3 ms·
Organized crime brings this issue to another level. "Basic controllers" will prefer to control not dangerous people (assuming they can tell them appart), to av
by sylware 3y ago
Organized crime brings this issue to another level.
"Basic controllers" will prefer to control not dangerous people (assuming they can tell them appart), to avoid to expose themselves to obvious danger. Because dealing with organized crime requires a whole other apparatus: the justice departement with the help of "services" (ahem...). Usually, those have to deal with the real nasty: killers, human traffickers, etc. They are very limited in human work force with often not enough means to do that work: so the "could you nuke those people because they are frauding the welfare system", ahem, maybe once in a while for posture. That makes me think about the movie and music industry asking for state-grade mass-monitoring of internet for their own benefit (in my country, they got that, hence you cannot trust the gov at not resisting such unreasonable lobbying).
To try to explain the shadows around this: with fraud and organized crime, beautiful ideological ideas do not work anymore: this is the hard reality, and it is often ugly. Only one thing has to really monitored: if the reality induced bias-es are not significantly self-maintaining/increasing that reality with some sort of feedback loop, presuming it is even possible to quantify that... Everybody wishes to never be on the bad sides of those reality induced bias-es. That's for the the "good" part, the "nasty" part is when it is not reality induced bias-es anymore but transforms into something ideological.