Changes in technology often produce ethical quandaries that did not previously exist. The successful transplantation of human hearts lead some to re-define death as "brain-death", so as to allow removal of organs for transplants. Now we may be faced with similar need for new definitions and limitations, as tech moves into neural interfaces. The article is to be found at Vox.
“Nothing was your own except the few cubic centimeters inside your skull.” That’s from George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, published in 1949. The comment is meant to highlight what a repressive surveillance state the characters live in, but looked at another way, it shows how lucky they are: At least their brains are still private.
Over the past few weeks, Facebook and Elon Musk’s Neuralink have announced that they’re building tech to read your mind — literally.
Mark Zuckerberg’s company is funding research on brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) that can pick up thoughts directly from your neurons and translate them into words. The researchers say they’ve already built an algorithm that can decode words from brain activity in real time.
And Musk’s company has created flexible “threads” that can be implanted into a brain and could one day allow you to control your smartphone or computer with just your thoughts. Musk wants to start testing in humans by the end of next year.
Of course, with medical technology, one could always make the argument that the issue was saving humans lives. Somehow we do not suspect that Zuckerberg or Musk are contaminated by such motives.
Your brain, the final privacy frontier, may not be private much longer.
Some neuroethicists argue that the potential for misuse of these technologies is so great that we need revamped human rights laws — a new “jurisprudence of the mind” — to protect us. The technologies have the potential to interfere with rights that are so basic that we may not even think of them as rights, like our ability to determine where our selves end and machines begin. Our current laws are not equipped to address this.
It's an in-depth article; a few highlights:
One of the main people pushing for these new human rights is neuroethicist Marcello Ienca, a researcher at ETH Zurich, one of Europe’s top science and technology universities. In 2017, he released a paper outlining four specific rights for the neurotechnology age he believes we should enshrine in law. I reached out to ask what he thought of the recent revelations from Facebook and Neuralink.
The four rights are:
1. The right to cognitive liberty
You should have the right to freely decide you want to use a given neurotechnology or to refuse it.
. . .
2. The right to mental privacy
You should have the right to seclude your brain data or to publicly share it.
. . . .
3. The right to mental integrity
You should have the right not to be harmed physically or psychologically by neurotechnology.
. . .
4. The right to psychological continuity
You should have the right to be protected from alterations to your sense of self that you did not authorize.
Alright, I know what you are thinking; wait, no, I don't! Not really. Let's keep it that way.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @08:34AM
they were right all along. who knew?
(Score: 2) by Bot on Wednesday September 18 2019, @09:29AM (11 children)
Not de jure but de facto the brain. Interface is too big of an opportunity to be left optional. I am not talking about plans for the nwo by Illuminati alien reptilians, but more prosaically the major publishers, Disney, Netflix, Warner. Because it plugs the analog hole. Content will be delivered to your brain. And DoS you like current content does.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 18 2019, @10:34AM (6 children)
For anything that doesn't stick wires into your brain, countermeasures will be found - too easy to generate noise levels higher than the signals of your brain.
For anything based on wires stuck in your brain, a small EM in the proximity will be effective in frying your brain - i.e. denying your right to life.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday September 18 2019, @10:51AM (5 children)
I don't want to run untrusted code from an untrustworthy source in a sandbox known historically to be as tight as Michelle Dugger's furry front bottom, so I use NoScript to protect myself whilst browsing. However, in order to see the timetables for the 23 bus (which passes the street two to the left) and the 43A (which passes a zigzag away to the right - therefore I *need* to make a decision which one I'm going for, and I'd rather make an informed decision - I apparently now *need* to turn on Javascript from several rando domains.
It's the future, but it will be your head not your browser next time.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 18 2019, @11:03AM (4 children)
I'll always have a choice to not want that and I don't see something that I absolutely need that won't work without implant.
Unless you condition my food/water/air by me accepting an implant - which is to say you try to deny my right to life - and even then I still have a choice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:41PM (1 child)
Yet.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:56PM
Well, I don't see yet a whole list of things, much simpler than controlling the complexity of a human brain. Things like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @03:29PM (1 child)
Don't worry. This kind of shit will be implanted rigth after born. When the subject don't have the choice of say no.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Wednesday September 18 2019, @11:06PM
Here in the good 'ol
freedumbfreedom-loving USA, what'll most likely happen is a lot of talk about "rights", and then the government will find a reason to say "no, we have to read your mind, because [Terrorism, The Children, the Homeland, OMG Sex, Taxes, Drug War, etc.]"You can pretty much count on it. If the tech arrives, US citizens will be at its mercy. Our history in this area is very consistent.
