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

Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 181 posts

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#151

Post by oconnore »

legohead wrote: post #140
sp4ke wrote: post #78

I have always been fascinated by computers and passionate about programming. I never taught I would ever feel ashamed of my passion ... that maybe I have been part of the decline of freedom and privacy, the same things I've always believed in and fought for . I've finished reading again 1984 a short time ago, and I felt sick reading this article and realizing we're making a monster. I stopped using Facebook a few mon…

We just don't have all the answers yet. We are at a strange era in human history. We have had privacy for eons, and now we may not. We can't even answer the question "do we need privacy?" If you were raised with no privacy, you wouldn't know the difference. Imagine living your whole life with cameras on you. You know if something bad happens, you have video evidence. Now imagine all those cameras are taken away. You…

If you were raised with no privacy, you may not be aware that it could get better, but you would still suffer from the power dynamic that the total lack of privacy creates. Information is power, and even if that power is distributed evenly (which it isn't now, and likely will never be), it changes things.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#152

Post by gurkendoktor »

zzalpha wrote: post #27
jeffhiggins wrote: post #16

The uncomfortable truth is that many HN readers are the ones gleefully building these tools.

Do you really think said hackers are "gleefully building these tools" specifically in order to enable a surveillance state? Of course not. It's been said a million times before: every technology can be used for good or for ill. After all, the technology that enables you to drink the water coming out of your tap, one of the most important developments in the history of mankind, is the very same technology that makes m…

> It's been said a million times before: every technology can be used for good or for ill

But what is the "good" about what we're building? The most cringe-worthy justification I have ever read for giving up privacy was this post by an Ex-Googler[1]:

> Digital identity unlocks universal personalization (i.e. better ads), payments and commerce (i.e. Snapcash), environmental adaptation (i.e. an Uber that plays your Spotify music), communications (i.e. Path Talk), and access (i.e. Sosh Concierge). Today’s most exciting apps are barely scratching the surface of what will be possible when there are years of preferences data stored up on each of us, that we can leverage at a moments notice, in any context.

An Uber that plays your Spotify music and better ads! This is the "good" we are chasing. I have never felt more ashamed to sit in front of a computer.

[1] https://medium.com/@chrismessina/thoughts-on-google-8883844a...

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#153

Post by driverdan »

hansdezwart wrote: post #98

For me as the author of the piece, it is wonderful to find an informed and critical discussion of the themes that I tried to discuss here in the comments. I will likely try and answer some of them here in the next couple of hours and am happy to answer any questions.

Please link to your sources. You reference most of your material from other places but don't link to anything.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#154

Post by blacksmith_tb »

desdiv wrote: post #26
charleslmunger wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What technology is google producing for the military?

Boston Dynamics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Google, produced the WildCat robot for DARPA's Maximum Mobility and Manipulation (M3) program[0]. [0] http://www.darpa.mil/our_work/dso/programs/maximum_mobility_...

I would guess that many HN readers tripped over the Boston Dynamics example because it doesn't seem to fit with this talk's overall theme of surveillance. Of course we all recognize Google is doing a tremendous amount of mining and predicting, but they aren't sending out cat-bots to collect the data, which makes it a bit of a non-sequitur.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#155

Post by pyre »

ameasure wrote: post #146
legohead wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We just don't have all the answers yet. We are at a strange era in human history. We have had privacy for eons, and now we may not. We can't even answer the question "do we need privacy?" If you were raised with no privacy, you wouldn't know the difference. Imagine living your whole life with cameras on you. You know if something bad happens, you have video evidence. Now imagine all those cameras are taken away. You…

Privacy, as it exists today, is entirely a modern invention. For most of human history people lived in small groups where everyone knew everyone else very well. It was not until industrialisation that we had mega cities where no one knows anyone.

> For most of human history people lived in small groups where everyone knew everyone else very well.

Someone already mentioned issues with your statement, but I will add on another issue. Even when living in small, tight-knit communities, if you screwed up your social standing (for whatever reason), you had the option to leave the group, possibly to another group, without your entire life-history following you.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#156

Post by tomaskafka »

ameasure wrote: post #146
legohead wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We just don't have all the answers yet. We are at a strange era in human history. We have had privacy for eons, and now we may not. We can't even answer the question "do we need privacy?" If you were raised with no privacy, you wouldn't know the difference. Imagine living your whole life with cameras on you. You know if something bad happens, you have video evidence. Now imagine all those cameras are taken away. You…

Privacy, as it exists today, is entirely a modern invention. For most of human history people lived in small groups where everyone knew everyone else very well. It was not until industrialisation that we had mega cities where no one knows anyone.

