Technology starting to scare me?

wexie

Patww79 wrote: »

So what? Like really, I'll tell them all that if they want so I don't care if they know by my buying habits.

Wibbs quoted an article a few pages back, this is a quote from it :

The company had deemed him a risk simply because, as the
letter put it, "[o]ther customers who ha[d] used their card at
establishments where [Kevin] recently shopped have a poor
repayment history with American Express."4 When Kevin
sought an explanation, the company was unwilling to share
any information on which of businesses - many of them major
retailers - contributed to American Exp

So what if suddenly it's not just what you buy, but when you buy it, where you buy it and crucially, the behaviours of other people, not related to you, who happen to buy similar things in similar places?

Would you care then?

Because that is how these algorithms work. If an insurance company can work out from data at their disposal that people who buy a certain brand of biscuit from a certain shop have an increased chance of getting X health problems what do you think they will do to the premiums of those people?

Now these are probably excesses in the US and we're unlikely to see similar issues here (yet) but I think it's in everybody's interest to make sure it stays that way.

OldMrBrennan83

wexie wrote: »

Wibbs quoted an article a few pages back, this is a quote from it :



So what if suddenly it's not just what you buy, but when you buy it, where you buy it and crucially, the behaviours of other people, not related to you, who happen to buy similar things in similar places?

Would you care then?

Because that is how these algorithms work. If an insurance company can work out from data at their disposal that people who buy a certain brand of biscuit from a certain shop have an increased chance of getting X health problems what do you think they will do to the premiums of those people?

Now these are probably excesses in the US and we're unlikely to see similar issues here (yet) but I think it's in everybody's interest to make sure it stays that way.

I still wouldn't care at all. So long as what I've bought is up to scratch and I've paid three correct amount then it's all good.

wexie

Patww79 wrote: »

I still wouldn't care at all. So long as what I've bought is up to scratch and I've paid three correct amount then it's all good.

I guess it's true what they say about ignorance and bliss.

You are truly blessed in your own special way Pat

OldMrBrennan83

wexie wrote: »

I guess it's true what they say about ignorance and bliss.

You are truly blessed in your own special way Pat

You're the one that thinks it's a big issue if a company knows how much you spent and where/when you spent it. I'd save the condescension for yourself really.

wexie

Patww79 wrote: »

You're the one that thinks it's a big issue if a company knows how much you spent and where/when you spent it. I'd save the condescension for yourself really.

That's not quite the issue we're talking about here Pat, and I'd try to explain it to you but I think it would be both unkind of me and a waste of my time.

Feel free to read any of the links already posted in the thread though.

babi-hrse

bluewolf wrote: »

No i'm holding out for replicators

earl grey tea, hot

I'll have some soylent green

OldMrBrennan83

wexie wrote: »

That's not quite the issue we're talking about here Pat, and I'd try to explain it to you but I think it would be both unkind of me and a waste of my time.

Feel free to read any of the links already posted in the thread though.

Unkind of you. Like I said, save the condescension because no matter what you throw up I'm not going to believe anything other than you talking out of your paranoid hole.

wexie

Patww79 wrote: »

Unkind of you. Like I said, save the condescension because no matter what you throw up I'm not going to believe anything other than you talking out of your paranoid hole.

Ah now, there's no need for that Pat, you're usually so classy?!

Gadgetman496

I've concluded from the data collected from this thread that certain individuals get angry when others disagree with them.

OldMrBrennan83

wexie wrote: »

Ah now, there's no need for that Pat, you're usually so classy?!

Consider me reflective in the class stakes. And trust me, you're in no position to be talking class seeing as you're incapable of portraying an ounce of it.

prunudo

kneemos wrote: »

They can deduct all sorts of things from your buying habits.
Number of children,income,likely voting choice,age and probably loads of other crap.

My big fear is when they couple all this info up with the likes of a google car very quickly you can have a situation where your route is out of your control and you could be sent by shops or services that they think you want.

When people become unable to drive themselves anywhere and just imput their destination into a computerised car without the knowledge to question the route then they become a slave to mega business.
Its not hair brained either, just look at the amount of people who imput info in sat navs and have no idea where they're being taken.

Wibbs

Patww79 wrote: »

That said, give me a screen and an internet connection over having to listen to everyone bar about 4-5 people in my life.

I suppose it's handy for the more misanthrope or isolationist among us.

Patww79 wrote: »

The correct one. You lot always play that card and you're always wrong when you do.