--
I wouldn't do anything for a Klondyke bar,
but I'd do some sketchy stuff for pizza.
(Score: 2) by inertnet on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:39PM
In the unlikely case that I'm forced to have such an interface, the first thing I'll need is an ad blocker. Or better, a blocker for anything that I didn't ask for.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Wednesday September 18 2019, @02:34PM (2 children)
Read 3001: The Final Odyssey, have you? That was essentially Asimov's idea that once the "braincap" became available and could begin to detect formations of criminal thought it became mandatory for screening purposes. It was just too useful to society to allow for individual liberty to refuse one. There was also a person who had been a criminal but had been "reeducated" as a valet for Frank Poole who had to use a card-type access for things everyone else used their braincaps for.
My only thought is that it won't take much for it to become mandatory. Too many people will find it useful enough and want the services it will offer enough to sign any privacy voiding agreements; it will become the majority and then the majority will make it mandatory. And since the soldiers will be mandatorily equipped with them and be able to communicate as a unit (akin to the Special Forces use in the Old Man's War series by Scalzi) they will readily be able to defeat the individualist partisans who are silly enough to resist... who won't have the weapons they need anyway because there will be no second amendment for them. But that's another rant.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 19 2019, @10:13AM
Reminds me of gun control to prevent a handful of people from dying in mass shootings, when the common cold kills over 100x more.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday September 26 2019, @06:49AM
I have read maybe 2 SF books and no Asimov, I prefer to browse history.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @09:39AM (22 children)
It's not about being forced. Nope. It's about being *coerced* by competition.
Let's say you're 100% against any form of neural interface. Let's say you know that any computer can be hacked, and therefore, will be. And that the cost of a neural implant (your very thoughts being monitored, your very thoughts being modified / tainted), are costs that keep you away.
Except -- across the street, Bob has one! And Bob? Just got that promotion, as he's literally 10x faster at his job now. More efficient. Can even argue in meetings, bringing in relevant data instantly, whilst you'd have to go and search Google for 10 minutes, and take another 10 to absorb that same info.... so, Bob wins those debates at the office.
Bob seems *awesome*. You seem to *suck*... even thought you're more intelligent, the use of instant data just helps Bob so much, you seem to suck.
So, what now? Do you keep losing job after job? It's not even a requirement, just... others are so better able to compete with an interface, and you aren't.
So you get an interface. Now, John across the street has you AND Bob to compete against. Soon, 20%, then 50%, then 99% of people have said interface. They're great! Can you still hold out, and hold a normal life?
Can you even *talk* to people who have such interfaces, and interact differently than before?
What about when people are all speaking via Local Instant Messaging via said app, and you can't hear, yet everyone else in the room can?
My point here is, there are 100 potential scenarios where such an interface is a great boon. You aren't FORCED to get one, but if you don't? Welp. Your prospects are cut.
Don't agree? OK.. go to school, or live in society without a computer. People not only look at you funny, it can hurt your ability to succeed.
Note: this same argument exists for genetic engineering your child. Even if your local area prohibits it with laws, the rich will fly to areas it is allowed, and conceive there. Fly home, birth locally, their child is 2x as strong, faster, intelligent than yours. Are you going to want your child to be an idiot, compared to those around him/her? Nope! You *will* enhance your child, or your lineage will die. Who wants to mate with an ugly, slow, temperamental, sickly, barely intelligent person? Well, that'll be your kid, compared to all others, without it)
Anyhow.
Yeah. You won't be forced. You'll do it of your own volition, because otherwise? You fail at life.
And that truly sucks, because such interfaces WILL be hacked, and can you imagine China monitoring your thoughts? Or, hackers infecting your mind somehow?
These things are going to simulate brain->vision, right? Connected to the visual cortex, yes? How above, while you sleep (with your eyelids closed), a message keeps flashing into your mind. "OBEY" or "LEADER = GOOD".
How about directly into your auditory cortex. A whisper. A constant whisper, when sleeping.
Or... let's say we bypass those two parts of the brain, and directly implant thoughts! Well, even worse! Because the auditory cortex and visual cortex are filtered prior to your brain making use of them. What if the interface to the brain, just pops thoughts into your brain? Past all normal filters, like filters we have in place to take in text, and what people say, and examine it?
Instead, the thought.. seems like your own! Want to be hacked now?
