4 ms·

A society cannot be "trustworthy", but it can embody "high trust". (Not wishing to be pedantic for its own sake, there's an important distinction) High-trust

A society cannot be "trustworthy", but it can embody "high trust". (Not wishing to be pedantic for its own sake, there's an important distinction) High-trust is the average trust metric between any two randomly chosen individuals from the set at some time. Trustworthiness (in one regard) is the historically accumulated record of positive performance against promises made. But a society is not a single entity. Maybe society's representatives might be trustworthy.

mdp2021 2y ago
What I meant in the post was "In using some service, one trusts it will not be abused"; consistent abuse of service is societal - hence, said societies "are not trustworthy".
- nonrandomstring 2y ago
  I didn't mean to undermine your comment, sorry. So there's a push for "zero trust" society. What do you make of that?
  - mdp2021 2y ago
    > there's a push for "zero trust" society. What do you make of that Given that what happens is what is allowed by the society in which it happens, the priority is to flee - as fully bad indicators are there. The problem remains, "to where" - identifying a society that still recognizes and defends Dignity.
    - nonrandomstring 2y ago
      You raise a keyword that is paramount in our time. Dignity. Privacy is a tangible and common talking point. Anyone who wants to flee to a forest hut can obtain privacy, but not dignity, because escape is undignified. While the concept of privacy makes it into laws, it's still just a minor component of a broader "dignity" that so many technologies seem set on destroying. A dozen or more major thinkers since the 1900s have noticed that human dignity is very fragile in the face of technology (Weber, Marx, Fromm, Freud, Jung, Nietzsche...) Surveillance is just one modern facet of undignified life with technology. Question: can technology ever enhance dignity? We've seemingly built a system (society) in which material and social success hinge on a willingness to forgo dignity. People who have a strong sense of dignity are disadvantaged and marginalised. So to answer your "to where?" To the margins. Unless one is prepared to embrace indignity in visible opposition. Struggle may be the last refuge of dignity.
      - mdp2021 2y ago
        > escape is undignified According to what would-be objective judgement? Under a threshold you fight; over a threshold you flee. It is just sensible. Dignity may or may not be impacted, heightened or lowered - it depends on details. > can technology ever enhance dignity Of course tools and devices are meant to enhance dignity, we build them for a purpose - to serve us and assist. > We've seemingly built a system (society) in which material and social success hinge on a willingness to forgo dignity. People who have a strong sense of dignity are disadvantaged and marginalised Very correct. (Careful with those «we».) > To the margins Of what is not your society? Look at reality. It is a procustean coexistence of squirrels and Men. There will probably be societies less vile.

mdp2021 2y ago

What I meant in the post was "In using some service, one trusts it will not be abused"; consistent abuse of service is societal - hence, said societies "are not trustworthy".

nonrandomstring 2y ago
I didn't mean to undermine your comment, sorry. So there's a push for "zero trust" society. What do you make of that?
- mdp2021 2y ago
  > there's a push for "zero trust" society. What do you make of that Given that what happens is what is allowed by the society in which it happens, the priority is to flee - as fully bad indicators are there. The problem remains, "to where" - identifying a society that still recognizes and defends Dignity.
  - nonrandomstring 2y ago
    You raise a keyword that is paramount in our time. Dignity. Privacy is a tangible and common talking point. Anyone who wants to flee to a forest hut can obtain privacy, but not dignity, because escape is undignified. While the concept of privacy makes it into laws, it's still just a minor component of a broader "dignity" that so many technologies seem set on destroying. A dozen or more major thinkers since the 1900s have noticed that human dignity is very fragile in the face of technology (Weber, Marx, Fromm, Freud, Jung, Nietzsche...) Surveillance is just one modern facet of undignified life with technology. Question: can technology ever enhance dignity? We've seemingly built a system (society) in which material and social success hinge on a willingness to forgo dignity. People who have a strong sense of dignity are disadvantaged and marginalised. So to answer your "to where?" To the margins. Unless one is prepared to embrace indignity in visible opposition. Struggle may be the last refuge of dignity.
    - mdp2021 2y ago
      > escape is undignified According to what would-be objective judgement? Under a threshold you fight; over a threshold you flee. It is just sensible. Dignity may or may not be impacted, heightened or lowered - it depends on details. > can technology ever enhance dignity Of course tools and devices are meant to enhance dignity, we build them for a purpose - to serve us and assist. > We've seemingly built a system (society) in which material and social success hinge on a willingness to forgo dignity. People who have a strong sense of dignity are disadvantaged and marginalised Very correct. (Careful with those «we».) > To the margins Of what is not your society? Look at reality. It is a procustean coexistence of squirrels and Men. There will probably be societies less vile.