@cstross@Heterokromia@yogthos Well of course I would agree with you if it were simply a matter of “homo homini lupus.” The thing is that in the historical contexts you rightly appeal to, it has always been possible for the inquiring class to excuse themselves from inquiry. Until they couldn’t, of course—a Man for All Seasons, Politburo purges under Stalin, etc. Once we all have access to AWS and ChatGPT X, everyone will live in fear until the mode of the music changes. Which it just might do.
@Canecittadino@cstross@Heterokromia@yogthos you see, there’s this thing called power, which is fairly unevenly distributed, so there’s always people that are beyond any inquiry and very interested in that those others aren’t. this latter thing is called control. and the times we live in tell that both concepts are very much fine and well and much the same as they were in the historic times. so, yes, you should care about your privacy. 🤷
@jkmcnk@cstross@Heterokromia@yogthos All true for now, but the situation is also more fluid than it used to be, largely because of the rapid evolution of communications technologies. Compare the longevity of the Roman Catholic Church or the British Monarchy with that of the Thousand Year Reich, or the Soviet Politburo. How long do you suppose Ron DeSantis is going to last? /1
@jkmcnk@cstross@Heterokromia@yogthos The uneven distribution of power isn’t the issue. As long as human beings are what they are, that may well be inescapable. What’s different now is the turbulence introduced into control mechanisms by the inherent unpredictabily of their impact. /2
@jkmcnk@cstross@Heterokromia@yogthos “Quis costodiet ipsos custodes” is the real issue here. When the watchers operate on a scale no human agency can effectively oversee, anomalies may very well become more frequent. China’s social credit evaluation regime will be the best test case for these suppositions, I think. We shall see…. /3 END
@cstross @Heterokromia @yogthos Well of course I would agree with you if it were simply a matter of “homo homini lupus.” The thing is that in the historical contexts you rightly appeal to, it has always been possible for the inquiring class to excuse themselves from inquiry. Until they couldn’t, of course—a Man for All Seasons, Politburo purges under Stalin, etc. Once we all have access to AWS and ChatGPT X, everyone will live in fear until the mode of the music changes. Which it just might do.
@Canecittadino @cstross @Heterokromia @yogthos you see, there’s this thing called power, which is fairly unevenly distributed, so there’s always people that are beyond any inquiry and very interested in that those others aren’t. this latter thing is called control. and the times we live in tell that both concepts are very much fine and well and much the same as they were in the historic times. so, yes, you should care about your privacy. 🤷
@jkmcnk @cstross @Heterokromia @yogthos All true for now, but the situation is also more fluid than it used to be, largely because of the rapid evolution of communications technologies. Compare the longevity of the Roman Catholic Church or the British Monarchy with that of the Thousand Year Reich, or the Soviet Politburo. How long do you suppose Ron DeSantis is going to last? /1
@jkmcnk @cstross @Heterokromia @yogthos The uneven distribution of power isn’t the issue. As long as human beings are what they are, that may well be inescapable. What’s different now is the turbulence introduced into control mechanisms by the inherent unpredictabily of their impact. /2
@jkmcnk @cstross @Heterokromia @yogthos “Quis costodiet ipsos custodes” is the real issue here. When the watchers operate on a scale no human agency can effectively oversee, anomalies may very well become more frequent. China’s social credit evaluation regime will be the best test case for these suppositions, I think. We shall see…. /3 END