|
|
|
|
|
by harimau777
2403 days ago
|
|
Just to make sure that I'm understanding you: [1] You are saying that there are two issues here: 1. A power inequality that would be created if the regular people's secrets are known but powerful people's secrets were not. 2. A lack of privacy would allow people's private actions to be judged and punished by society if they fail to conform. You are then arguing that giving everyone access to the data/surveillance would solve the first problem but not the second. If I am correct in my understanding, then I think that's a very reasonable argument. Although I'm concerned that even problem #2 alone could create a dystopia. [1] I know intention can be difficult to read in text so I want to make clear: I truly mean this as confirming that I am following your argument, not as an indirect way to say that I think you are wrong. |
|
Assume the dystopia: with my smartphone I can tap in to the network of smart dust that blankets the world and can view and hear anything that is happening anywhere. We tend to consider this from the viewpoint of the observed but invert it and consider the constraints upon the observer/judge. Imagine how difficult it would be for people to judge and punish you for this lack of conformity if it is trivial for you to show a similar collection of mistakes and 'bad' behavior on the part of those who would judge you and if you can know who is watching you at any time (because you can watch them watching you.)
It is not quite a complete solution, but it seems to me that people tend to focus on one side of an imagined power relationship without necessarily asking if that power structure could be maintained in the new environment.