Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Data Dictatorships: The Arms Race to Hack Humankind

borjamoya.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 55 posts

Re: Data Dictatorships: The Arms Race to Hack Humankind

#21

Post by excalibur »

borjamoya wrote: post #9
naringas wrote: post #7

> we have the capacities to centralize this data but we also have the technical capacities to descentralize it (federate it?) interestingly enough, it is getting more centralized. Is this due to economic incentives?

Hi, I'm the author of the book. I believe decentralization in theory could work. But our current situation is so chaotic that there's no clear solution. However, the key here is to understand the full picture. In the book I argue that there's a big shift going on--not only an economical shift, but also geopolitical and social. And this is going to be a surprise for a lot of people, but this shift is coming from socia…

> Liberal democracy is going to die. Data is becoming the raw materialization of power, and this is making dictatorships more efficient than ever before.

Why not make the data public? If data is power, you criminalize the hoarding of data, and require it to be shared openly with all. We would still be headed toward a surveillance state, which comes with a high risk of authoritarianism, but at least we would have a shot at keeping it democratic.

Re: Data Dictatorships: The Arms Race to Hack Humankind

#22

Post by donclark »

borjamoya wrote: post #19
afpx wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a summary of your conclusions (for those of us who haven't read it already)? Are we doomed, or is there a bright light?

The problem with summaries and TL;DRs is that they don't allow you to start a conversation. So I can't provide you with a short answer because everybody is going to interpret it with their own filter. That's exactly why I wrote the book. You can't change people with a tweet. Sometimes not even through an article. But that's the magic of books. Is it all gloom and doom? That depends on how we react. But I have the fee…

Actually, I am wondering if its both. Could you create a 'buzz' around your book/topic via a short synopsis/tweet/TLDR/etc. while promoting a larger conversation with a link to that forum/etc.

Re: Data Dictatorships: The Arms Race to Hack Humankind

#23

Post by borjamoya »

excalibur wrote: post #21
borjamoya wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I'm the author of the book. I believe decentralization in theory could work. But our current situation is so chaotic that there's no clear solution. However, the key here is to understand the full picture. In the book I argue that there's a big shift going on--not only an economical shift, but also geopolitical and social. And this is going to be a surprise for a lot of people, but this shift is coming from socia…

> Liberal democracy is going to die. Data is becoming the raw materialization of power, and this is making dictatorships more efficient than ever before. Why not make the data public? If data is power, you criminalize the hoarding of data, and require it to be shared openly with all. We would still be headed toward a surveillance state, which comes with a high risk of authoritarianism, but at least we would have a sh…

The thing is that data by itself is useless. You need the right infrastructure to make it work. Data without context is not information.

But the point here is that there's data that shouldn't be collected in the first place. And that data, especially biometric data, is what allows data autocrats hack human beings. And you don't need a lot of data to hack a human being. Just enough to know someone better than that person knows himself or herself.

Re: Data Dictatorships: The Arms Race to Hack Humankind

#24

Post by borjamoya »

donclark wrote: post #22
borjamoya wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with summaries and TL;DRs is that they don't allow you to start a conversation. So I can't provide you with a short answer because everybody is going to interpret it with their own filter. That's exactly why I wrote the book. You can't change people with a tweet. Sometimes not even through an article. But that's the magic of books. Is it all gloom and doom? That depends on how we react. But I have the fee…

Actually, I am wondering if its both. Could you create a 'buzz' around your book/topic via a short synopsis/tweet/TLDR/etc. while promoting a larger conversation with a link to that forum/etc.

That's up to you to decide.

But I do want to create "buzz" around the conversation. We need it. The book? That's secondary. I don't make any money of out it. That's why I'm giving it away for free.

But again, I can't answer that for you.

Re: Data Dictatorships: The Arms Race to Hack Humankind

#25

Post by bilbo0s »

excalibur wrote: post #21
borjamoya wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I'm the author of the book. I believe decentralization in theory could work. But our current situation is so chaotic that there's no clear solution. However, the key here is to understand the full picture. In the book I argue that there's a big shift going on--not only an economical shift, but also geopolitical and social. And this is going to be a surprise for a lot of people, but this shift is coming from socia…

> Liberal democracy is going to die. Data is becoming the raw materialization of power, and this is making dictatorships more efficient than ever before. Why not make the data public? If data is power, you criminalize the hoarding of data, and require it to be shared openly with all. We would still be headed toward a surveillance state, which comes with a high risk of authoritarianism, but at least we would have a sh…

>at least we would have a shot at keeping it democratic

If by democratic you mean freedom to form outrage mobs then I'd agree, but I don't think that would be a good thing. Having thousands of people in some community screaming for the head of some kid who said something dumb about his school and his dad's rifle on a Call of Duty discord is not going to end well for the kid.

