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

We already live in social credit, we just don't call it that

thenexus.media

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 727 posts

Re: We already live in social credit, we just don't call it that

#71

Post by chuckadams »

wvenable wrote: post #33
gruez wrote: post #29

There was a comment that appeared for a few minutes before getting deleted, that vaguely lined up with what I wanted to say. It didn't reappear, so I'll just repost it: >real life also has social credit. were you an asshole to the bartender last week? that goes to your reputation at that bar. did you volunteer with a local non-profit? that goes to your reputation with that organization. even without an algorithm, peo…

You can always move to new town and start again. The problem with all these social credit systems is that they're designed to follow you wherever you go forever. There is also zero recourse if a mistake was made; at least you can try and smooth things over with a bartender.

The bartender also doesn't sell your behavioral profile to every other bar in town. I mean, unless you're a total asshole and it's a small town, but then they tend to volunteer it.

Re: We already live in social credit, we just don't call it that

#72

Post by gruez »

themafia wrote: post #56
gruez wrote: post #29

There was a comment that appeared for a few minutes before getting deleted, that vaguely lined up with what I wanted to say. It didn't reappear, so I'll just repost it: >real life also has social credit. were you an asshole to the bartender last week? that goes to your reputation at that bar. did you volunteer with a local non-profit? that goes to your reputation with that organization. even without an algorithm, peo…

The difference is the relationship between the bartender, the non-profit or the barista all revolve around physical locations where cash transactions or real work occur. There's actual direct value to be measured in the interaction. Further my interactions with the bartender aren't likely to be measured or even known about by the non-profit and vice versa. To the extent my "credit" is a factor it doesn't travel with…

>the non-profit or the barista all revolve around physical locations where cash transactions or real work occur. There's actual direct value to be measured in the interaction.

I don't see how this is a relevant factor. If you're a karen at a restaurant who constantly sends your food back for the tiniest of issues, how is that any different than if the interaction happened online, such as if amazon gave you a bad customer credit score for your excessive returns?

>Further my interactions with the bartender aren't likely to be measured or even known about by the non-profit and vice versa. To the extent my "credit" is a factor it doesn't travel with me from location to location.

Word travels around, does it not? Moreover why is it relevant whether it's a number sitting on a database somewhere, compared to some vibes sitting in some guy's head?

Re: We already live in social credit, we just don't call it that

#73

Post by janalsncm »

> Citizens are tracked for every jaywalking incident, points are deducted for buying too much alcohol

The first time I visited China I was under 21 but I had heard the drinking age was 18 so I went to a convenience store to buy a beer. Person running the till was probably 12 and didn’t say a word or ask for ID. Unbelievably lax compared to the US sometimes.

I generally think it’s easier and more effective to track the outputs rather than the inputs: you don’t need to track how many beers they buy, just outlaw public intoxication. And enforce that law.

Re: We already live in social credit, we just don't call it that

#74

Post by otterley »

Majestic121 wrote: post #68
otterley wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

They are surely not the only one to have make mistakes in their life. It's literally a lesson from the Bible: "Let him who is without sin among you, cast the first stone at her." I'm telling on myself too, yeah.

Of course people should learn from their mistakes and constantly improve.

But if you respond like an asshole to a comment, it means you haven't learned the lessons you should have. IOW, the commenter is proving my point.

Re: We already live in social credit, we just don't call it that

#75

Post by tecleandor »

YcYc10 wrote: post #44

Amazon? Who cares. Air BnB? Not really an issue unless you trash a place. Same with Uber. Instagram? Please.

You don't care until the corporation is big enough or starts crossing information with enough companies. Amazon already owns healthcare companies. Facebook has shared more information than we can think about with all sort of parties.

One day you'll be denied care or your insurance premiums will quadruple because you buy too much sweets in Amazon, or because you once said you fell off a chair while drunk in a party in Instagram. Then you'll care.

Re: We already live in social credit, we just don't call it that

#76

Post by justinrubek »

nemomarx wrote: post #19
socalgal2 wrote: post #5

Great article and good point. I never articulated this as good as the article but, I've always assumed that when I use Uber/Lyft and rate a driver, if I give too many drivers a low rating I'll be banned from the app. I'm not saying I will actually be banned, I have no idea. Rather, I'm saying I fear I will be banned. I mean why not? Any customer that effectively makes the company look bad can be banned by the company…

All of this sounds like normal driving behavior to me? I see it every time I commute to work. I think if you want a driver who doesn't do this you'd need a real commercially registered driver with specific training.

It is, but it shouldn't be. We don't pay all of the other drivers on the road, but we do pay for the uber we're in. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect someone performing a commercial driving act to need to do so safely and correctly.

Re: We already live in social credit, we just don't call it that

#77

Post by etrautmann »

card_zero wrote: post #65
wvenable wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can always move to new town and start again. The problem with all these social credit systems is that they're designed to follow you wherever you go forever. There is also zero recourse if a mistake was made; at least you can try and smooth things over with a bartender.

Yeah, automation and information sharing prevents people slipping through the cracks, and that also prevents leniency, diversity, and reason. I was musing over something, though. We have creeping Orwellian things like face recognition and the policing of chat histories. But some of this is private, as in, not done by the state. Even when done by the state, it isn't in most places to prop up the regime and prevent dis…

It also ignores context or interpretation, and forces one perspective on incentives that doesn't necessarily reflect reality.

Re: We already live in social credit, we just don't call it that

#78

Post by ok123456 »

"Social Credit" doesn't exist in China the way it's portrayed in Western media. It's really just a way of enforcing civil judgments, so you aren't living high on the hog after telling your creditors that you're broke.

Depending on the type of bankruptcy declared, debtor exams happen here.

Re: We already live in social credit, we just don't call it that

#79

Post by idle_zealot »

shadowgovt wrote: post #27
NitpickLawyer wrote: post #2

Interesting article. On the one hand, it provides insides into how the project actually worked in china, which I didn't know. That's interesting. But it misses a huge nuance on the whole "dystopian" thing. The main thing about "social score bad" takes is that the government will use that scoring. It's not private private. Everything the author mentions about the various scoring in the US (and EU for that matter, alth…

The relevant freedom is the freedom to opt-out. It's much harder to opt-out of a government than a privately-crafted social scoring system. But some become so large that you can't de-facto opt-out, not without significant consequences to your quality of life... And that becomes a problem.

As an exercise, can you construct a version of private social credit that supports opt-out and isn't dystopian? I posit that any such system would interpret and opt-out as an effective negative score, heavily disincentivizing that option, and making it de-facto mandatory.

Re: We already live in social credit, we just don't call it that

#80

Post by treve »

exabrial wrote: post #9

Why do you think sms "2fa" is suddenly so popular with banks and other fintechs, despite things like passkeys and u2f, you know things that _actually_ prevent people from breaking into accounts, have existed forever?

SMS 2FA stops enough would-be criminals and checks the compliance box. They don't lose enough money to sophisticated thefts to do something better.
Post reply on HN