But this 'surveillance' was: 1) voluntary 2) symmetrical 3) done by humans with understanding and compassion

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#157

Post by tomaskafka »

"Hannah Arendt’s understanding of the political domain of the classic city would agree with the equation of walls with law and order. According to Arendt, the political realm is guaranteed by two kinds of walls (or wall like laws): the wall surrounding the city, which defined the zone of the political; and the walls separating private space from the public domain, ensuring the autonomy of the domestic realm.

The almost palindromic linguistic structure of law/wall helps to further bind these two structures in an interdependency that equates built and legal fabric. The unwalling of the wall invariably becomes the undoing of the law."

"The breaching of the physical, visual and conceptual border/wall exposes new domains to political power, and thus draws the clearest physical diagram to the concept of the ‘state of exception’."

"Future military operations in urban terrain will increasingly be dedicated to the use of technologies developed for the purpose of the ‘unwalling of the wall’.

This is the architect’s response to the logic of ‘smart weapons’. The latter have paradoxically resulted in higher numbers of civilian casualties simply because the illusion of precision gives the military political complex the necessary justification to use explosives in civilian environments where they cannot be used without endangering, injuring or killing civilians.

The imagined benefits of ‘smart destruction’ and attempts to perform ‘sophisticated’ swarming thus bring more destruction over the long term than ‘traditional’ strategies ever did, because these ever more deadly methods combined with the highly manipulative and euphoric theoretical rhetoric used to promulgate them have induced decision makers to authorize their frequent use. Here another use of ‘theory’ as the ultimate ‘smart weapon’ becomes apparent. The military’s seductive use of theoretical and technological discourse seeks to portray war as remote, sterile, easy, quick, intellectual, exciting and even economic (from their own point of view). Violence can thus be projected as tolerable, and the public encouraged to support it."

Eyal Weizman

Lethal Theory

http://www.skor.nl/_files/Files/OPEN18_P80-99%281%29.pdf

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#158

Post by jjcc »

LiweiZ wrote: post #24
rdtsc wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point. The government in the propaganda domain at least is bound by high ideals and promises -- "We are for freedom. We represent the people. We don't stiffle expression. (Unlike those other countries out there...)". So doing anything too harsh to a public figure, known internationally, is going to create a big hassle. At another level you can argue that he is also a token, and thus implicitly somehow part of th…

Based on my observation of those iconic people in China, I have to say that a sad truth is nearly 100% are performers in media. It took me a long time to accept this. I was looking for some really contemporary thinkers in my nation but failed. Instead, I found a "career path" for some iconic guys. I know it sounds unbelievable, given the context of life in US.

Exactly.Almost all of those figures have serious integrity problem. But there's one exception, only one: http://www.weibo.com/u/1971861621?topnav=1&wvr=5&topsug=1

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#159

Post by xenophonf »

ewzimm wrote: post #120
sp4ke wrote: post #78

I have always been fascinated by computers and passionate about programming. I never taught I would ever feel ashamed of my passion ... that maybe I have been part of the decline of freedom and privacy, the same things I've always believed in and fought for . I've finished reading again 1984 a short time ago, and I felt sick reading this article and realizing we're making a monster. I stopped using Facebook a few mon…

I agree that privacy is important, but whenever I hear people talk about how hard it is to abandon Facebook or similar services, it seems to me that there's a missing middle ground. Posting to Facebook, even messaging, is publishing. People just need to remember that. There's nothing wrong with publishing. It's something that people used to work hard to achieve and only a few could afford. Now anyone can publish. Thi…

There's a distinct (I'd say moral or intentional) difference between publishing/performing in public and sharing with friends/family. Even Friendster or Diaspora* conflate the two. What I would like to see is the P2P equivalent of something like Snapchat, completely decentralized and fully under control of the person sharing a datum (text, picture, video, like, etc.) Unfortunately, that's not something easily engineered (likely impossible given our experience with software-only DRM systems), let alone sold or monetized.

Re: Ai Weiwei Is Living in Our Future

#160

Post by jessaustin »

kordless wrote: post #133
ZenoArrow wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You feel awful now, but what you've written is very encouraging. You're doing the right thing. Coding can be put to good use too. Perhaps there's an open-source project you can contribute to that has a positive benefit to offer society? What social injustices are you most passionate about? I also intend to leave Facebook (again) very soon. The only reason I haven't in the past is that I didn't want to lose contact wi…

I famously left Facebook over 4 years ago. Yes, a bunch of friends from high school thought I 'unfriended' them, but they all eventually figured it out. I got involved with Digital Detox and try to unplug regularly. Like meditation, almost.

Hehehe, I eventually heard through the grapevine that it had been "impossible" to invite me to a high school reunion, because I wasn't on FB.
Post reply on HN