part of "Social Credit" is still science-fiction, let alone somebody's web history affecting their ability to obtain credit. The part that is in place already and works somewhat is a national registry of unpaid debts, so you can find out e.g. that the state-owned investment fund you're dealing with owned a large stake of a mining company that went bankrupt while owing a large sum of money to a state-owned bank, leading to a court case in which the fund was ordered to service part of the debt. Stuff like that.
  • ravel-bar-foo 5y ago
    In 2018 there were announcements on Chinese trains that smoking in the bathrooms would affect your social credit score. In Mandarin and in English. I don't know how it is implemented, but I would be surprised if it wasn't.
    • yorwba 5y ago
      If you get caught smoking on a train, they can put you on a list of people banned from buying tickets. Very simple; no credit scoring required. Presumably being on such a blacklist will actually influence individual credit scores once they get rolled out nationwide, but unless I somehow missed the announcement, that hasn't happened yet.
  • scohesc 5y ago
    > Xu was sued in 2019 for calling tai chi "grandmaster" Chen Xiaowang a fraud, and the Chinese court ordered him to pay Chen approximately US$60,000 in damages and to apologize for seven consecutive days on social media. Additionally, his social credit rating was lowered to the point where he could not rent, own property, stay in certain hotels, travel on high speed rail or buy plane tickets.[16][17] The restrictions were lifted after he paid US$40,000 in both legal fees and the cost of placing the apology.[18] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xu_Xiaodong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xu_Xiaodong So it's a system that's created by the government to make people aware of unpaid debts, but it's the same government that decides to impose debt on said people whenever it wants. Coolbeans.
• ravenstine 5y ago
  What is sad is I think as generations go by people will be more willing to accept it. All we need is crisis after crisis to get people to trade freedom for safety bit by bit. Create a crisis where billions are stolen because "the system is broken", offer up social credit and a new monetary system as a solution, have the AP and Reuters send the same propaganda copy to all the news institutions for them to recite in unison with a new repeated phrase like "mutuality" followed by "this is the new normal", call the minority of dissidents "reactionaries" or "right wing", and your new mechanism of authoritarian control can be installed (literally) without any meaningful fight.
  • II2II 5y ago
    It is hard to say whether the problem is going to get better or worse. Many people live in an already precarious position, and this would only make matters worse. Both the left and the right already see the system as broken, even if they don't agree upon how it is broken or how to fix it. I would suggest that most of those people see themselves as moderates or at least representing the majority (whether or not they are is another question). Eventually things are going to boil over. We can only hope that it does so in a peaceful way.
    • marcusverus 5y ago
      The problem is that we're trying to achieve a goal which is not possible with the tools at hand. There is no way to satisfy the right of all people to self-govern in a nation where half of the population wants a secular society with a European-style welfare system, and the other half wants a laissez-faire system that imposes Christian social mores. The goals of the left and right are not reconcilable. The underlying issue here is that democracy is not enough. To state it differently, democracy is a means to an end, with the 'end' being self-representation. Democracy is necessary to achieve self-representation, but it's not sufficient. An example: remember when The Don wanted to buy Greenland? Well, let's say the US bought Greenland. Their people, then, would be granted US Citizenship, including the right to vote. Throughout the transition, they would reside in democracies. One day they would stop voting in Danish elections and would instead vote in US elections. They would always be able to participate in the democratic process. They would also be extremely pissed off. Why, though? They had their say, didn't they? They voted in the elections, didn't they? But even though the process was democratic, the right of the people of Greenland to self-govern was not observed. They had democracy, but not self-representation. Folks in the US feel the same way. In the Pacific Northwest, there is a broad consensus that the state should run healthcare, and yet they don't have state-run healthcare. Why? Because they need the consent of folks who live thousands of miles away in Oklahoma, Texas, and Florida! They have democracy, but they don't have self-representation. When the tide turns and there is majority support, on the national level, for state-run healthcare, what happens in Oklahoma? We're going to force a national healthcare system on them when the vast majority of the citizenry abhor the idea of state healthcare. And why? Because, thousands of miles away in California, Oregon, and Washington, folks support the idea. That's democracy, sure, but it's not self-representation. The rash of democracies that have taken hold in the world over the last few centuries has been wonderful, but we'd be foolish to assume that we've perfected human governance. There are better, more representative forms of government out there that we need to seek out and implement. To make the next great leap in human governance, we need to acknowledge the limits of the systems that we currently have. We need to admit that over-large democracies are not conducive to actual self-representation. And we need to exorcise the ghosts of our monarchical forebears. Our governments don't own us, do they? Then why do we allow them to stifle and suppress democratic secession movements, like the recent one in Catalonia? To ensure that we are truly able to self-govern, we need to pick our governments, not just our representatives.
• jdavis703 5y ago
  In the US people working in national security positions also have to regularly (though not annually) submit financial information too.
  • da_big_ghey 5y ago
    and most will get in trouble if they post lot of political hot takes on twitter