You lot eh? Hate to break this news to you, but just because you say it's wrong doesn't mean it is, certainly not when you can't/don't back up your position with anything approaching an argument. I'm alright Jack, seems to be the sum of it.

I fear the attempt will be fruitless, but I like a lost cause, so let's examine this "I've nothing to hide" argument shall we?

Let's ignore privacy entirely and just take the law. No doubt you see yourself as law abiding upstanding member of society? Most of us do. However you have almost certainly broken a multitude of laws and regulations in your lifetime. Like we all have. Do you have a 100% encyclopaedic knowledge of the laws and regulations in Ireland? Of course not. Other than creeping over the speed limit in your car, there are highly likely to be a few laws you broke without even realising it. If you're being surveilled 24/7 you will break some law or other, however trivial and you are far more likely to be charged and convicted for it. Someone once said (and I sadly can't recall who, but they were IIRC someone in some dictatorship's service): Show me a page from the diary of an innocent man and I'll find you enough evidence to have him hanged.

Further on that point: Bad laws. Today being Gay is not a crime. Neither is seeking information or traveling for an abortion(and abortion itself will be reexamined, because of a recent vote). Again imagine you are being monitored 24/7 and you were Gay in 1950's Ireland, or you looked for information or travelled to the UK for an abortion. You would be breaking what we would see as a bad law today. If you were gay it would be almost impossible to have a relationship however brief.

Even two sided discussion of bad laws would be made extremely difficult if your every utterance and movements were being monitored. Democracy depends on as free a dissemination of new ideas and arguments as possible. Living in such a monitored world that notion would have a hard life. We have no bad laws left? Oh you can be sure we do and plenty of them. After all 1950's you would have thought we were mostly set and you would have heard precious few discussions about a different approach, so would keep believing it. Unless you were one of the weaker members of society that the bad laws targeted.

When you say you've nothing to hide, you're effectively saying you don't care about the evolution of laws and rights and how those laws and rights are protected. You're also saying it in a very individualistic manner. I'm alright Jack essentially. Never mind wider society, imagine if one of those 4-5 people in your life did have something to hide from a bad law. What then?

OldMrBrennan83

Wibbs wrote: »

I suppose it's handy for the more misanthrope or isolationist among us.

Essential for blowhard avoidance.

Wibbs wrote: »

You lot eh? Hate to break this news to you, but just because you say it's wrong doesn't mean it is, certainly not when you can't/don't back up your position with anything approaching an argument. I'm alright Jack, seems to be the sum of it.

I fear the attempt will be fruitless, but I like a lost cause, so let's examine this "I've nothing to hide" argument shall we?

Let's ignore privacy entirely and just take the law. No doubt you see yourself as law abiding upstanding member of society? Most of us do. However you have almost certainly broken a multitude of laws and regulations in your lifetime. Like we all have. Do you have a 100% encyclopaedic knowledge of the laws and regulations in Ireland? Of course not. Other than creeping over the speed limit in your car, there are highly likely to be a few laws you broke without even realising it. If you're being surveilled 24/7 you will break some law or other, however trivial and you are far more likely to be charged and convicted for it. Someone once said (and I sadly can't recall who, but they were IIRC someone in some dictatorship's service): Show me a page from the diary of an innocent man and I'll find you enough evidence to have him hanged.

Further on that point: Bad laws. Today being Gay is not a crime. Neither is seeking information or traveling for an abortion(and abortion itself will be reexamined, because of a recent vote). Again imagine you are being monitored 24/7 and you were Gay in 1950's Ireland, or you looked for information or travelled to the UK for an abortion. You would be breaking what we would see as a bad law today. If you were gay it would be almost impossible to have a relationship however brief.

Even two sided discussion of bad laws would be made extremely difficult if your every utterance and movements were being monitored. Democracy depends on as free a dissemination of new ideas and arguments as possible. Living in such a monitored world that notion would have a hard life. We have no bad laws left? Oh you can be sure we do and plenty of them. After all 1950's you would have thought we were mostly set and you would have heard precious few discussions about a different approach, so would keep believing it. Unless you were one of the weaker members of society that the bad laws targeted.

When you say you've nothing to hide, you're effectively saying you don't care about the evolution of laws and rights and how those laws and rights are protected. You're also saying it in a very individualistic manner. I'm alright Jack essentially. Never mind wider society, imagine if one of those 4-5 people in your life did have something to hide from a bad law. What then?

