>After Mr Miller questioned why the complainant was being described as a “victim” if no crime had been committed, the officer told him: “We need to check your thinking”.
There are people still sore about swastikas and roman salute "retconned" too. But well maybe don't use them for supremacist signaling in the first place, that sure could help.
If you think this story is limited to, or even about, political correctness, you are mistaken. It could be your insurance rates going up for jaywalking, even with no cars around. It could be your credit score dropping if you have too many drinks at a bar. It's about your personal activities all being tracked, measured, and in the end, controlled by corporations.
I don't know why you are downvoted. Think the dangers are real with social credit systems on the rise. Much has been written on them, e.g.
> The social credit system is used to punish citizens for bad behavior with numerous blacklists preventing them from traveling, getting loans or jobs, or staying in hotels, and even by limiting internet access.
I don’t agree with the downvoters at all, but I think it’s fairly obvious why he’s being downvoted: either folks think he’s wrong that such a thing is possible, or folks think he’s right but don’t care (i.e., they think that the society he describes is desirable, or at worst neutral).
I don’t think that his described society is impossible, and indeed we already see a slow, less-regimented version of that playing out.
I cannot emotionally understand someone who would find such a society desirable, but intellectually it kind of makes sense: one needs to be just authoritarian enough to want to control non-violent behaviour, while just naïve enough not to realise that there are aspects of one’s own behaviour which would be controlled, too (i.e., every one of us disagrees with the majority on at least one or two items).
It's shocking to me that here, on Hacker News, posts like these get voted down. I could understand them being regarded as unpopular on mainstream media, but HN? Wow.
It already is implemented in America. Political dissidents are harassed by airport security, get their bank accounts closed and credit cards canceled, are banned from services like AirBNB, and get railroaded in the courts.
These are all political censorship against people or groups that aren't doing anything illegal, and the standards are applied differently based on ideology rather than any objective standard.
Thanks, although it's the security checks at the border based on traced political views isn't sourced, I found some.
That's the one that bothers me, as there is hardly ant competition possible in the security checks business.
Airbnb, banks.. all it takes is some open minded provider to make those political police institution to loose ground. Although its matter a time before open minded providers also get pressured to police their customers.
Doesn't seem to matter, since that comment is getting downvoted as well.
I guess technologists don't want to see the future they're creating, and would rather just come up with tactics that barely defend against the surveillance we have now.
Technologists are for hire. They get paid. They need to get paid for something. They do see the future it's creating, some of them build tools (for free) to counter what they or they peers are building.
>After Mr Miller questioned why the complainant was being described as a “victim” if no crime had been committed, the officer told him: “We need to check your thinking”.