|
ZurdoDev wrote: Never mind then. I thought you might be able to explain your position.
It's just that at this point I really feel like you're the one who needs to do his own research and inform yourself. But clearly, that's never going to be important enough for you to care. Carry on then. I wish you the best.
|
|
|
|
|
Dangers? Well, at least it may be annoying.
Like this coworker of mine who one day comes to tell me that he is worried about my lunch habits; the last two weeks I have eaten meats more times than I have eaten fish. Well, I guess his bookkeeping of my lunch menu is correct, but honestly, I prefer to enjoy my lunch without anyone, that be coworker or police, doing close bookkeeping of my menu choices.
Recently, when a pizza place in town was mentioned, I remarked that I hadn't been there for years. This coworker of mine immediately set out to correct me: But we were there... no, that more than two years ago, almost two months more, so you could say it is years ago - but then you remarked to the waitress that they had been doing some remodelling since your last visit. ...Jeez! What makes someone spend their mental capacity on remembering which comments I made to a waitress more that two years ago? What else does he remember from years back that he could hold against me if some reason pops up?
I was active in a singing group. The leader was very focused on our vocal quality - having fun and enjoying ourselves was secondary, or even lower. Pointing out details that we didn't do in a perfect way was far more essential than pointing out the success we made. I was constantly annoyed by this. Last fall, we were entertaining at a social event, mingeling with the guests afterwards, and I overheard our leader talking with one of the guests about how an earlier performance of ours hadn't been up to standards because I had made a mistake. That must have been at least five or six years earlier. Sure, I made that mistake, but repeating the story to strangers many years later was the last straw for me: I quit.
What is the worst possible takeover of power that you could possibly imagine that could happen in your lifetime? A fundamentalist Christian theocracy? A communist economoy? A dictatorship of vegans? A fascist regime? A Moslem state? All of the above?
In either case, you may safely assume that everything that is filed by the autorities, or filed by private interests that has come successfully through the power takeover, will be fully available to the new forces in power. Is there any "danger" of letting the police of a Christian or Moslem theocracy see all your grocery bills, see how much beer you drink, and which movies you have been streaming late at night? Is is OK if a military vegan rulership gets access to ten years of police drones hovering over your frequent outdoor grill parties? Is it OK if a fascist regime knows in detail how often you have visited your Jewish or Gipsy friends? Will all of these future rulers fully accept all of your intimate friendships without raising an eyebrow, regardless of sex and age of your partners? If the rules do not accept your current partner (wrong sex, age, race, kinship, ...), are you prepared to break up your family?
You may say: When I did those things, they were perfectly legal! There are a few problems with that: Interpretation of the law often is just one of many possible; new forces in power may read the laws differently. And we may introduce new laws: We have had several international cases related to war crimes: Even though some actions were not against the law when performed, we have later claimed that they are "crimes against humanity" (completely ignoring how culturally defined these "universal" laws are).
Some countries have given their laws an extended jurisdiction: Two people may perform identical acts in the same place at the same time. To one of them it is perfectly within the law, the other one may be severely puhished. In most cases, that An extreme case of that: I don't know if FGM is allowed (/not explicitly forbidden) in any country today; it certainly was the case a few years ago in several African countries. In Norway, it is "of course" forbidden. It is forbidden even if the operation is not performed in Norway. It is forbidden even if you are not a Norwegian citizen, and you are not living in Norway. If you have a daughter in an African country that was circumcized ten years ago, because all girls in your community were, and you come on a business trip to Norway for a couple of days, you may in principle be thrown in jail in Norway for not preventing something that was perfectly legal in your home country. (It hasn't happened yet, but the laws allow for it.)
You never know how terms like "indecency" is interpreted in the future. A beach photo of you may give you trouble. The child protoective services may come after you for not giving your kid enough protection, or for not allowing your kid enough freedom to gain experience, for the same thing! You are locking up your child in a mental cage! No, I am protecting him agaist the evil of the world!
In my bookshelf, I have the 1936 and 1984 collection of Norwegian laws, with the current laws available on the internet. Society, morals and legal practice have changed drastically over some 80 years, yet the three editions of the laws are remarkably similar. Lots of actions that could send you to jail in 1936 are OK today, but in 1936 you could do a lot of stuff that is forbidden today. But you won't see that from the laws; they may be near-identical! (In some cases - not all of them!)
