[ExI] privacy again, was: RE: Critiquing democracy
William Flynn Wallace
foozler83 at gmail.com
Thu Mar 5 17:57:27 UTC 2015
> Many of us have long advocated open government. There are those who argue
> that government is impossible without privacy, that completely overt
> government is a fantasy. I am getting an uneasy feeling that power will
> now concentrate in the hands of those who figure out how to
> most-effectively communicate privately.
How much of what government does is decided at political conventions, in
think tanks, in meetings with big donors, at Senate bars and gyms, on
private email? It's infinite. People are fearful and insecure about
everyone knowing their every move. Totally natural. When open hearings
and meetings occur the issues and stances are often a done deal. I don't
know of any way on Earth to make this any different and I am not sure I
would want to.
Yes, unless it involves national security, data should be open, votes
should be open always, but the basic process of formulating individual
opinions will never be open unless we force individuals to undergo some
futuristic form of fMRIs and find out what they think deep inside, and even
then we won't know how those opinions were formed.
> We should be glad for the openness we already have, though we should
always push for more openness because there are those who will push in the
opposite direction. This is never ending.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat