4 ms·
I think you’re missing the point, the issue is important because they have no reason to act against themselves, but a healthy system would have someone opposing
by willy_k 2y ago
I think you’re missing the point, the issue is important because they have no reason to act against themselves, but a healthy system would have someone opposing them, and that’s not happening at the moment.
- thaumasiotes 2y agoIf you want a rule enforced against some party, you need the enforcement power to belong to some other party.
- willy_k 2y agoI don’t think anyone’s disagreeing with that. My interpretation of your initial comment was that you were saying it’s not an important issue because it can’t be effectively policed. I don’t think that’s what you meant, but that’s what I got out of your saying no in response to the assertion that it’s important.
- thaumasiotes 2y agoThe reason I'm saying "no" is this: >> The people who nominally you want to be enforcing this "right" are also some of the people who most want to AI profile you. If your goal is specifically to have someone enforce a rule against themselves, that's not an important issue, because it won't work. If you change the statement of your goal so that you're not requiring the enforcement power to be vested in the target of the rule, then the issue might become more important.
- nerdponx 2y agoRight, but being fatalistic and giving up is even less likely to be successful than attempting to create counterbalancing force in the system.