So, even if it is OK that the authorities - and others - track every detail of your life today, don't trust it to last. It doesn't take a revolution or military takeover to change things, either. Morals change rapidly, and law enforcement is to a significant degree steered by moral interpretation.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 7989122 wrote: Well, at least it may be annoying.
Why are you annoyed that people track you?
Member 7989122 wrote: the police of a Christian or Moslem theocracy see all your grocery bills, see how much beer you drink, and which movies you have been streaming late at night? Is is OK if a military vegan rulership gets access to ten years of police drones hovering over your frequent outdoor grill parties
I would not care.
Member 7989122 wrote: Morals change rapidly
That IS the problem. Not tracking.
I appreciate tracking. What good is a coupon for something I don't ever buy? Give me targeted ads instead of random ones.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
ZurdoDev wrote: I appreciate tracking. What good is a coupon for something I don't ever buy? Give me targeted ads instead of random ones.
OMG.
Let me guess, you're one of those surveyed who responded you'd give up your work password in exchange for a bar of chocolate?
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: Let me guess, you're one of those surveyed who responded you'd give up your work password in exchange for a bar of chocolate?
Why such a juvenile response?
Are you suggesting you'd rather see ads that are meaningless to you rather than ones that might actually be good for you?
When girl scouts knock on your door are you afraid someone is coming to take your guns away? 
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
ZurdoDev wrote: Why such a juvenile response?
I wasn't trying to be juvenile at all. If you're willing to trade your privacy for a miserable coupon, you clearly put as much value on it as those willing to trade a password for a chocolate bar. I was merely illustrating a point. The way you're describing your position, I'm not sure where you draw the distinction.
ZurdoDev wrote:
Are you suggesting you'd rather see ads that are meaningless to you rather than ones that might actually be good for you?
Oh, abso-f***ing-lutely. Advertisers don't care whether you need a product or not, they only want you to buy it, so what you want is ultimately irrelevant to them (ever heard of the idea of "creating the need"?). I'd rather get lost in a sea of anonymity, so they can't focus on me. I see no reason to try to make their lives easier. If I need a product, I'll seek it out--y'know...research...as opposed to believing what an ad is going to try to tell me. Given the lies advertisers tell you - I don't know where you get the idea that any ad may be "good for me". Ads exist only to sell you things. Ever heard of "a fool and his money..."? If that's not holding you (as a consumer) in contempt, I don't know what it.
Have you ever worked with someone who does advertising for a living? What a glorious bunch of people. My experience has never been a positive one. It seems like their lives revolve around manipulating people and controlling their thought process, and they take pleasure in it. The more egregious they get, the prouder they are of themselves. I find that repugnant.
ZurdoDev wrote: When girl scouts knock on your door are you afraid someone is coming to take your guns away?
I'm not sure why you're bringing this into this discussion. Canadian here. I don't have/need/want guns.  And no ad will change that.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: If you're willing to trade your privacy for a miserable coupon, you clearly put as much value on it as those willing to trade a password for a chocolate bar.
I believe that it is clear to you. 
dandy72 wrote: I'm not sure where you draw the distinction.
You don't know the difference between handing over your password and a targeted ad? 
A password actually protects important information. What I buy at the grocery store does not need to be protected. I would think anyone could understand that. And it is impossible to protect what I do out in public so why even bother trying.
dandy72 wrote: I'm not sure why you're bringing this into this discussion. Canadian here. I don't have/need/want guns.
First, I bring it in because you seem very paranoid. No one can do anything harmful by knowing that you bought lettuce on Thursday for $3.45. It's paranoid to think that problems can arise from that.
Secondly, I find it hilariously ironic that you care if someone watches what brand of toiler paper you buy because of what slippery slope it could lead to an over tyrannical government, yet you see no need for guns. I'm not laughing at you but that is so outlandishly hilarious. 
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
ZurdoDev wrote: You don't know the difference between handing over your password and a targeted ad?
Both are matters of not caring about the consequences of not safeguarding what is nobody else's business but your own.
ZurdoDev wrote: I bring it in because you seem very paranoid.
It's not about paranoia, it's about telling others to f*** off and stop rummaging through my trash.
