[wheelerwj]

We've all known that this has been coming for a long, long time. Education won't get the job done. Strong business ethics won't either.

No, this shit needs to be regulated into the ground. No more of this opt in bullshit, no more selling data that was never yours to sell, we have to cut out immediately. We MUST limit the amount of datapoints that can be used for advertising and we must limit access to that data with much stronger privacy laws by outlining EXACTLY what data is being collected, providing consumers access to that data, and not allowing business to sell data that to other business. Internal use only, that has to be the rule.

Freedom of thought is at stake, we have to act fast or we are totally boned.

[dredmorbius]

Building a system that bypasses the problem entirely by disintermediating media consumption from advertising and tracking would be even better.

[wheelerwj]

any clever ideas?

[dredmorbius]

Universal content syndication, with distributed delivery.

Static pages would help loads.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/1uotb3/a_modes...

[yummyfajitas]

You lose the "freedom of thought" simply because a computer does exactly the same thing that a good salesman would do, simply at scale?

[dredmorbius]

A hydrogen bomb does the same thing that Greek Fire does, at scale.

The gas turbine does the same thing the ox does, at scale.

Mustard gas does the same thing a bee does, at scale.

Scale fucking matters.

[yummyfajitas]

Your examples illustrate my point quite well. It is (and should be) illegal to pour greek fire on even 1 person - small scale doesn't make the action ok.

Does this mean we should pass a law against salesmen, and just general interpersonal persuasion? If not, why not?

[dredmorbius]

I'm going to try to put my finger on the nature of your comments that's troubled me for quite some time.

A key element that's lacking seems to be the principle of charity: seeking a sympathetic understanding of an idea presented, and interpretation of ideas in their most persuasive form.

I don't believe I've ever seen you do that. You might care to give it a thought.

http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html

I'll through your questions back at you:

How is Greek Fire unlike a hydrogen bomb? How might considerations of these be different? What else that shares elements of what a hydrogen bomb is, or does, still substantively different in a way that would not require some sort of regulatory treatment?

Why is it we pass laws, generally? What are the hallmarks of a good, or a bad law?

[dredmorbius]

Gah. "Throw", not "through".

[crawfordcomeaux]

If I sell you something I know you have the money for, but can't afford, that's a predatory action.

If I convince you to harm yourself, that's a predatory action.

We have laws of various forms making these actions illegal. They may not be federally regulated, but could probably stand to be, especially when it's done at scale.

Who needs protection of the law in those situations? The emotionally exploitable or the unethical salesman?

[wheelerwj]

no one is talking about passing a law against campaigning or politicians.

What we are talking about is passing a law that says your data can't be used against you.

[jpttsn]

How does this mesh with the idea that information wants to be free and DRM is evil?

[someguydave]

Indeed if the security of control of your government is fragile enough that a fancy telemarketer can acquire significant power perhaps a bit of governmental re-architecture is in order.

[mirimir]

Well, what's problematic is democracy. Representative government doesn't protect against this sort of data-driven populism. If people can be manipulated so efficiently, how can democracy be workable?

[someguydave]

One answer: restricting the vote to people who have skin in the game. If you have to personally pay for your favored policy you might consider it more carefully.

[mirimir]

Yes, people with less to lose are arguably easier to manipulate. But I'd rather see some sort of "I am not a bot." test for independent thinking ;)

[someguydave]

Not only are they easier to manipulate - they have a conflict of interest when they (for instance) demand that the government pay them money when they don't pay taxes.

[crawfordcomeaux]

By shifting societal norms toward learning nonviolent emotional independence?

[mirimir]

That seems a good start. But maybe that's game-able too. If you're dealing with an AI (or proto-AI, at least) that understands you better than you do yourself, you're pwned. So then you need your own AI, to filter input and flag exploits. Rather like anti-malware, for your mind.

[crawfordcomeaux]

That's what I'm developing :D

The idea is to create a human programming language to encode activities for learning/practicing principles found in the book Nonviolent Communication and publish that before publishing the language as a way to protect oneself.

[jpttsn]

Sounds expensive

[mirimir]

No, you lose your freedom either way. But a society loses its freedom when software does it at scale.