4 ms·
> "In a town of 3,000 people there is no privacy. Everybody knows what everybody is doing." Technically true but they weren't documenting everything, measuring
by caseysoftware 2y ago
> "In a town of 3,000 people there is no privacy. Everybody knows what everybody is doing."
Technically true but they weren't documenting everything, measuring everything inside and outside your home, keeping it indefinitely, broadcasting it to the rest of the world, and making it available to law enforcement at any time.
The "lack of privacy" was a small scale, limited situation and falls apart now.
- Pet_Ant 2y ago> The "lack of privacy" was a small scale, limited situation and falls apart now. It wasn't industrialized and indelible. There have already been adults with real world suffering from someone digging up some old tweet they made as a pre-teen.
- add-sub-mul-div 2y agoRight, without Google facilitating and automating the loss of privacy at scale you could pick up and move to another town and become anonymous again.
- pptr 2y agoThe data is stored in people's brains for a lifetime. The data is worthless afterwards, so this is indefinite storage for all intents and purposes. Law enforcement can retrieve the information by asking for it.
- comte7092 2y agoFurther, there wasn’t a giant asymmetry of information. I don’t actually completely agree with the premise, but even taking it at face value, everyone knew what everyone else is doing. That is very different than some far off entity subtly cataloging everything about you in the background, where you only have a mere notion of the full scope of its existence.
- ItCouldBeWorse 2y agoWell, to be honest, one does not need to do so. You collect for half a generation, you drive mental models from the collected data- after that you can simulate most stuff with minimal data collected. Human lifes are not that unique after all. And the individual is actually pretty sure behave like a arche-type when simulated and measured.