[ExI] What surveillance solution is best - Orwellian, David Brin's, or ...?
eugen at leitl.org
Wed Jun 27 19:30:19 UTC 2007
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 11:43:25AM -0700, Jef Allbright wrote:
> Eugen, are you suggesting that this is a transition strategy until
> there are better solutions, or possibly until the Singularity and all
I don't really include the Singularity in my future models. Both
because it's incalculable by definition, and because I don't expect
it (very much like the Spanish Inquisition) to land during my 40-50
of natural biological lifespan left (assuming, the supplements and
the beer won't get me first). I fart in Singularity's general direction.
> bets are off anyway? How do you account for the relatively higher
> quality information you inadvertently provide by the gaps?
You cannot remain off the radar forever (a bit ironic, coming from me)
but you can really limit your world-visible information footprint.
> Since I don't at this time bet on a Singularity solving any of my
> problems, and I think the issue of transparency versus privacy is
> going to continue tipping toward transparency, I think the "solution"
The problem with transparency is that it only applies to some people.
It's very much a two-class society.
> to people having information about you is to intentionally publish as
> much public information about yourself as practical. The risk is not
> too much information, but of asymmetric exploitation of information.
You can assume the latter as a given. (It was this where Brin received
his well-deserved concerto of hisses and boos on cypherpunks@, at which
point he retreated to lick his wounds and sulk in the corner).
If there's no information to exploit, you're not giving anyone any rope
to hang you with.
More information about the extropy-chat