41–50 of 87 posts
Better title - Social credit: China's digital dictatorship Pretty horrifying story, sounds like Black Mirror.
Is it better to fear the State or your fellow citizens?
The Black Mirror episode, btw: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosedive_(Black_Mirror)
People who show unusual or controversial behaviour (be it political or social) will soon loose sources of income and thereby social status.
People who stick to the accepted norms and ethics and do not act up will on average have the chance to move up the ladder and earn more money and prestige.
The analogy is not perfect, of course, but money has similar effects on our society.
I expect those that defend the system see its appeal as a more rational alternative to guanxi, the informal networks of trust and reciprocal obligation that pervade Chinese society. Do you want a loan, or need a good hospital for your parent? You don't need to bribe or schmooze with the right person, only to be an orderly, hard-working citizen. On the other hand, you're trusting your score to "the algorythm", and any…
Stuff like this will slowly stop further evolution of society and lock down the status quo. Right now we still have ways to change society peacefully but in a surveillance state either nothing changes or change has to come with force. I think societies with massive surveillance will stagnate until they collapse.
I sometimes feel like currency is a primitive preliminary to this social points system. People who show unusual or controversial behaviour (be it political or social) will soon loose sources of income and thereby social status. People who stick to the accepted norms and ethics and do not act up will on average have the chance to move up the ladder and earn more money and prestige. The analogy is not perfect, of cours…
I think the concept of social credit has a lot of merits. But the risk for overreach is substantial unfortunately. I'd love to get rid of people who are unable to ride a train like a social human from the trains and lock people out of cinemas who can't behave as one should expect.
Really? I am for getting rid of people who use trains. No personal transport? You are probably just too poor...
But yeah, generally we should indeed welcome data collection about every detail of our personal lives. Because you know what would be the benefit?
Watching star wars without this stinky nerd that always spoils the next 10 minutes of the movie.
I can see no argument how you could be against this anymore.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, the title is awful - I was happier with the article then I thought I'd be, as it did go in to some of the negative points. To point to any atomic automatic judgment of ones citizens based on their beliefs as a good thing is a bit of a weird view, however. The examples they give are all terrifying. It's also not great that the lady they report as pro social credit is only revealed later on in the piece as being…
> I'm glad she "married for love", but I don't see why it would be relevant They're just making the point that she didn't marry him for his social credit score, even though he happens to have a high score under the system. To quote the article immediately prior to that section: "Who your friends and family are will affect your score. If your best friend or your dad says something negative about the government, you’ll…
Yes, that makes sense. I still hold that the deliberate omission of her party relationship until later in the article is to initially position her as a third party positive voice who happens to support the system.
And yes, the network affects are particularly awful.
Stuff like this will slowly stop further evolution of society and lock down the status quo. Right now we still have ways to change society peacefully but in a surveillance state either nothing changes or change has to come with force. I think societies with massive surveillance will stagnate until they collapse.
Or more frightening, the Communist experiment is successful long-term and becomes the dominate model for 'stability' globally.
Stuff like this will slowly stop further evolution of society and lock down the status quo. Right now we still have ways to change society peacefully but in a surveillance state either nothing changes or change has to come with force. I think societies with massive surveillance will stagnate until they collapse.
Or more frightening, the Communist experiment is successful long-term and becomes the dominate model for 'stability' globally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or more frightening, the Communist experiment is successful long-term and becomes the dominate model for 'stability' globally.
Doubt, there's no pure communist states left, they all fell after killing a bunch of their citizens by "knowing what's best". The economy is a chaotic system and any earnest attempt at top down control will fail, let alone communism which historically was more about transferring power to your friends than any real belief in an ideology.
The comment above though probably meant the true communism, i.e. society without money.