Is the thought that says "Submit to State" yours, or is it the interface? Or, are you thinking "Hmm, maybe it's too risky to argue with the state, to protest". Is that thought yours? Or is it a subtle way to reduce dissent?
This stuff is *madness*, and you'll be getting one, everyone will, or see above!
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Common Joe on Wednesday September 18 2019, @10:20AM (4 children)
I was debating whether to bump this up insightful. I finally did. It could have been worded better, but AC's concerns are my own.
I keep hearing the phrase "You can do anything you want, but every decision comes with consequences -- good or bad." You can try to reject it, but it's like saying you're going to be a small farmer or a horse shoe repairman in today's world. That won't work anymore. As a society, we will be forced into this at some point. And judging from how things are going politically, it's not going to be pretty. Corporations will be paying for farms of people's minds. If a particular version of software / hardware damages a group of minds, then they'll just have to upgrade or abandon the group. (Who knows what happens to the people.)
Man, the Matrix looks pretty appealing because at least there you had the ability to choose. I think I need a drink.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday September 18 2019, @02:41PM (3 children)
Define "small farmer" and what you'd expect to get out of it. Sure, it'd be pretty tough to make a living, but I don't see any reason it couldn't work. You're likely not going to make a dent in the mega corp farm, but I don't see why you couldn't survive as a small farm.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by Common Joe on Wednesday September 18 2019, @03:58PM
There are plenty of reasons. Without getting into all of them, I'll leave you a one word reason: Monsanto.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday September 19 2019, @01:42AM
Ask the Amish. [npr.org]
Or if you don't want to ask them... (And my numbers are made up for some small degree of simplicity....) When you have 1,000 individual farmers each farming three acres and the farmers get 1 bushel per acre and corn costs $2 per bushel to grow and gets $4 per bushel every farmer has made $6. Nice. But when you have 301 farmers, 300 of which farm three acres and 1 of whom now farms 2,100 acres (previously taken by 700 farmers at 3 acres each) and everything else is the same the 300 farmers make $6 and the big one makes $4,200. You've gotten the same total amount of food out of the system as the prior example (3,000 bushels).
(Actuially because of scale the one with 2,100 acres makes about $6,000 because of increased efficiency and being able to afford better yielding seed, but whatever). The seedmakers will raise prices, farm taxes will go up, and now costs per bushel are $3.50 per acre. The next year your 2,100 acre farmer makes $1,050 but still survives. Your other 300 farmers made $1.50 and their farms are now in foreclosure because they had to spend that $1.50 on their food and clothes and sending their kids to school. No money for seed for next year. The farming conglomerate only spent $300 total for their 200 employees on those costs so they still have the money for seed. (In reality the small farmer will take out a loan or a second mortgage and hope next year is better - but one only gets so many shots at that before nobody will lend to that farmer anymore).
Oh, wait, you thought that the prices would come up to meet those increased costs? Nope. The big guy can afford to absorb the hit, especially if it means there will be another 300 farms in foreclosure next year that the conglomerate will add to their portfolio and take reduced profit margins because they will truly make it up in scale and volume. The conglomerate will still sell theirs at $4 per bushel and the little guys can't hold out - they have to take the higher amount. That's why your bread is still $1.something per loaf today and not $10.00 per loaf as it would be with standard inflation. See a graph like this one [inflationdata.com]. There's always enough people who will sell low enough that price inflation is pretty well suppressed on the farmer's end of things even though they do indeed face inflation themselves, and try anything like crazy to get improved efficiency to try and meet it. Including buying out other small farmers if they can.
Sorry, long winded explanation. But the reality is for any industry, anywhere, the little guy can't compete head-to-head with the conglomerate and win. Not without providing some sort of value or additional leverage that makes doing business with them more worthwhile, or finding some efficiencies to eat the inflationary costs. It's why the old aphorism is that the only time a farmer ever really makes money is when they sell the farm off - if they survive.
We haven't gone anywhere near crop insurance, or that a drought year kills small farmers much worse than agribusiness, or that the government pulled subsidies that the small farmers had been riding on, or.....
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 22 2019, @07:15AM
You could survive. But you couldn't participate in contemporary society, you'd be stuck surviving, and eventually the law or the powerful neighbours would eminently seize your domain. Consider even taxes; where does the money for those come from, in a society where for "food security" you can't get into markets, because you might have razor blades in your tomatoes? What about when the neighbours get the valuation jacked up so they can evict you, buy it at auction, and have it re-appraised back down after? This kind of thing already happens. It won't decrease as automation makes the motions simpler. That's what a purely liquid globalized market means - no space to survive at the "bottom of the market."
