Don't Build Mindreading
lesswrong.com
Don't Build Mindreading
1–9 of 9 posts
Re: Don't Build Mindreading
#2Lesswrong might be the only site on the internet where "mass-deployed BCI telepathy" is considered a more immediate threat to social cohesion than social media, propaganda or advertising.
It's a shame that today's "technologists" are eager to ignore the political axis of technology if it means they get to talk about ESP or Von Neumann machines. It's like I'm watching the field progress in reverse, transitioning from a crowd of self-righteous and skeptical consumers to a mystic and eschatological identity that eschews understanding.
Re: Don't Build Mindreading
#3Lesswrong might be the only site on the internet where "mass-deployed BCI telepathy" is considered a more immediate threat to social cohesion than social media, propaganda or advertising. It's a shame that today's "technologists" are eager to ignore the political axis of technology if it means they get to talk about ESP or Von Neumann machines. It's like I'm watching the field progress in reverse, transitioning from…
> It's a shame that today's "technologists" are eager to ignore the political axis of technology if it means they get to talk about ESP
Your comment reads to me like a criticism of lesswrong, but the linked article is entirely about the political axis of a potential technology. Am I misunderstanding your comment?
Re: Don't Build Mindreading
#4Lesswrong might be the only site on the internet where "mass-deployed BCI telepathy" is considered a more immediate threat to social cohesion than social media, propaganda or advertising. It's a shame that today's "technologists" are eager to ignore the political axis of technology if it means they get to talk about ESP or Von Neumann machines. It's like I'm watching the field progress in reverse, transitioning from…
> It's a shame that today's "technologists" are eager to ignore the political axis of technology if it means they get to talk about ESP Your comment reads to me like a criticism of lesswrong, but the linked article is entirely about the political axis of a potential technology. Am I misunderstanding your comment?
Their argument against BCI is that it will be used in government-mandated purity tests to forcibly rally their subjects. But that's a political objective, and one that you don't need mind control or ESP to achieve. We already have extremely effective social controls in the form of Twitter/X, daytime television and mass advertisement. What use is mind reading in a world where you already control what most people think?
Look at the Patriot Act, or any other military censor you choose. Same concept - we need to peek into people's private communications to determine if they're a terrorist! We need to scan their photo gallery to prevent them from abusing children! All are means to the same ends, the state wants to enforce absolute loyalty by sucking out any room for protest. Throughout history you can very easily ascertain that authoritarianism isn't restrained by a lack of mind control, for every life Oskar Schindler saved there's another 1,000 bodies buried in Babi Yar. The fact that ESP might have prevented those 1,000 lives from being saved somewhat glosses over the millions that were ostensibly genocided without using psychic domination.
Re: Don't Build Mindreading
#5it's called less wrong because they're still always wrong
Re: Don't Build Mindreading
#6This is like reading an argument against multicellularity. The evil neurons are enslaving all the rest of us. Mind reading tech would obviously just be a new kind of language. Whatever state comes after would be unpredictable and emergent. It's not nazis with brain scanners.
Re: Don't Build Mindreading
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's a shame that today's "technologists" are eager to ignore the political axis of technology if it means they get to talk about ESP Your comment reads to me like a criticism of lesswrong, but the linked article is entirely about the political axis of a potential technology. Am I misunderstanding your comment?
Their argument against BCI is that it will be used in government-mandated purity tests to forcibly rally their subjects. But that's a political objective, and one that you don't need mind control or ESP to achieve. We already have extremely effective social controls in the form of Twitter/X, daytime television and mass advertisement. What use is mind reading in a world where you already control what most people think…
> Their argument against BCI is that it will be used in government-mandated purity tests to forcibly rally their subjects. But that's a political objective
Then why did you start this thread by complaining that technologists ignore the politics of technologies?
Re: Don't Build Mindreading
#8This is like reading an argument against multicellularity. The evil neurons are enslaving all the rest of us. Mind reading tech would obviously just be a new kind of language. Whatever state comes after would be unpredictable and emergent. It's not nazis with brain scanners.
> It's not nazis with brain scanners.
Why not? Where do you suppose the nazis would go, once they got ahold of some brain scanners?
Re: Don't Build Mindreading
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their argument against BCI is that it will be used in government-mandated purity tests to forcibly rally their subjects. But that's a political objective, and one that you don't need mind control or ESP to achieve. We already have extremely effective social controls in the form of Twitter/X, daytime television and mass advertisement. What use is mind reading in a world where you already control what most people think…
> Their argument against BCI is that it will be used in government-mandated purity tests to forcibly rally their subjects. But that's a political objective Then why did you start this thread by complaining that technologists ignore the politics of technologies?
Because they are. This is a flight-of-fancy, a science-fiction diversion that has no relevance to any real world politics from the last century.
Their "Nazis with a mind reader" scenario explains it perfectly; only a small minority of people were able to lie well enough to escape a regime with 1940s technology. Millions of other people were killed and the Nazis did not need a mind reader to find them. A modern authoritarian state with a mind reader is barely any scarier than a modern authoritarian state without one.