âprivacy might well be a very recent fetishâ - will self
total privacy leads to the samprivacye place zero privacy does
âWhether or not it draws on new scientific research, technology is a branch of moral philosophy, not of science. PAUL GOODMAN, New Reformationâ
Excerpt From: Neil Postman. âTechnopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technologyâ. Apple Books.
Information is naturally social, a solitary individual wouldnât be able to produce meaningful data (about themselves OR about the world around them, and may well be speaking in a âprivate languageâ), even if they have compelling reasons to log it, it wouldnât mean much outside of their solipsism. Data becomes information only after it steps into social arena.
âArguing that you donât care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is like saying you dont care about free speech because you have nothing to sayâ - Snowden
LOL
WATCH ME DISMANTLE THIS POSITION IN THE SPACE BELOW
Privacy is not absolute and can be traded just like hours in the days of our lives are traded when we pick up a trade, profession or calling. Data privacy is as fundamental a right as the right on our time, which is to say, like all fundamental rights, it too is malleable. Besides, there are cameras everywhere already, it was only a matter of time what we did here happened, isnât it a blessing that it happened semi-consciously and semi-deliberately instead of being a total accident? What kind of tragedy would we be looking at then?
So, saying you care about data privacy even though you have nothing special to share with the world is like saying i have ten free hours in the day i consciously choose to waste because Iâve been taught to hide my best bits from the public, to be secretive and individualistic. How long do you think that logic is going to fly given where tech has reached?
Data is the new oil? Did you ever think who/where the well is?
Who gets to say what and when is tightly controlled, even western liberal media isnt free, such is the nature of democracy in late capitalism.
If FS leads to disastrous consequenses it isnt FS as iâve demonstrated
Most people do have nothing to saya nd just want to live peaceful lives
I dont care about privacy because i DO believe in FS and i DO have sth to say (and am saying it all the time)
Most freedoms arenât dependent on data âprivacyâ or anything that resembles it. A few are, but it is debatable how important those freedoms are, and whether doing away with them isnât altogether beneficial for the planet.
First of all, ANY participation in society, by definition, implies a loss of individual rights. The veneer of fundamental rights is a necessary fiction that makes us feel free, when in fact, the individual is everywhere in chains. Every single one of us is bound by a social structure and a social order that is beyond us and we talk of individual freedom as if it even exists. Man is a social creature, rights are commensurate with duties. Some people perform special duties, so their rights to duties ratio is different. Such as soldiers, or even civil servants. But even that is going too far, want to marry that nice girl from gym but mom wonât allow? whereâs your fundamental right? Sure, you could break ties, but then youâd be forsaking other stuff. So everything in life is a tradeoff, lets not be too rigid about rights and such. Youâre free to spend your time however you want, thats the most basic fundamental right, to do what you wish WITH YOUR TIME, but you must surrender that right and work 8 hours a day so you can make money, pay bills fulfil social obligations etc. Harping on about rights is nothing if not, âmotivated ignoranceâ. Sound fascist and sadistic, I know.
Instead of making things better, most of us are just looking for someone to blame while we enjoy our toys.
All of us have become, at some level, caricatures of the very SJWs we despise, Iâm only trying to get us up one level and turn everyone into a journalist instead, how can that be fascist? Why am I doing this? Because I know nobody wants to give up their toys and rights, and indeed, nobody should have to. Iâm choosing the lesser evil.
Re point (1), most people are woke in their bliss and ignorance and donât need to be âwoken upâ, contrary to popular belief, but nobody starts blaring common knowledge in the streets because theyâve made those tradeoffs. No one is truly free, my effort here is to help us realize and move beyond this dichotomy of free/unfree. Weâre free in relation with the world in proportion to the quality and quantity of our contribution towards it. As for individualism, what would it even mean in the absense of other people? World is hell, being an individual is a torture, if you cannot endure, become a communist. Otherwise, strive for a rights:duties ratio that puts your soul at ease while calming those around you.
Suppose someone invaded your thoughts and started reading them, then you would complain about how they wonât let you be but the truth of the matter is most people canât even leave themselves alone. If someone invents a new mic, sure they should be compensated, but people will start complaining about noise pollution even before things start if they presume they can see the future. Thatâs my problem with the left in general, way too pessimistic, whereas from where I stand, the future isnât all bad.
(Data) Privacy has no intrinsic value, it only has the value we give it. The difference can be illustrated thusly: if I preface a joke with âhereâs a jokeââ or âlet me tell you a jokeâ, it is likely that the impact of the joke will diminish. However, in a public setting like a stand up comedy club, where the intentions of the performer arenât hidden from the crowd, the humour isnât dampened. Similarily, our need for surprise, the need to do stuff with the illusion of our intentions being hidden from the outside world is a socially determined need. It is, in effect, a need for the âotherâ. Conversely, it is a need OF the other. In short, I want privacy only because others want it. Which is a loop with no beginning. The need for privacy isnât rooted in biology and even if it is, technology has started the evolutionary cycle that will change all that. Iâm just a symptom of this evolutionary drive. Sure, some people with evil intentions still would prefer their plans to remain hidden but such people are the minority.
During Peacetime, Privacy is the illusion allowed by those who think they are in control, to those who would like to think they are in control. During wartime, whoever can keep a secret doesnât necessarily win.
Democratic voting doesnât make something a âsinâ, nor does cultural convention produce meaning. Voting and conventions both are ways around the real task of asking difficult questions facing the human race. I say Donât vote, just think.
Peter Sloterdijk
Where is this ego then, if it is neither in the body nor in the soul? Blaise Pascal
Every ego, in or- der to manifest itself and to stand up to public scrutiny, requires a solid nucleus, a pride of ego, which can endure having to appear before others. The greatest breakthrough for the people came when they discovered the language of human rights for themselves. These rights were articulated from the peasant wars of 1525 up until the modern Russian and Polish resistances as the rights of Chris- tians. In the traditions based on the American and French revolutions, they are understood as temporal natural rights.
Bildungspolitik
All wheels stand still, if our strong arms so will.
Geistesgeschichte
The Utopia of conscious life was and remains a world in which we all have the right to be Odysseus and to let that Nobody live, in spite of history, politics, na- tionality, and Somebodiness.
Between the poles of Nobodiness and Somebodiness, the adventures and vicissitudes of con- scious life are strung. In conscious life, every fiction of an ego is dissolved once and for all.
For this reason, Odysseus, and not Hamlet, is the true founding father of modern and everlasting intelligence.