ZurdoDev wrote: yet you see no need for guns
It's those who allow things to go too far and will then overreact that will suddenly feel the need for guns, not me. Makes sense?
Surely you realize it's not about collecting the petty details you keep bringing up. It's all about things to come. It starts here, and grows from there. Once society finds something to be benign and acceptable, the goalposts move, and the data collection moves on to the next bigger, juicier targets. I don't think that's paranoia.
"First they came for [xxx], and I did not speak out, because I was not a [xxx]". But you don't see the link, because it's all inconsequential, right?
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: Both are matters of not caring about the consequences of not safeguarding what is nobody else's business but your own.
They do share that one single thing in common. But nothing else.
dandy72 wrote: It's all about things to come.
Yes, I understand you think it is a slippery slope.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
ZurdoDev wrote: They do share that one single thing in common. But nothing else.
Bingo. I just believe if I'm not okay with allowing one thing to happen, then why allow the other. Nip it in the bud, so to speak. Don't allow precedents to be established.
ZurdoDev wrote: Yes, I understand you think it is a slippery slope.
Yes. It's all about recognizing where things start. That's it.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: It's all about recognizing where things start. That's it.
Indeed. And we have different opinions on where that is.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed. I hope you didn't take any of this as a personal attack, as that was not my intent, despite some words I may have used. I rather enjoyed this discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
ZurdoDev wrote: Why are you annoyed that people track you?
There are fundamentalist Christians in this country that won't pull the window curtains (or have any curtains at all), because they try to live a life so moral that they have nothing to hide. Nevertheless, their bedroom windows do have curtains.
As the song goes: "Ain't nobody's business". No matter how moral the bedroom activities of these fundamentalists are, it is nobody's business how they do it. They don't want to be continously monitored in their bedroom. I extend that to my living room. And to my selection of dishes in the canteen. And my comments to the waitress. Of course you see and hear it then and there, but when you start to log it systematically, for correcting my actions or statements many years later, then you interfere with my life in ways I do not appreciate.
Maybe you have been living your entire life in on of the upper floors of a tall apartment building, so that noone can look in your window (both in the direct and the allegorical sense). You do your shopping where noone recognizes you. You go to the other side of the town for a night out, so none of your neighbours will talk about how drunk you get. Maybe you live your physical life more or less in loneliness. Noone talking behind your back, because they don't relate to you. Noone at work trying to correct your lifestyle to fit their ideals, because you are nothing but a humanoid coworker machine. Maybe noone cares about you enough to relate to you in neither positive or negative ways.
In smaller places you may not be able to hide in the crowd. Maybe you think it is OK being tagged as the village drunkard, or he who watches dubious movies, or he who mistreats his kids. You may be socially frozen out. People may avoid doing business with you. You may be hearing rumours that other kids are told not to play with your kids.
Yes, you can say "I do not care". What if you get in trouble with the police, say that you are suscpected of drunk driving? Surveillance cameras prove that you bought two sixpacks the day before. You claim that they are still in your fridge. But the cameras showed that you have bought twelve sixpacks the last two week, where did they go? That might be the wrong time to say: I don't care!
I would not care. Maybe you don't realize the seriousness. What we are talking about, is that you may be breaking the laws, whether by a new interpretation or new laws. You may be thrown in jail for an extended period of time. Is that what you refer to as "I don't care"?
Or maybe you would like to help your son's soccer team who needs a standin coach, and you are qualified. But you are locked out: You have been watching movies that proves you to be unfit for any activity with kids. Maybe you become a world famous movie director, but then when you win a prize for one of your movies, a great movement protests against you earning the prize: Everybody says that your movies are worth the prize, but almost fifty years ago you had a love affair, one that would have been perfectly legal in lots of countries around the world, but not in yours. That love affair prevents your internationally acclaimed artistic work from receiving the prize it deserves from an art viewpoint. Still "I don't care"?
Your arguments are fine as long as all the authorities line up with you, fight for your interests. As long as all of your neighbours condone all sides of your lifestyle (or at least all of the influential ones). You may fight for the world to forever stay exactly as you like it best, Member 7989122 wrote: Morals change rapidly
That IS the problem.
- but I am afraid that you will be disappointed. Your morals is a very special case. There are millions of morals out there; the chance that yours will be the one to survive forever is epsilon squared. (I would guess that epsilon sqared in this case is negative.)
