|
|
|
|
|
by bee_rider
1579 days ago
|
|
It should be noted that this is a pretty bad end state. Reporting is already an extremely weak force for preventing corruption on the part of the powerful. Journalists entering a state of total uselessness is only going to make the problem bigger. In a realm of total bullshit the winners are the one who are best at lying. "I don't know what to believe and everyone involved is probably corrupt" is usually just an excuse to disengage and follow base instincts. |
|
I agree. The parent poster didn't ask what's the downside, and I think it's this: when no one knows what to believe and starts to distrust most things, society may start to fall apart, as society relies on us trusting each other.
So while I think disinformation is one of the best privacy strategies (not so different from differential privacy efforts by Google and others, suggested by the OP but without the term name), I think the more we lie to hide, the more we spin others and ourselves in circles.
I really like Sam Lessin's essay on this at The Information, where he talks about how, with the nature of the internet being so easy to share info, we have to start spreading disinfo to even close colleagues, so far as even lying to ourselves.
I think this paradox is one of the most challenging paradoxes of our time: the internet makes it so easy for us to open up and share and yet it makes it so hard for us to not open up and share.
[0]: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/the-future-of-privac...