(Score: 4, Interesting) by SomeGuy on Wednesday September 18 2019, @10:35AM
If Apple is the one selling this stuff then you will also have to contend with the idiots who get one just to make themselves look "cool" or "hip". If you don't, even if you are still as productive or even more productive, then you will be considered "behind the times" or a "Luddite".
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Wednesday September 18 2019, @10:53AM (12 children)
Bob's cognitive function will deteriorate with each sudden discharge in the same room of a capacitor the size of those in photo flashes. like this [google.com].
He may even die from the EM noise of a high speed electric motor with worn out brushes.
Yeap. Finding facts/knowledge and creativity are two different things. The same go for physical skills - something that a lot of tradies use everyday.
Heck, I haven't seen the plumber I called using any computer while he installed a new water heater and he still charged me half a grant for the job.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @11:03AM (6 children)
And when the plumber runs into trouble at work, what does he do these days? Go to the library for a textbook / building code book, go to the city, or access these via a webpage?
What if it's a weird problem? Web, or .. what? The local plumber's guild? Call friends that get upset, and say "Google it!"?
What about when he has to install a specific water softener? Or a UV filter? Or a new water pump in a well? Or a new fangled knock valve, or .. anything?
Do you think the docs still come 100% with these? Sometimes, sometimes not. Soon, not. After all, a user's guide isn't the same as in installer's guide, and many things come with only one, or neither. Why? Waste of paper, environmental and cost concerns! Google it!
What about buying tools for work? Is Mr Plumber going to go to Home Depot, then Lowes, then 3 or 4 different plumbing specialty shops? Or is he going to Google for price savings, order online, check for sales online, find info, reviews, details about product online?
Is the non-computer plumber advantaged, or disadvantaged yet?
See? That's just in Mr Plumber's professional life.
What about in his personal life? Will he shop 100% local, driving from store to store (or calling a lot) to get best-pricing, see if product is in stock? FYI, both professionally and personally, I find many local stores don't stock rarer items now, as people just order them online! In fact, some stuff from Home Depot, Walmart, etc is ONLY available by special order now.. not like 30 years ago, where it made sense to stock many things locally.
Of course, plumber can use the phone. He won't get to see, read about, research, find info about stuff.. but, he can call and order product that's not in local stores. But Home Depot, Sears, Walmart, have fewer / no catalogs now!
Where will he find info?
What about maps? Hmm? To get to job sites?
I can't find new maps any more. Any I find are a decade old here. They used to be updated daily. I guess he'll have to do with old maps, ask more questions of customers (how do I get to your house? why are you telling me to use gmaps/gps?)
See. Tech counts. Computers count. Not having one IS a disadvantage.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 18 2019, @11:11AM (4 children)
Oh, he and many others will. For sure.
He and his tradies friends are tradies because they have physical skills and know what to do to throw a wrench (so to speak) in your too high dependency on tech. E.g. the sparky will arrange for your power supply to go out and he will take care to not be affected by it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @11:34AM (3 children)
Eh?
You're not getting it. He *can*, but he *doesn't*. Every plumber I know, every contractor, buys online, uses computers or their smart phone to save money. To do things faster. To get docs. And to all the things you ignored in my post you just replied to.
That makes them MORE profitable, MORE efficient, and gives them MORE free time.
Meaning? They're more competitive.
You are disadvantages without a computing device today. You keep ignoring this part, and say "But you don't have to!".
So what? Meaningless. That's not the point.
The tradesman can forego all electric tools too. Use a hand drill. A cart and horse. So?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by c0lo on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:43PM (2 children)
Sucks to live in your place, then.
'Cause mine came to see what I want, called his mate at the depot by phone, got a discount that was passed half to me on the materials bill, went there and picked the heater, was back in 1 hour. I was glad to pay him extra for the work, 'cause he saved me half a sday and the entire evening waiting for the delivery.
Can't get more competitive than personalized service and less dependence on logistics ran from hundred of kilometers away.
Maybe. There are advantages too in being less reliant on an infrastructure than may or may not be accessible when you need it.
You know those farmers that initiated the right to repair movement some years ago? When you risk your crop of an entire year because a sensor is faulty and the service will come tomorrow, together with the forecaster rain... you might get the idea that the entire technology that made you so efficient in raising that crop is actually a huge liability when it stops you from harvesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @09:07PM (1 child)
You're missing context (likely on purpose, as you keep doing it), by ignoring the ends of sentences, and thread totality.
