3 ms·

> the people in power have nearly total thought-level-control over the population Thought-control? That's a bit much. Mind-reading might be a better analogy

by rtpg 12y ago

cryptoz 12y ago
I disagree that it's "a bit much". Maybe in 2014, but we're also talking about the world in 2024... and even today in 2014 I don't think it's a bit much. I think it's normal, day-to-day interactions between populations and those in power. Facebook is already experienced in controlling the emotions and moods of large populations: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/30/facebook-emotion-study-breached-ethical-guidelines-researchers-say http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/30/facebook-e... And that study we know about because they published it. There are many ways for this to happen without us knowing, and clearly the technology and the science is knocking on the door.
- gknoy 12y ago
  There are already things I won't post (or even take!) digital pictures of: my kids in the bathtub. Growing up, all my friends' families had photos of the kids in the bathroom, etc, but now .... I am fearful that such things would be taken out of context as part of a witch-hunt. The surveillance state, coupled with the Justice Machine (which has no empathy or accountability, it sometimes seems), makes me very fearful to post anything political. We've seen how J. Edgar Hoover persecuted people __because he could__. Imagine if the keepers of secrets were not just patriotic, but actively villainous? There's no way we would know, or be able to hold them accountable for it.
c0nsumer 12y ago
Remember, the panopticon works... People grow to fear even considering certain actions when -- right or wrong -- they feel them hopeless. That's thought control right there.
natch 12y ago
Thought-control was not the phrase that was used. Why bother replying if you're going to do this kind of stuff.
- rtpg 12y ago
  How else am I supposed to read thought-level-control? Am I missing some nuance?
  - natch 12y ago
    I can't speak to what the poster meant, I just want to emphasize the point that misquoting simply isn't a good practice when people desire a healthy discussion. And yes I do not doubt that you are missing some nuance.

> the people in power have nearly total thought-level-control over the population Thought-control? That's a bit much. Mind-reading might be a better analogy

by rtpg 12y ago

> the people in power have nearly total thought-level-control over the population Thought-control? That's a bit much. Mind-reading might be a better analogy

cryptoz 12y ago

I disagree that it's "a bit much". Maybe in 2014, but we're also talking about the world in 2024... and even today in 2014 I don't think it's a bit much. I think it's normal, day-to-day interactions between populations and those in power. Facebook is already experienced in controlling the emotions and moods of large populations: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/30/facebook-emotion-study-breached-ethical-guidelines-researchers-say http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/30/facebook-e... And that study we know about because they published it. There are many ways for this to happen without us knowing, and clearly the technology and the science is knocking on the door.

gknoy 12y ago
There are already things I won't post (or even take!) digital pictures of: my kids in the bathtub. Growing up, all my friends' families had photos of the kids in the bathroom, etc, but now .... I am fearful that such things would be taken out of context as part of a witch-hunt. The surveillance state, coupled with the Justice Machine (which has no empathy or accountability, it sometimes seems), makes me very fearful to post anything political. We've seen how J. Edgar Hoover persecuted people __because he could__. Imagine if the keepers of secrets were not just patriotic, but actively villainous? There's no way we would know, or be able to hold them accountable for it.

c0nsumer 12y ago

Remember, the panopticon works... People grow to fear even considering certain actions when -- right or wrong -- they feel them hopeless. That's thought control right there.

natch 12y ago

Thought-control was not the phrase that was used. Why bother replying if you're going to do this kind of stuff.

rtpg 12y ago
How else am I supposed to read thought-level-control? Am I missing some nuance?
- natch 12y ago
  I can't speak to what the poster meant, I just want to emphasize the point that misquoting simply isn't a good practice when people desire a healthy discussion. And yes I do not doubt that you are missing some nuance.