2 ms·

I wonder if there's a "missing infrastructure opportunity" here. An isolated individual opt-out has the uninspiring cost/risk-vs-benefit/principle tradeoff othe

I wonder if there's a "missing infrastructure opportunity" here. An isolated individual opt-out has the uninspiring cost/risk-vs-benefit/principle tradeoff others have mentioned. But what if that equation could be shifted? Perhaps "I'll do the scan just now, but also, while it has my motivation and attention, I'll press the easy button to donate $N to some org effectively fighting it". Or "I'll opt out, and press the easy button to encourage others with a somewhat-anonymized "I/someone at airline-or-city-or-region-or-occupation-or... just opted-out! N+1! - Yay future!" tweet/counter"?

mmooss 2y ago
> An isolated individual opt-out has the uninspiring cost/risk-vs-benefit/principle tradeoff others have mentioned. One way to shift the equation is to shift understanding of the tradeoff: Some minor inconvenience - I think none in this case - for freedom and other human rights is hardly a tradeoff that needs much consideration. Honestly, I think it's people following the herd to the cultural trend of despair, powerlessness, and worship of strongmen - a incredible reversal from American individualism I'd read has dominated the culture for centuries. More practically, a little courage and action has a large effect on others. Imagine you are in a meeting where something obviously morally wrong is likely to be approved, and there is pressure to go along: Imagine nobody raises their hand to object. Imagine the despair and powerlessness everyone would feel, that it just passes without objection, that everyone is cowed. Imagine one person raises their hand. Not only does it greatly reduce the feeling of despair and powerlessness, it heartens people, and even more it makes it far easier for a second person to raise their hand, or for others to object to this issue or to others later. Imagine two raise their hand ...

mmooss 2y ago

> An isolated individual opt-out has the uninspiring cost/risk-vs-benefit/principle tradeoff others have mentioned. One way to shift the equation is to shift understanding of the tradeoff: Some minor inconvenience - I think none in this case - for freedom and other human rights is hardly a tradeoff that needs much consideration. Honestly, I think it's people following the herd to the cultural trend of despair, powerlessness, and worship of strongmen - a incredible reversal from American individualism I'd read has dominated the culture for centuries. More practically, a little courage and action has a large effect on others. Imagine you are in a meeting where something obviously morally wrong is likely to be approved, and there is pressure to go along: Imagine nobody raises their hand to object. Imagine the despair and powerlessness everyone would feel, that it just passes without objection, that everyone is cowed. Imagine one person raises their hand. Not only does it greatly reduce the feeling of despair and powerlessness, it heartens people, and even more it makes it far easier for a second person to raise their hand, or for others to object to this issue or to others later. Imagine two raise their hand ...