I didn't say "only buys online", I said "buys online to save". Save being the key component. I also mentioned tools, which are expensive things.. yet you ignored that, and talk about a water tank, the most difficult thing to single-ship.
A plumber needs things like plumber's tape, solder, propane/butane, and 100s of little things like copper pipe joins, PVC pipe joins, PVC cement, and on, and on, and on.
These are all things that are typically bought ahead of time, in bulk. Pricing online = better than in store.
Of course, you ignore all those possibilities, and just say 'meh', and say 'but I saw this guy buy something from a store!' and 'he *called* someone'.
I don't know why you persist in ignoring things like this, when repeatedly mentioned. You're not debating the point, simply ignoring it.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday September 19 2019, @12:11AM
I thought I made it obvious that I paid extra to have the problem solved to my needs and fast. the
Immediateness consequence: there is a market for which considerations of 'saving a dime to waste a thousand' does not apply.
Could be do it by computer? I doubt that he maintains on Facebook his personal relation with the store owner where he bought the heater at discounted price and I really doubt that he could download the heater from the store to install it. His choice seems to be face 2 face, personal relations and doing a good job which includes the acquisition and delivery of the equipment. He seems to make a living good enough for himself, so I suspect the market segment he caters to is larger than only myself.
(bottom line: you can still make a profit if you chose not to save more but to earn more. Still works, especially outside the corporate environment.
Since the tools are mostly one of investment (at least within a year), I don't see how being connected with a neural Interface to the internet plays a role into it. Besides, I didn't see him using anything else but pliers, blowtorch, flux and tin, plumbers tape. Can't imagine those tools are that expensive or requires knowledge one needs to download from internet straight into the brain.
And obtaining all of these requires direct neural connection? Is that 'the survival factor for plumbers' as younseem to imply?
Mate, are you aware about the law of diminishing returns? Using a computer could have shaved probably $10 from his bill, in consumables. Like less than 1% of his total bill. Oh, wow, that's ... /s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 18 2019, @03:00PM
He opens the Ugly book, and searches for ideas. Failing that, he discusses the problem with his buddies at the bar. If that fails, he asks his wife for advice. The wife goes to Youtube, and downloads a video.
I'm only half joking here. We have "engineers" at work, who tell us how to do some thing or another. When questioned, a common reply is, "I saw it on Youtube last week!" The first few times I heard that, I thought it was a joke. Sadly, it's the "engineers" who are the joke.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @02:06PM (4 children)
Half a Grant? $25?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 18 2019, @02:22PM (3 children)
Typo. Grand - half of it being $500
I don't know what a grant is and why is half of it worths $25. Should I?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Wednesday September 18 2019, @02:38PM
Don't see why you should.... anyplace smart except for banks refuse to accept them anymore, let alone a good Franklin. :)
Guess he's become Useless Grant again.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 18 2019, @03:03PM (1 child)
Ulysses S. Grant left his image behind, to be used on the US fifty dollar bill. Thus, half a grant would be $25.00, give or take, depending on where you go to school in the US.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Wednesday September 18 2019, @11:20PM
"it's all about the Pentiums" [youtube.com] by Weird Al. (Boy, is that already old!) Original song: "Benjamins".
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday September 18 2019, @11:30AM
They promised that with automation, and computers, and "the paperless office", and the internet...
In some rare odd cases yes the steam engine did pretty much eliminate certain classes of employment. But in general the DMV does not work 100x faster because they got computers in the 80s and now they got a website in the 10s and 10x10=100.
Its kinda like TV was supposed to bring valuable educational content into boomer childrens lives, whereas mostly they got "The Flintstones" and "All in the Family".
My guess is brain implants will be good for sex. not much else.
Much like home computers in the 80s, HPV vaccines in the 00s, tablets in the 10s, richer school districts will be "forced" to roll out this kinda crap to keep their school districts and therefore property values attractive, even though nobody much wants to participate in the scam. So there will be a couple very short generations of kids that are using brainwave stuff to shitpost on 4chan and insta while they're supposed to be paying attention in trigonometry class and everyone will pretend that's the greatest thing ever and it'll make them so successful in the job market.
