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

Computers are an oppressive technology

devever.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 145 posts

Re: Computers are an oppressive technology

#41

Post by liminvorous »

Santosh83 wrote: post #16
matheusmoreira wrote: post #12

This oppressiveness is not inherent to computers, it's inherent to the people and institutions making use of them. The examples in the article say it all: government bureaucracies, beverage dispensers. They own the computers and impose their own rules on us, rules like deadlines and brand checking. We don't want these rules but they impose it on us all the same. Computers are neutral technology. It's just that we are…

Computers are fine but total computerisation of human society may not be so. That's actually what the article should have explored in my opinion. Computers are neither ruthless nor kind, its controllers, humans, are. So the question then becomes, who controls them and how sophisticated they (the computers) become, and how much they infiltrate our world. A simple thought... should everything that can theoretically be…

Whether computers count as ruthless depends on fine details of your definition of ruthless.

If you mean the mental/emotional state necessary for a human to act without regard for consequences of their actions to other people, then computers are not ruthless.

If you just mean acting without consideration of how their their actions will affect people then computers fit this definition of ruthless perfectly by virtue of not being able to consider the consequences of their actions on other people, because we don’t know how to program them to consider how their actions will affect other people.

Re: Computers are an oppressive technology

#42

Post by vouwfietsman »

MrJohz wrote: post #32

I really like the article (less so the title), but it reads like the "For" side of a two-sided debate - a myopic (albeit valid) criticism of the worst aspects of computer cruelty. But I think this is one of those areas where there is another side to the discussion, and the truth probably lies somewhere between (or perhaps better said: it lies in both sides simultaneously, and we as a society, and especially as techno…

Indeed it lies in both sides simultaneously, as all your examples have a free and oppressive side to them as well. It seems the freedom lies with the individual and his control over his own computer, and the oppression lies with larger platforms that enforce rules on the individual outside his control.

Computers have democratized art and opinion, but the distribution of that art and opinion is done through centralized platforms, which are curated/censored using automated programs ("the algorithm").

I think computers are neither inherently oppressive or freeing, and I think that is also the point of the article. Computers are -exactly- what we make them do, and the word -exactly- is what is explored, and judged, as easily leading to oppression if given power over the inidividual.

Power over the individual sounds ominous, but what I basically mean is that a computer decides over you, instead of for you. For example: youtube decides if your video is monetized, some AI decides if you get a loan, or get into a country, or get random checks at the airport, or what you see on youtube, etc etc.

Re: Computers are an oppressive technology

#43

Post by jazzyjackson »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #12

This oppressiveness is not inherent to computers, it's inherent to the people and institutions making use of them. The examples in the article say it all: government bureaucracies, beverage dispensers. They own the computers and impose their own rules on us, rules like deadlines and brand checking. We don't want these rules but they impose it on us all the same. Computers are neutral technology. It's just that we are…

tools are not neutral: they favor that which they make easier

Re: Computers are an oppressive technology

#44

Post by fsflover »

verisimi wrote: post #17
matheusmoreira wrote: post #12

This oppressiveness is not inherent to computers, it's inherent to the people and institutions making use of them. The examples in the article say it all: government bureaucracies, beverage dispensers. They own the computers and impose their own rules on us, rules like deadlines and brand checking. We don't want these rules but they impose it on us all the same. Computers are neutral technology. It's just that we are…

I agree. I think the oppressiveness will come from software. Who writes it, and what values does the software reflect? Does it reflect yours? The governance structure wants to code their rules into a machine that will execute those rules without being able to apply human discernment. Humans are meant to be out of the loop - their rules and diktats are meant to be all we need. Ai + robotics has brought this possibilit…

This is exactly why free software was invented, which respects its users: https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/why-free-software-is-more-impo....

Re: Computers are an oppressive technology

#45

Post by gtsop »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #12

This oppressiveness is not inherent to computers, it's inherent to the people and institutions making use of them. The examples in the article say it all: government bureaucracies, beverage dispensers. They own the computers and impose their own rules on us, rules like deadlines and brand checking. We don't want these rules but they impose it on us all the same. Computers are neutral technology. It's just that we are…

Spot on! The matter at hand here isn't "human vs machine" but "human vs machine vs human", meaning the oppression of human by human via the machine

Re: Computers are an oppressive technology

#46

Post by kijin »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #43
matheusmoreira wrote: post #12

This oppressiveness is not inherent to computers, it's inherent to the people and institutions making use of them. The examples in the article say it all: government bureaucracies, beverage dispensers. They own the computers and impose their own rules on us, rules like deadlines and brand checking. We don't want these rules but they impose it on us all the same. Computers are neutral technology. It's just that we are…

tools are not neutral: they favor that which they make easier

Computers make a lot of things easier, both oppressive and subversive, just like any other highly versatile tool: hammers, screwdrivers, knives, syringes, duct tape and WD-40.

Re: Computers are an oppressive technology

#47

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #43
matheusmoreira wrote: post #12

This oppressiveness is not inherent to computers, it's inherent to the people and institutions making use of them. The examples in the article say it all: government bureaucracies, beverage dispensers. They own the computers and impose their own rules on us, rules like deadlines and brand checking. We don't want these rules but they impose it on us all the same. Computers are neutral technology. It's just that we are…

tools are not neutral: they favor that which they make easier

Tools define a relationship with the entity being tooled, so you can learn a lot about the goals and values of the transactions by looking at the kinds of relationships that are/aren't implied.

You can't feed people with an AR-15.

The metaphors that define computing are all about abstraction, automation without human input, predictability, and control.

Abstraction tends to lossy and context-insensitive, which is why an algorithm will say "no" to a loan request based on a credit score that ignores personal context, where a human loan manager who knows the people involved might say yes - for good and valid reasons.

Computing seems to be one of the most successful products of modernism, which values speedy predictable repetition, lack of decoration, and anonymised mechanisation.

It's possible to imagine computing in other value systems. But it's revealingly hard to do without losing the essence.

All of which is a complicated way of agreeing - computing is not neutral, and very probably can't be.

It's the first automated value evangelising system in history. And that's not a comfortable thought.

Re: Computers are an oppressive technology

#49

Post by Smaug123 »

syzygyhack wrote: post #39

Various appeals to emotion and analogies that ultimately provide little to nothing of value. Maybe it is a good article about why we build human-operated escape hatches and failsafes in software and hardware. When was the last time you saw train doors ruthlessly separate children from their parents ? Have you seen anyone lose a limb to that ruthless guillotine? No. Machines do what they are programmed or built to do.…

I certainly have seen with my own eyes a train door "ruthlessly separate a child from his parent". I don't think I've ever seen an adult so distraught. I have also seen with my own eyes a lift door close on the head of an extremely elderly man. These things do happen.

Re: Computers are an oppressive technology

#50

Post by gtsop »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #34

We could use mobile phones to have an instant voting system where everybody approves the government's decisions. Computers don't have to be oppressive, we just have decided to use them in a particular way.

Although I am against e-voting for privacy and security reasons, this is a perfectly valid point of view completely under-represented in the mainstream dialogue. It seems that the powers-to-be only vouch for e-voting where they feel confident the status quo is guaranteed and they sell it as "democratization". How about casting an e-vote, or even less, a like-dislike on a bill?

Again, in concept it sounds like a good idea, but I can already imagine the privacy/security implications of such an action be grave, let alone the law like-farms that would surface.

Post reply on HN