171–180 of 498 posts
Open to abuse & certainly not privacy friendly, but in a hypothetical world where governments can be trusted on that it seems very plausible that it could be a social plus. i.e. You can probably spot trends like person X spends a huge amount of their pay on nappies and babyfood...probably could do with some additional social help. Nordic countries probably come closest to said hypothetical but still seems kinda dicey
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Grocery stores who track me are subject to the pressures of competitive enterprise. The government is not. And that's to say nothing of the fact that, at least in the US, about 50% of the entire population at any given time tend NOT to believe that the government has their best interest in mind
Quoted post unavailable.
I doubt Walmart is a major player in Norway.
The moment I left we were receiving soft real-time Pos log data (anonymized) and we’re building some consumer groceries basket stats.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're already being tracked by the grocery stores, wouldn't it be better to be tracked by someone who at least tries to have your best interests at heart vs. the grocery industry who just wants to sell you more?
> You're already being tracked by the grocery stores With cash and no store "loyalty" app - no. > wouldn't it be better to be tracked by someone who at least tries to have your best interests at heart But this is not the case here.
Several stores track your phone inside the store. Some also use facial recognition.
I haven’t seen any store use automatic license plate readers on customer cars but It wouldn’t surprise me if some do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now you are tracked by both private entities and the state. I don't want to be tracked by anyone, without my explicit consent, which I should be able to withdraw anytime.
But you agreed to be managed by the government right? Remember when they came round and you signed the contract? To pay 40%+ in taxes? For the ability to vote once every 4-5 years for someone to represent you? You don't? Nor me. Governments presume to have authority over everything in their domain. The belief in the false idea of 'government' by the majority is what sustains their power. It is actually immoral and fr…
The comments objecting to this are bizarre. In the predatory capitalist US, the number of private companies- not subject to any real regulation, or supervision, or action on the part of citizens- that have exactly this data and more numbers literally in the thousands. And while a lot of attention is paid to government data collection, it is very hard for various parts of the government in the US to get this informati…
Knowledge is power, and power corrupts, so what you're saying is "I don't mind giving the Norwegian government absolute power, because they aren't absolutely corrupt (yet)".
For example, all health/hospital records of deceased Norwegians are digitalized ten years after death and added to a national register. No way to refuse. In my opinion, that is much more invasive, yet it hasn't been discussed at all by the public
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
> Ah yes, the great "individual freedom" to screw over the many people already affected by climate change. Thanks buddy. So you'd be OK with full-on tyranny? Because there's never going to be a short list of massive problems in the world to deal with. > You're also shifting the discussion from climate change Not shifting anything, I was giving an example of how certain items could be taxed by linking them to current…
Yes, you live on a finite world with a lot of people and many things you choose to do affects other people too. Now, you may choose to stick your fingers in your ears and shout "LALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" and straw-man everything you don't like as "full-on tyranny" if you wish, but that's not how it works and at that point you're no longer really part of any constructive dialogue. There is always a balance, and it's rarely easy.
People seem to suddenly forget that these transactions are already tracked and individually linked to you. Should we allow anyone to collect that data except democratically elected governments? What's the logic behind this?
The idea behind the separation is that the government has the ability to make you do something with the threat of force. Not to say we shouldn't put protections from private corporations in place, but they can't legally imprison you.