Maybe you are old enough to say "I'll be dead before anyone could possibly take over this country, so I don't care about the possibility of someone unfriendly to me being in charge. I am totally convinced that it couldn't possibly happen before my death." OK, you have the right to think that way. Younger people may want to consider changes in power structures as a possibilty.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't care what people say about me or think about me. Why would I?
You have a lot of "what ifs" but I refuse to live my life that paranoid.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
Because you might be thrown in jail.
You might loose your job.
You might loose your friends.
You might loose your business.
Your neighbours might frown at you and tell their own kids not to play with yours.
You may be unable finding a plumber who wants to come to your house to fix that leak.
And so on.
You are free not to care about such consequences.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 7989122 wrote: You are free not to care about such consequences.
Exactly. 
All of those "mights" you listed have always been mights. Nothing new.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
So? So did the old lady watching out her window that said she saw a guy.
And this guy can go sue the heck out of the company and make a fortune.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
The same argument holds for any totalitarian dictatorship tracking every one of the 24/7: For each individual case, it is nothing different from a neighbour (or whoever) watching your moves from the window. Whether it is just an old lady or a STASI agent, it is just watching you. Nothing to worry about.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 7989122 wrote: for any totalitarian dictatorship
Not the same as an old woman. And the US is not a dictatorship, unless the idiots vote for Bernie. And if we ever get to the point where there is an actual threat from the government, tracking will be the least of our worries.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
ZurdoDev wrote: I appreciate tracking. What good is a coupon for something I don't ever buy? Give me targeted ads instead of random ones.
he he... I had one funny experience with Amazon ...
I have bought a number of DVD/BDs from Amazon. For a period, Amazon insisted heavily on suggesting to me "You might want to buy this movie" - gay porn movies. I fully accept homosexuals, and have a couple homosexual friends/coworkers, but I am definitely not gay myself. And I do not waste money on porn movies. So where did Amazon get this notion that I would like gay porn?
Sometimes, I collect a list of movies I would like to buy, and order them all in one batch. I had done that, receiving a dozen of movies from Amazon in a single batch. Obviously, I didn't play them all the night they arrived. In fact, one of them stayed on my shelf for about half a year before I found a good time to watch it. Then it dawned upon me why Amazon had labeled me as a watcher of gay porn: This movie was an Italian black-and-white "artsy" movie from the early 1960s, a story with mythological roots involving a couple demigods visiting humanity. As demigods rather than humans, they certainly was not fully dressed. They were male. Anyone who buys a 50+ year old b/w Italian art movie where you in some scenes can se an unclothed male demigod must be eager to buy gay porn movies, right?
So much for targeted ads. It took Amazon a couple of years to realize that in spite of their intense marketing, I had no interest in that sort of movies, so they quieted down.
Here in Norway, my friends laughed at Amazon's proposals when it was ongoing. In some social environments in the US, it could have caused me trouble, if some moralists had looked over my shoulder when I turned on the PC and connected to Amazon, noticing that "Based on your previous purchases, we think that this gay porn would also be in your taste". If I had been living in USAs bible belt when this was going on, I would have been careful that no super-moralistic bystander was watching when I opened the Amazon web site.
|
|
|
|
|
The problem with targeted ads is that they don't show me relevant ads until AFTER I bought the product.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
ZurdoDev wrote: dandy72 wrote: Personally it's the things I have no control over I object to.
Which is most everything in life.
I have endless empirical evidence that proves that my wife disagrees with both of those statements.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
- Even a rookie policeman has a far lower mis-identification rate than the best face recognition system.
- Yes,the system should be used as you suggest - it raises a flag, and the officer on the spot decides whether the match is correct. In practice, what happens is that officers have an unwarranted faith in the system's infallibility, and will simply arrest anyone the system indicates may be a criminal.
- If I happened to look similar to a wanted criminal, I might be arrested multiple times for no good reason. Can anyone spell "malicious arrest" and "defamation of character"?
- Given certain countries' admission policies (I'm looking at you, USA!), I would not want even a mistaken arrest on my record. The additional hassle when travelling there would be extremely annoying.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
What Mark says.
The problem starts when the systems get so good that they only fail once every 10000 positive identifications. That's when the users learn to trust the tool
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
