[zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC]

> this is a common argument it hear, do you not think it is elitist to think that you know better then the common people? Hell, maybe you do, but I bet 10,000 other people also think they know better too. I am going to trust 100 billion micro decisions everyday rather then some academic in an ivory tower who thinks they know the will of the people.

What is your point? That people don't ever act against their own interest because of lack of information or understanding?

> Come on, There are many more channels to reach your audience, you are on one right now.

That wasn't the question. The question referred to a hypothetical situation. Stating that the hypothetical situation doesn't match reality doesn't answer the question.

> Hacker new knows nothing about me other then my username and password.

And your IP address and which comment threads you are interested in and which opinions you express and which comments you vote on in which way ... but I guess that's besides the point anyway.

> duckduckgo, bing, reddit, facebook, TV, or Family people get create their opinions based on a huge number of inputs. The problem is that people want to be told they are right so they only consume things that reinforce their opinion (confirmation bias) but that is a whole other road.

How is that a choice you have regarding other people being manipulated against your interests? I don't understand.

[magicGLASSman]

>What is your point?

You don't know what they value most, only they do.

>That wasn't the question.

True, to much hypotheticals

>And your IP address and which comment threads you are interested in and which opinions you express and which comments you vote on in which way ... but I guess that's besides the point anyway.

Your right about that, but if I cover my tracks I give a lot less data then say a Facebook.

>How is that a choice you have regarding other people being manipulated against your interests?

You don't and you never will. People have been manipulating others since the the dawn of humanity. My point is that if people have choice they can take in many inputs and decide the best way to make decisions for themselves instead of being forced to use a service.

[zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC]

> You don't know what they value most, only they do.

But you very well can find out that people commonly proclaim inconsistent values, and that they often regret decisions they made earlier, and that that often coincides with having had inconsistent values.

It's just an empirical fact that if you look at how happy people (claim they) are, for example, people living in police states tend to be less happy than people living in free(ish) societies, while at the same time you still find many people who are very pro law-and-order. Now, I am not telling them whether they should prefer a police state or a free society, I just can empirically observe that people show support for politics that empirically leads to a society that the same people also empirically dislike.