[ExI] What surveillance solution is best - Orwellian, David Brin's, or ...?

[Eugen Leitl]

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.