(Score: 2) by Fnord666 on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:54PM
If this strikes a chord with you, give Beggars in Spain [wired.com] by Nancy Kress a read. It's about children who are genetically engineered to never need sleep and all the implications that entails.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 19 2019, @08:51AM
I've been in industries where it was advantageous to smoke. The smokers included most of the management, and all the smokers went outside into this little sheltered area to smoke. So many deals were done out there that non-smoking managers got shafted and lost their jobs. Promotions on the floor were given to people the higher-ups knew, ie those who talked to them during their smoking breaks. Trying to spend time out there without smoking would get you ostracized worse than being excluded as it was obvious you were just there for the politics.
How much worse is it going to be when the in-group clique with implants can talk to each other without even the possibility of you luddites overhearing?
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @09:52AM
Like a pauper protesting the government taxing his billions.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by VLM on Wednesday September 18 2019, @11:22AM (13 children)
So... western world is going 3rd world at a rapid pace, I don't think we need to worry about "everyone" getting
I mean, for most people, braces on teeth, lack of obesity, affordable medical care, minor plastic surgery, all are dreams. That fat dude at walmart who needs braces and can't afford new eyeglasses and his prescriptions isn't going to get brain surgery.
The enforced elimination of the middle class means no potential users... rich powerful people aren't going to put up with this shit, and poor people won't afford it and won't need it for the jobs they won't have anyway. You MIGHT see it in weird corners of the employment sphere... wall street traders who aren't even human anyway, or maybe a tiny fraction of military special forces troops where hacking them wouldn't really be worth it but there would be benefits (REMF MOS medics (as opposed to front line medics) maybe?).
(Score: 2, Interesting) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:07PM (1 child)
probably need to throw out the 1st/2nd/3rd world model about now.
globalization is happening in the worst possible way, and as such the entire concept of 'western' is gone too.
If the magna carta is thrown out, and it has been, there is no western civilization. You can thank israel for this, there is no way they could complete the yinnom plan and genocide the palestinians and syrians, or keep their stolen nuclear arsenal secret, with human rights still in effect. And thank the pentagon stooges that let them get infiltrated to the point they are building black site concentration camps all over and murdering people with drones without historical record.
So I am not standing up for western civilization at this time, I am advocating for its return. The rights of the individual and minority do not exist and with this the entire tradition comes to an end.
This is already biting us and numerous, numerous activists and journalists have been murdered and many more simply made destitute in order to keep things moving this way, so that the word doesn't get out and the intellectual pillars that human rights exist upon are smashed. The harassment and infilration I have experienced are part of this effort. If you speak up for human interests or individual interests or any of these heady 18th century legal concepts, the people extrajudicially ruining your life are just going to laugh at you.
thesesystemarefailing.net
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday September 20 2019, @11:44AM
Not disagreeing with most of what you said, but that's kinda close to magic dirt theory.
Demographics is destiny. Can't have a western culture if westerners no longer exist and no longer have countries, merely "north syria" or "north mexico" etc.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:18PM (8 children)
The masses will be placated by other means. [unherd.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by meustrus on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:20PM (7 children)
Identity politics, defined by Merriam Webster:
You've got a curious reinterpretation of identity politics. Your linked article goes on to misinterpet "intersectionality" as well, asserting that it is about one's own identity, whereas in reality it is about finding common ground with other identity groups.
I'm not saying identity politics are good. They're very bad, whether it's San Franciscan ethnic groups vying to overpower each other or white supremacists insisting that they be in charge.
If you have a beef with trans, it's not identity politics. TERFs be damned, trans activists fight for issues that go far beyond their identity group. It doesn't take much reasoning to imagine that someone who understands both gender perspectives would be interested in claiming privileges of their birth gender for their claimed gender as well.
This is the foundation of Scruton's argument, the ideal he wishes to restore. He does not wish for a world where people can discuss ideas freely without fear of social recourse. Quite the opposite. He wishes for a world where people know their place, where people like him are on top, and nobody is allowed to question it.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @03:07PM (3 children)
^ no brain implant required, 1+1=3 and Meustrus will now lead the minute hate against the heretical, double-plus ungood thought-criminals Scruton and Murray.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Wednesday September 18 2019, @03:24PM (2 children)
I don't hate anybody. I don't tell Scruton or Murray who they can be or put limits on their lives based on who they are. But when someone does that to me or the people I love, I fight back. It's my right as much as yours.
