4 ms·

And why not? Consumers are all but asking them to take it. You can't reward bad behavior with money and expect it to end.

by caseyy 2y ago

idle_zealot 2y ago
Correct. But you also can't expect an unaffiliated group of people to each individually decide to inconvenience or disadvantage themselves in order to punish bad behavior. The customers are the victims of an enormous power and organization imbalance here. If only there were some means by which the people could could all get together and decide on rules that benefitted them.
- caseyy 2y ago
  > If only there were some means by which the people could all get together and decide on rules that benefitted them. That's not been very effective in tech recently, has it? People have control over whether they enable the surveillance capitalism grift when they are used as means to an end. They can make this business model proliferate much less, so that much fewer companies are built around it, and other business decisions are relatively more profitable. We can all not use apps that track us, clear our cookies automatically when the browser closes, use E2E encryption in communications, and so on. And yes, many people can also not shop at Costco. And many will make that choice, but not most. You know, society has always managed to enforce the social order without the need for government — to decide together what is acceptable and what crosses boundaries. For at least tens of thousands of years as pre-chieftain egalitarian communities, and ever since. Culture exists as a concept, people can develop a privacy-conscious culture and in some regions of the world, it exists more than in others. Government as a concept is more recent. Big micromanaging government, even more recent. You just need to not be lazy and do the work, not expect that someone else will come and solve all the problems for you. Of course, people have become quite complacent these days. They don't set boundaries if it's more convenient for them in the moment. But culture is more effective than government in dictating what is right and wrong, except for autocracies. Some have been very effective in imposing a social order. But I don't think we need to go there. People can self-manage. The question if whether people want to self-manage or if they prefer the consequences of not doing so.
  - somnic 2y ago
    I think coordinating the norms of a foraging troupe all with a similar understanding of their environment and society through individual action is a little more tractable than coordinating the norms of an economy consisting of millions of people with wildly varying levels specialization and knowledge.
    - caseyy 2y ago
      Yes it is more tractable. But cultures that have norms for what’s acceptable and not exist all over the world. For example, the culture of data privacy exists in some European countries more than in the US. Laws like GDPR are a result of this culture, they are not dictatorial imperatives going against what people want and practice in their lives. The people usually set the norms. The law only enshrines them.
      - idle_zealot 2y ago
        And yet the people of Europe individually chose to use social media that abused their privacy. You're making the case for collective action.
        caseyy 2y ago
        Yes, they do individually chose to use social media. But fewer do. And those who do, use social media less. It is a cultural difference with very little government guidance. And it makes a difference in how profitable this business model is here, as well as what laws are passed in the EU. Yes, I agree with naturally arising collective action through culture. I argue that this may be all we need and we can do just fine without government intervention. I don’t think government intervention can be as robust as cultural norms, anyways. Tech companies constantly find ways to dance around laws. They can’t dance around their primary source of income choosing not to be exploited. And this doesn’t have to be all-or-nothing. As more people will value privacy, a culture will develop that will reduce exploitative business practices like surveillance capitalism. If fewer people will value privacy, a culture will develop that will enable their exploitation. It’s gradients.
- gdpr4567 2y ago
  Yes, if only the US government could create some type of general data protection regulation (they could call it GDPR for short) that would reduce the abuse of personal data...

And why not? Consumers are all but asking them to take it. You can't reward bad behavior with money and expect it to end.

by caseyy 2y ago

And why not? Consumers are all but asking them to take it. You can't reward bad behavior with money and expect it to end.

idle_zealot 2y ago

Correct. But you also can't expect an unaffiliated group of people to each individually decide to inconvenience or disadvantage themselves in order to punish bad behavior. The customers are the victims of an enormous power and organization imbalance here. If only there were some means by which the people could could all get together and decide on rules that benefitted them.

caseyy 2y ago
> If only there were some means by which the people could all get together and decide on rules that benefitted them. That's not been very effective in tech recently, has it? People have control over whether they enable the surveillance capitalism grift when they are used as means to an end. They can make this business model proliferate much less, so that much fewer companies are built around it, and other business decisions are relatively more profitable. We can all not use apps that track us, clear our cookies automatically when the browser closes, use E2E encryption in communications, and so on. And yes, many people can also not shop at Costco. And many will make that choice, but not most. You know, society has always managed to enforce the social order without the need for government — to decide together what is acceptable and what crosses boundaries. For at least tens of thousands of years as pre-chieftain egalitarian communities, and ever since. Culture exists as a concept, people can develop a privacy-conscious culture and in some regions of the world, it exists more than in others. Government as a concept is more recent. Big micromanaging government, even more recent. You just need to not be lazy and do the work, not expect that someone else will come and solve all the problems for you. Of course, people have become quite complacent these days. They don't set boundaries if it's more convenient for them in the moment. But culture is more effective than government in dictating what is right and wrong, except for autocracies. Some have been very effective in imposing a social order. But I don't think we need to go there. People can self-manage. The question if whether people want to self-manage or if they prefer the consequences of not doing so.
- somnic 2y ago
  I think coordinating the norms of a foraging troupe all with a similar understanding of their environment and society through individual action is a little more tractable than coordinating the norms of an economy consisting of millions of people with wildly varying levels specialization and knowledge.
  - caseyy 2y ago
    Yes it is more tractable. But cultures that have norms for what’s acceptable and not exist all over the world. For example, the culture of data privacy exists in some European countries more than in the US. Laws like GDPR are a result of this culture, they are not dictatorial imperatives going against what people want and practice in their lives. The people usually set the norms. The law only enshrines them.
    - idle_zealot 2y ago
      And yet the people of Europe individually chose to use social media that abused their privacy. You're making the case for collective action.
      - caseyy 2y ago
        Yes, they do individually chose to use social media. But fewer do. And those who do, use social media less. It is a cultural difference with very little government guidance. And it makes a difference in how profitable this business model is here, as well as what laws are passed in the EU. Yes, I agree with naturally arising collective action through culture. I argue that this may be all we need and we can do just fine without government intervention. I don’t think government intervention can be as robust as cultural norms, anyways. Tech companies constantly find ways to dance around laws. They can’t dance around their primary source of income choosing not to be exploited. And this doesn’t have to be all-or-nothing. As more people will value privacy, a culture will develop that will reduce exploitative business practices like surveillance capitalism. If fewer people will value privacy, a culture will develop that will enable their exploitation. It’s gradients.
gdpr4567 2y ago
Yes, if only the US government could create some type of general data protection regulation (they could call it GDPR for short) that would reduce the abuse of personal data...