3 ms·
Using public safety as a cudgel to mandate adherence to any technology is a nonstarter. The imposition is huge. We’re talking about privacy, movement and its r
by alexgoodhart 24d ago
Using public safety as a cudgel to mandate adherence to any technology is a nonstarter.
The imposition is huge. We’re talking about privacy, movement and its relationships with housing/work/family management/safety.
At the very least, it needs to be plainly stated that this concept is not being studied out of curiosity. A few companies have a gigantic investment in seeing massive, government-facilitated adoption that creates guaranteed customers and gated entry.
- simianwords 24d agoi'm kinda hating how privacy is becoming a boogeyman to oppose literally anything. i'm predicting that public will catch hold of this rhetoric eventually. literally any. single. thing. gets opposed on privacy grounds. and its a good move because technology by definition works by passing information around so it lends to being opposed this way everywhere. i think Foucault is partly responsible for this with his whole panopticon nonsense.
- LtWorf 24d agoWhat rhetoric? It's not like it's made up…
- philipallstar 24d ago> i'm kinda hating how privacy is becoming a boogeyman to oppose literally anything It isn't.
- berytos_storm 24d ago[dead]