Time used to be that blacks, gays, and suffragettes were double-plus ungood thought-criminals. Scruton and Murray want to return to that. It's clear to me which side insists that some ideas are unthinkable.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @04:51PM (1 child)
I'll watch my humour [managers.org.uk] if you're offended (you're not and I won't :)
You're aware of the Scruton affair [google.com] and that Douglas Murray is gay? The latter irrelevant to his arguments but relevant to yours. You're also aware that cancel culture is real? I don't get the objection to my point - that social control (or engineered social conflict) has or will never require implants.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Wednesday September 18 2019, @07:14PM
That was your point? And here I thought it was just using TFA as a pretense to share your ideology. I agree at least that social control has never required implants (be it now, the 50s, or any other time in history).
I haven't read Murray's book. If he's gay himself, it's unlikely he wants to see a return to the "shared religion" and "old customs" Scruton seems to idolize.
Which suggests that Scruton is taking Murray's arguments in a different direction. It's a common problem in this area, evidenced even further by your "Scruton affair" link: arguments in support of bigotry end up associated with bigots, whether justified or not, often because other voices coopt reasoned commentary in support of selfish ideology.
How do you define "cancel culture"? Does it include deplatforming, either on social media or on college campuses? Does it just mean socially shaming someone? Is it cancel culture if the shame is completely justified, i.e. based on what the person actually said and meant rather than third or fourth party interpretation?
I hope you're not implying that it's wrong to call out bigotry and ignore public figures that peddle it. I'll agree though that it's problematic when the offense is blown out of proportion or completely imaginary. That's more of a consequence of mob rule than anything else, though. And like I said about Stallman, the only realistic alternative is to forgive actual bad actors along with the jokesters and insensitive critics.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 4, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday September 18 2019, @05:32PM
White Supremacy is the ORIGINAL identity politics. Per usual, they're going to project their own flaws onto everyone else.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 19 2019, @08:06AM (1 child)
Different AC here. I think you need to read up a little more on intersectionality before critiquing other peoples understanding of it. This is something that has come from Critical Theory and is basically an re-expression of the old Marxist idea of the bourgeoisie oppressing the proletariat, but now instead of the proletariat we have all the plethora of identity groups - so we can now castigate everyone as oppressors or defend as the oppressed depending upon the prevailing political expediency. I believe this is what is driving a lot of the nasty "cancel culture" which we have seen so very recently WRT RMS.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Thursday September 19 2019, @09:28PM
Scruton's musings on intersectionality involved people adopting the identities of other disadvantaged groups. I think I saw that on the news once, actually. Generally, though, intersectional feminists don't start acting like they're all African-American too.
The plethora of identity groups is part of the bourgeoisie oppression. It has been for centuries. It is, in fact, the reason why southern states stopped keeping white slaves in the 18th century. Poor whites are still shafted by intentional public policy. Red scares aren't what keep them from rising up. White supremacy is. They're placated by burning crosses, knowing that they're better than someone else...who could have been an ally for economic justice.
Intersectionality is intended as a remedy to this. Radicals in the 60s and 70s understood that they were up against a big, big adversary and that they would need allies. All it takes is to be "disadvantaged".
I suppose it would be nice if we could all agree that trailer trash are disadvantaged similar to gang bangers. Seems like there's a lot of old hurt to process first, though, starting with that whole confederate flag thing. Not saying it has to go, just that it has to be for everyone or no one. I dunno, maybe the descendants of slaves could be convinced it was some kind of Springtime for Hitler thing to reclaim the flag for actual rebellion's sake.
As for "cancel culture", I'm quite sure that its intent is fundamentally to change culture. As I understand it, people trying to prevent certain abuses from going unpunished are so sick of the excuses that they're willing to accept some collateral damage. But the goal is still to end those abuses. Just like laws against murder are intended to prevent murder for fear for the consequences.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by meustrus on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:24PM
He's got the latest iPhone though, along with access to state-of-the-art computer software and massive social networks costing billions to operate.
If neurotech can steal your privacy, the beneficiaries will subsidize it. Thread surgery will be as cheap as Facebook.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:37PM
You forgot the scenario in which rich people pay some of the poor people to get the implants and they'll just keep the remotes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Wednesday September 18 2019, @11:58AM (2 children)
conventional wisdom 1980 - mind control and mind reading tech is totally impossible
conventional wisdom 2018 - mind control and mind reading is probably being experimented with by the military and rich cults, and is probably possible, but no way *your mind* is important enough to read just because
conventional wisdom ITT - mind control and mind reading are real, very near, and no one is going to be able to escape it and it is not going to be something you can control and btw the government is totally evil and will continue to let people like epstein get away with whatever they want, which includes access to and control of your mind
So yeah, the idea of stallman and friends(including me) from the very beginning is, if tech is not carefully audited and in the public domain, institutions are going to generate all this tech that only betrays the user and generally invisibly so, is correct and has been, and this concept is only going to be more important.