I'm not sure I believe in completely open data because entire populations with access to it are not completely rational.

Re: Data Dictatorships: The Arms Race to Hack Humankind

#26

Post by dangerface »

naringas wrote: post #7

> we have the capacities to centralize this data but we also have the technical capacities to descentralize it (federate it?) interestingly enough, it is getting more centralized. Is this due to economic incentives?

> but we also have the technical capacities to descentralize it

We have the technology but I think it's still very specialist, we need a more generalised framework for the average developer.

> interestingly enough, it is getting more centralized. Is this due to economic incentives?

Decentralised has the ability to scale better and work out cheaper in the long run. However it's current state of being so specialised means the real cost is in hiring people to build and maintain it.

Hopefully as the tools to decentralise become more generalised to the point where every developer can use them properly the initial cost vs long term cost will tilt into decentralised favour.

Re: Data Dictatorships: The Arms Race to Hack Humankind

#27

Post by naringas »

borjamoya wrote: post #23
excalibur wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Liberal democracy is going to die. Data is becoming the raw materialization of power, and this is making dictatorships more efficient than ever before. Why not make the data public? If data is power, you criminalize the hoarding of data, and require it to be shared openly with all. We would still be headed toward a surveillance state, which comes with a high risk of authoritarianism, but at least we would have a sh…

The thing is that data by itself is useless. You need the right infrastructure to make it work. Data without context is not information. But the point here is that there's data that shouldn't be collected in the first place. And that data, especially biometric data, is what allows data autocrats hack human beings. And you don't need a lot of data to hack a human being. Just enough to know someone better than that per…

> But the point here is that there's data that shouldn't be collected in the first place

I just don't think that's feasible. The cat cannot be put back in the box (so to speak).

I think the solution goes more in line with open transparency. Yet individual privacy is really important.

The only way through, I think, is to guarantee individual privacy but enforce institutional transparency.

Re: Data Dictatorships: The Arms Race to Hack Humankind

#28

Post by borjamoya »

naringas wrote: post #27
borjamoya wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is that data by itself is useless. You need the right infrastructure to make it work. Data without context is not information. But the point here is that there's data that shouldn't be collected in the first place. And that data, especially biometric data, is what allows data autocrats hack human beings. And you don't need a lot of data to hack a human being. Just enough to know someone better than that per…

> But the point here is that there's data that shouldn't be collected in the first place I just don't think that's feasible. The cat cannot be put back in the box (so to speak). I think the solution goes more in line with open transparency. Yet individual privacy is really important. The only way through, I think, is to guarantee individual privacy but enforce institutional transparency.

The problem of this way of thinking is that it makes “okay” to collect data that is not necessary for the app in order to work.

It's not feasible because there's a huge economic logic behind that data collection. While the truth is that most services (even innovation) would still work with a few data points.

I mean, Google Maps doesn’t need to collect all the data it collects, but it sells us the benefit with an imminent long-tail of problems.

Re: Data Dictatorships: The Arms Race to Hack Humankind

#29

Post by naringas »

bilbo0s wrote: post #25
excalibur wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Liberal democracy is going to die. Data is becoming the raw materialization of power, and this is making dictatorships more efficient than ever before. Why not make the data public? If data is power, you criminalize the hoarding of data, and require it to be shared openly with all. We would still be headed toward a surveillance state, which comes with a high risk of authoritarianism, but at least we would have a sh…

> at least we would have a shot at keeping it democratic If by democratic you mean freedom to form outrage mobs then I'd agree, but I don't think that would be a good thing. Having thousands of people in some community screaming for the head of some kid who said something dumb about his school and his dad's rifle on a Call of Duty discord is not going to end well for the kid. I'm not sure I believe in completely open…

> I'm not sure I believe in completely open data because entire populations with access to it are not completely rational.

certainly not. but we are at the beginning of a cultural shift in line with the renaissance and the age of enlightnement which vastly changed the cultural mindset quite a bit. before these previous 'cultural revolutions' what people considered rational was different.

Re: Data Dictatorships: The Arms Race to Hack Humankind

#30

Post by vixen99 »

bilbo0s wrote: post #25
excalibur wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Liberal democracy is going to die. Data is becoming the raw materialization of power, and this is making dictatorships more efficient than ever before. Why not make the data public? If data is power, you criminalize the hoarding of data, and require it to be shared openly with all. We would still be headed toward a surveillance state, which comes with a high risk of authoritarianism, but at least we would have a sh…

> at least we would have a shot at keeping it democratic If by democratic you mean freedom to form outrage mobs then I'd agree, but I don't think that would be a good thing. Having thousands of people in some community screaming for the head of some kid who said something dumb about his school and his dad's rifle on a Call of Duty discord is not going to end well for the kid. I'm not sure I believe in completely open…

As against the populations which are completely rational as determined by whom?
Post reply on HN