5 ms·
That depends entirely on whether you want to culture a humane trust society or a transactional surveillance society.
by swatcoder 3mo ago
That depends entirely on whether you want to culture a humane trust society or a transactional surveillance society.
- paytonjjones 3mo agoI think everyone wants a high trust society but you can't just remove all guardrails and expect that to be the result. The causality goes the other way.
- newspaper1 3mo agoI would absolutely support the surveillance of CEOs and board members. They have demonstrated themselves, as a class, to not be trustworthy. I think as a society, we should be reviewing Alex Karp's decision making for instance.
- b112 3mo agoThere are hundreds of millions of CEOs, and board members. Every single company in the West has a CEO and a board. I've heard of some bad behaviour. I haven't heard of millions of cases of bad behaviour. Do you have numbers to back up your assertions?
- newspaper1 3mo agoThere are orders of magnitude more workers than there are CEOs and board members. If surveiling workers is on the table, certainly the much easier and higher return task of monitoring this much smaller group, who has the potential to do much more damage to society, is a better idea.
- graemep 3mo ago> Every single company in the West has a CEO and a board. Outside the West too!
- antonvs 3mo agoCollectively, in the US at least, decisions collectively made by boards have led to greatly increased inequality. For example, at every AI company right now, an explicit goal it to make profit by replacing or reducing the need for human staff. There tends to be extremely little attention paid to the social ramifications of this: like every SV business before them, the goal is to "disrupt" and leave the consequences for everyone else to deal with. So yes, collectively, what has led to the current situation is indeed "millions of cases of bad behavior", each one of them often relatively localized, but collectively leading to damaging results. The proposed oversight of board members and CEOs could be a great way to bring these issues into public discussion, to provide much-needed pushback that we don't get if boards have no oversight other than that provided by investment markets.
- lotsofpulp 3mo ago>For example, at every AI company right now, an explicit goal it to make profit by replacing or reducing the need for human staff. Almost everyone has an explicit goal of spending less money for equivalent goods and services. People prefer to stores that prioritize lowering prices over paying for more staff.
- antonvs 3mo agoDo people also prefer paying zero percent tax over paying a positive percentage in tax? Perhaps you’d like to reconsider your comment with that in mind.
- lotsofpulp 3mo agoI do not see why I should reconsider. My intention was to point out it is not just “AI companies” that have the following directive, they just couch it in finding the lowest price for something. >an explicit goal it to make profit by replacing or reducing the need for human staff. There tends to be extremely little attention paid to the social ramifications of this:
- groundzeros2015 3mo agoThis is not a serious comment. CEOs are some of the most accountable and watched people in society. Low level employees (imagine a random adult) is not highly capable or accountable and needs guidance. Can you acknowledge this gap in your analysis?
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- newspaper1 3mo agoCEOs are not accountable at all. Look at Elon Musk. I don't care what the guy stocking shelves at Walmart does, I do care when billionaires interfere with my life in myriad ways, all of which are nefarious. They can cause infinitely more damage than a low level employee and need infinite more scrutiny because of that.
- groundzeros2015 3mo agoWhat has Elon done to you? Other than provide more vehicle and internet choices? Scrutiny and surveillance are not synonyms.
- newspaper1 3mo agoSteal my money, commit the worst securities fraud in history, interfere with my government, promote ultra-right wing racist views… I could go on. He’s truly one of the most heinous people of our time.
- DriverDaily 3mo agoI’m not sure an absence of surveillance is what creates “humane trust”. I’m certain we had locks on doors and security guards before the internet.
- feanaro 3mo agoSurveillance is decidedly and completely unlike locks.
- DriverDaily 3mo agoSurveillance and locks are both imperfect solutions to the trust problem.
- HPsquared 3mo agoSurveillance can remove the need for locks.
- rbk1234 3mo agoI'd prefer locks, they work passively and do not reduce privacy or create endless busywork.
- causal 3mo agoSo you can also destroy trust other ways. What’s your point?
- majormajor 3mo agoYeah the trust was gone pre-internet, pre-networked-cameras. People would've thrown doorbell cams on their front door at the same time as the deadbolt if they'd had the option. Many of the high-trust smaller societies before those locks were actually pretty low privacy.
- roughly 3mo agoTrust involves risk - someone has to be willing to risk having their trust violated. The problem in modern western society is that we’ve decided we’re unwilling to take that risk, and therefore we’ve begun imposing what’s effectively a panopticon state on those with less power than us, with the consequence that the kinds of things we with power get away with fine - driving over the speed limit, being a couple minutes late to get a task done, getting sick or injured - cascade into severe circumstances by the cold logic of the system we’ve built to make ourselves feel better (job loss, money paying fines instead of food or medicine, etc). The answer to this is if you don’t trust your domestic worker to not steal from you, either hire one you do or go do your own damn domestic work, and if the company you’re paying to provide a service doesn’t trust their own workers enough to not keep them under constant surveillance, go find one that does. The panopticon is a cheap answer that lets us pretend we don’t need to put the work in to manage our own lives while leveraging the power of the state to subjugate everyone further down the socioeconomic ladder from us.
- socalgal2 3mo agoI believe Japan is a more trusting society than most western societies yet their big electronics stores have easily 4x the surveillance than most western ones.