When there is a 5g transmitter that can also work in the frequencies that can interact with your brain remotely without any accountability, no one will be able to have a password, how's that going to work? It's going to integrate you into the cloud, except the cloud will be a mass interface with what we know now as the cloud. An emf cloud that puts you in direct contact with unaccountable, incredibly byzantine physical hardware networks that are integrated directly with the state. Which is controlled by trump and anyone who gives him a blowjob, or who can make him give them a blowjob(read: the russian and israeli mob)
Also, it's not like they are going to announce this, they are going to activate it first secretly in order to steal the most important passwords from the most important people in the resistance against them.
Think though, if the drake equation and fermi's paradox suggests that other civilizations reach this same phase, how many planets are there in the universe like in A Wrinkle In Time where all of the children bounce their balls in unison and every thought is controlled.
Someone wrote even in the matrix you had a choice. Actually, no, only a very select few who had the tech know-how were able to mount any resistance at all, whatsoever, and then they had a choice to go back. And even the people who went back, still had no choice, they were going to sit motionless in the vat and their expiriences would not go further than a few cells near the cable in the back of their head.
But above comment is right, also the book Nexus, if you feel like having it explained to you via pulpy disposable novels. China is going to build this, rich supervillains are going to build this, israel is going to build this, and you can bet none of these parties have any good plans for soylentis, or anyone who does not think exactly like them. So I'd say countermeasures, detection, defenses, auditing, legal measures, and more detection and auditing are in order.
If anyone would like to help me start a company to make affordable emf measurement device, or a portable faraday cage, let me know. This is of course though a prime example of
thesesystemsarefailing.net
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday September 18 2019, @04:08PM (1 child)
We do have much better knowledge about the brain than we did in 1980. We seem to have broken down where types of information are stored and seem to have gotten down some experimental technology for controlling things with our mind. It's one thing to design something that's controllable by our brain, it's an entirely different proposition to try to "read your mind". Sure, they might be able to detect that you're thinking "happy thoughts" or might be accessing "creative thoughts" / lying, but I highly doubt this will go much beyond that.
I could definitely see a dystopian future where a "mind reading" device was used as a means for the government to do what they want. A non-Mind Reading Device that is used and says what the government wants it to.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Thursday September 19 2019, @10:09AM
With computesr - designed for total control after period where it looked like it would allow personal use
network - designed for total control after a period where it looked like it would allow personal use
handheld computer phone - designed for total remote control
In every single instance with every single technology, they design it for total control after lying about it.
Biological machines are still machines. The components are discrete. Something is sending signals to my fingers when I type this, these words appear somewhere in my head before anywhere else.
To think that this is under no circumstances readable or manipulatable is wishful thinking and well, naive.
It's bad news I know. What we also know for sure is that corps and gov will use any tool at their disposal to make the population less intelligent and capable of critical thought.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @12:05PM
has been with us for quite some time already. The problem was that it was invasive. Now they have solutions that are not.
(Score: 4, Funny) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 18 2019, @01:11PM
Fight Club is starting to seem like prophecy.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by acid andy on Wednesday September 18 2019, @08:19PM
Even if things don't get directly wired into our brains, round the clock surveillance in the home will feed AIs that analyze all dialog (I think there was an article recently about sub-audible monologues being picked up as well), behavior and facial expressions and--importantly--use the information to attempt to predict future behavior. Sometimes that could be worse than reading actual thoughts because it won't matter whether the AIs predictions are wrong. Your fate is sealed.
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18 2019, @08:58PM
If we re-define death as "brain-death", then for symmetry we should re-define birth as "brain-birth". Brain waves then determine the full extent of legally protected human life, from beginning to end.
(Score: 2) by nobu_the_bard on Wednesday September 18 2019, @08:58PM
Look as long as we can all agree not to have clear cases for our heads like we do our computers I think we'll be able manage somehow.
(Score: 2) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Thursday September 19 2019, @09:53AM
With computesr - designed for total control after period where it looked like it would allow personal use
network - designed for total control after a period where it looked like it would allow personal use
handheld computer phone - designed for total remote control
In every single instance with every single technology, they design it for total control after lying about it.
Biological machines are still machines. The components are discrete. Something is sending signals to my fingers when I type this, these words appear somewhere in my head before anywhere else.
To think that this is under no circumstances readable or manipulatable is wishful thinking and well, naive.
It's bad news I know.