[sentenza]

It is best to do the following thought experiment: What if all communications data was available to "somebody"?

Well, sooner or later, this "somebody" would use it for things that for them are no-brainers: For example fighting terrorism in case of "somebody" = law enforcement. But then what?

Unfortunately, a situation in which somebody has all the data and is allowed to use it for a limited number of purposes is not stable. There is just too much that you can do with it, making the temptation irresistible. It then really doesn't matter if the scope of usage is extended in a million small steps or a few giant leaps, because the end state of a system with humans and data is that the humans will use the data.

But obviously, not everybody will have access to the data. We start (now) from a situation in which there is an information access asymmetry between the intelligence community and the general public and there is no indication that the intelligence community will ever be willing to give up this privileged position.

So in the end, all the data is available and it is used for many purposes, but the number of those that have access to it is limited, and their access gives them certain advantages over everybody else. This is how, over the course of a few dozen decades, you arrive at a security-clearance based caste system.

[harryh]

That wasn't a thought experiment. It was a bunch of predictions with no supporting evidence.

[sentenza]

We're talking about future developments of society in a rather abstract manner, so the whole discussion is always scraping along the edge of BS territory. However, I've stated clear assumptions each step of the way. Some of them may be wrong, but I am (unfortunately) confident that they're not.

Let's take the data usage expansion hypothesis. Already in the discussion about the EU data retention directive many stakeholders stated that they want access to the data for persecution of activities such as tax avoidance or file sharing. Even now, after they (mostly) lost their case, these people try again every few years. If they continue to persist and if they get a little bit of what they want every now and then (which has happened), we have the million steps scenario. I consider the situation unstable, because the resources of those that want to restrict the usage of gathered data (at least here in the EU) are dwarfed by the resources available to those that want to expand the usage.

Even the most extreme statement in my tale (the one about the caste system) has some footing in reality. When we still had the STASI here in Germany, the nature of what they did basically made them such a caste. Because STASI operatives had the job of spying on their surroundings with the tools available at the time, they had a general information advantage compared to everybody else. However, the rest of society avoided any contact with them (obviously only possible when they were not undercover) because of what they did. I once heard that children in school had to proclaim the professions of their parents at some point during the school year. If a child did not state a specific profession but just said "worker", everybody knew that the parents were STASI. Of course the child was then shunned by the other children.

While falling short of a fully developed caste system, this little example shows that a society with an extremely developed information gathering and processing apparatus can move in that direction.

I admit that using the word thought experiment was most likely wrong, but then it follows that one really can't make a Gedankenexperiment about the future of society, doesn't it?