4 ms·

Compare two dystopian novels: "1984" and "This perfect day." In 1984, survalance is everywhere, and everybody is miserable. In "This perfect day" has just a

by rhelz 2y ago

Compare two dystopian novels: "1984" and "This perfect day." In 1984, survalance is everywhere, and everybody is miserable. In "This perfect day" has just as much surveillance, but the people love it. Think how much you love your mobile phone. Big brother could only dream of having a camera and microphone so close to you 24/7. China's social credit system sounds like another dystopian terror. But...how great would it be to be able to get back at the Bullies, Cat-callers, and assholes who can make you miserable with complete impunity. You might very well like being able to fight back at them in a way which had a real, material effect on their whole life. After a while, you may even love it, especially if you were getting all kinds of perks and advantages from playing along. Robots roaming around offices is just about the most Ham-Fisted way I can think of to get employees in line. Of course they will hate it, but even at that, it only can police what the robot sees. More filling and tastes horrible. They could achieve way better results with something which just thrilled their employees.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
I'm not sure I agree with this premise. > In 1984 ... everybody is miserable "He loved Big Brother." In that story, nobody other than the protagonist considered that they had a bad lot in life because their basic needs were always taken care of and, in the end, Winston was successfully converted to a regular, party-loving citizen. Of course, I agree with your overall point; people will welcome the dystopia with open arms when it promises to solve all of their problems.
- rhelz 2y ago
  Not a bad argument!
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  >people will welcome the dystopia with open arms when it promises to solve all of their problems. At what point does "dystopia" become "utopia"? If it solves all your problems and you're not unhappy, why is it a "dystopia"? This reminds me of Huxley's "Brave New World": it's widely considered a dystopia, but it reads to me like a utopian society: everyone has lots of sex, they aren't miserable because of social division and lack of housing, everything is really good. People who don't grow up in the society (savages) consider it terrible, but that's the case for most people today: how many irreligious, urban westerners want to live in a conservative Islamic society, and vice-versa?
  - rhelz 2y ago
    // At what point does "dystopia" become "utopia"? So you think you can tell....Heaven from Hell :-) That is a very deep, and interesting question. For the general case, I don't know. Best I can do is pick one specific aspect of a "utopia." E.g. The Chinese Social Credit system. I would love to benefit from doing random acts of kindness. And I would love to be able to punish bullies and assholes in a meaningful way, which had real impact on their lives. But, whoever controlled that system would have a lot of power, and a lot of temptation to abuse that power. So much power that it's not a matter of if, but when and how often, that power would be abused. We have people, not angels, so the system would have to work even if it were run by people. Without very robust checks-n-ballances to prevent abuse, and without robust methods of getting relief from that abuse, even the people who were benefitting from the system would be living in perpetual fear of losing their social credit, through no fault of their own, and finding themselves so encumbered by having no social credit that they would never be able to rebuild the life they had. So yeah, maybe that's even a candidate for a partial answer to the general case. The system has to work even if it's run by people, not angels.
hooverd 2y ago
I think China's social credit system is just explicit rather than implicit.
- rhelz 2y ago
  Interesting. Every society has its way of encouraging its citizens to adhere to norms. The implicit vs explicit axis might be a good framework to think about these kinds of issues. Something deep inside of me screams in terror at China's social credit system, but, if I stifle that, I can think of some pluses. The rules are explicit--you don't have to worry about breaking an unwritten rule you didn't knowabout. You don't have to play endless games of 20 questions to know where you stand with everybody. And it's nice to be recognized and rewarded in a meaningful way if you do something good. I guess what worries me is the potential for abuse--at the push of a button, you could be an unperson, saddled with so many punitive encumbrances that you wouldn't have time or resources even to try to exonerate yourself. You couldn't even move to a new place to try to make a fresh start. I guess that's one of the advantages of an implicit system....if you've burned your relations, you can get a different job, or move to a different neighborhood, and start again. Its important to have a way back. Some kind of Jubalee system, where ever 7 years your slate is wiped clean, and you can start over gain...

by rhelz 2y ago

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago

I'm not sure I agree with this premise. > In 1984 ... everybody is miserable "He loved Big Brother." In that story, nobody other than the protagonist considered that they had a bad lot in life because their basic needs were always taken care of and, in the end, Winston was successfully converted to a regular, party-loving citizen. Of course, I agree with your overall point; people will welcome the dystopia with open arms when it promises to solve all of their problems.

rhelz 2y ago
Not a bad argument!
shiroiushi 2y ago
>people will welcome the dystopia with open arms when it promises to solve all of their problems. At what point does "dystopia" become "utopia"? If it solves all your problems and you're not unhappy, why is it a "dystopia"? This reminds me of Huxley's "Brave New World": it's widely considered a dystopia, but it reads to me like a utopian society: everyone has lots of sex, they aren't miserable because of social division and lack of housing, everything is really good. People who don't grow up in the society (savages) consider it terrible, but that's the case for most people today: how many irreligious, urban westerners want to live in a conservative Islamic society, and vice-versa?
- rhelz 2y ago
  // At what point does "dystopia" become "utopia"? So you think you can tell....Heaven from Hell :-) That is a very deep, and interesting question. For the general case, I don't know. Best I can do is pick one specific aspect of a "utopia." E.g. The Chinese Social Credit system. I would love to benefit from doing random acts of kindness. And I would love to be able to punish bullies and assholes in a meaningful way, which had real impact on their lives. But, whoever controlled that system would have a lot of power, and a lot of temptation to abuse that power. So much power that it's not a matter of if, but when and how often, that power would be abused. We have people, not angels, so the system would have to work even if it were run by people. Without very robust checks-n-ballances to prevent abuse, and without robust methods of getting relief from that abuse, even the people who were benefitting from the system would be living in perpetual fear of losing their social credit, through no fault of their own, and finding themselves so encumbered by having no social credit that they would never be able to rebuild the life they had. So yeah, maybe that's even a candidate for a partial answer to the general case. The system has to work even if it's run by people, not angels.

hooverd 2y ago

I think China's social credit system is just explicit rather than implicit.

rhelz 2y ago
Interesting. Every society has its way of encouraging its citizens to adhere to norms. The implicit vs explicit axis might be a good framework to think about these kinds of issues. Something deep inside of me screams in terror at China's social credit system, but, if I stifle that, I can think of some pluses. The rules are explicit--you don't have to worry about breaking an unwritten rule you didn't knowabout. You don't have to play endless games of 20 questions to know where you stand with everybody. And it's nice to be recognized and rewarded in a meaningful way if you do something good. I guess what worries me is the potential for abuse--at the push of a button, you could be an unperson, saddled with so many punitive encumbrances that you wouldn't have time or resources even to try to exonerate yourself. You couldn't even move to a new place to try to make a fresh start. I guess that's one of the advantages of an implicit system....if you've burned your relations, you can get a different job, or move to a different neighborhood, and start again. Its important to have a way back. Some kind of Jubalee system, where ever 7 years your slate is wiped clean, and you can start over gain...