Bold = 100,000,000%

Also, you pointing out that someone isn't automatically right doesn't afford you the same. People believe what they believe and minds won't be changed and to be honest I think most of what you've argued above is tripe but more power to you if you want to live by it.

amacca

wexie wrote: »

That's not quite the issue we're talking about here Pat, and I'd try to explain it to you but I think it would be both unkind of me and a waste of my time.

Feel free to read any of the links already posted in the thread though.

Well said.

Lackey

tritriagain wrote: »

Laughed my arse off at above. So true.work in retail and people paying with cards for very small amounts are a pain. Had one woman recently hand me 3 items while she was on the phone (rude for a start) . She than realised she was paying with her phone. Her head nearly exploded because she couldn't figure out what to do. I hope cash never dies. I would never go anywhere without a bit of cash.

Or when they have loads of stuff and do this weird little shuffle dance reaching towards the items one full hand at a time (doing this several times) trying to figure out how to get the stuff from the basket / trolley onto the desk without having to put anything down.
It's always the coffee that gets placed precariously somewhere...usually ends up being spilled.
Then trying to pick up all the bags, plus bags from other shops, while NEVER EVER putting down the phone.
Hilarious

joe40

I understand the dangers of big data and the way it can be used to influence and manipulate behaviours in large sections of the population.
But haven't population always been fairly malleable and easily influenced. Look how many young men were convinced by extreme nationalism to off to war and be killed in ww1 for example.
This was pure manipulation on behalf off their leaders.

joe40

I understand the dangers of big data and the way it can be used to influence and manipulate behaviours in large sections of the population.
But haven't population always been fairly malleable and easily influenced. Look how many young men were convinced by extreme nationalism to off to war and be killed in ww1 for example.
This was pure manipulation on behalf off their leaders.

amacca

joe40 wrote: »

I understand the dangers of big data and the way it can be used to influence and manipulate behaviours in large sections of the population.
But haven't population always been fairly malleable and easily influenced. Look how many young men were convinced by extreme nationalism to off to war and be killed in ww1 for example.
This was pure manipulation on behalf off their leaders.

Thats one of the potentially scary things about it for me anyway....I don't like being brought along for the ride by a bunch of brainwashed morons who can't or won't think for themselves.

denismc

jimbobaloobob wrote: »

sounds futuristic but then im not one to keep up with technology. Not sure id be comfortable to trust it, especially around Galways rush hours

Sure you would be grand as traffic in Galway never moves!

Capt'n Midnight

dan1895 wrote: »

Can't remember where I read the following but I found the below to be interesting and it applies to all generations.

Any technology that exists when your born is seen as the norm. Lightbulbs, cars, planes, tv's etc.

Any tech invented/developed before you hit your late 20's is seen as groundbreaking, exciting, innovative, cutting edge,must have. Mobile phones, high speed internet, bluetooth, wifi.

Any tech developed after your late 20's is seen as unneccesary, dangerous, going to far, only going to be used for bad. Look at the cynicism surrounding the likes of self drive cars and Alexa.

Obviously doesnt apply to everyone or everything but do find myself questioning new technology and why would anyone bother with it.

FYI

“I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.”

- Douglas Adams.

wexie

Wibbs wrote: »

When you say you've nothing to hide, you're effectively saying you don't care about the evolution of laws and rights and how those laws and rights are protected.

I guess that's really the core of the issue (for me anyways). Technology in and of itself doesn't scare me, not even remotely. Technology is neutral and can be used for good or bad.

It's the way legislation covering the use of technology is forever trying to (unsuccessfully) trying to catch up that scares me. Combined with the moral compass of corporate entities that have little problem with exploiting the shortcomings of the legislation and you've a recipe for many a dystopian thriller.

Michael Crichton wrote a book called Next about a man who's genetic material ends up being owned by a company. Unfortunately the original sample gets lots end they end up chasing him and his family around because they feel they are entitled to more of it as they own the patent.

Completely outrageous scifi material right? Except it's taken till 2013 (and many lawsuits) for the US supreme court to rule that human DNA can't be patented. (I think the Australian supreme court ruled that it can)

When it comes to animal DNA though it's a different picture, 862 different species of marine life are covered by patents, half of which are owned by one company....

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/nearly-half-all-patents-marine-genes-belong-just-one-company-180969325/

So no technology doesn't bother me in the least, it's how we allow this technology to be used and if what we've seen so far is anything to go by then we need there to be massive improvements before things really get very dystopian.

peasant

Wibbs wrote: »

Further on that point: Bad laws.

Never mind bad laws from the past that still linger but are mostly ignored / not enforced...think about bad laws of the future

Imagine a future bad government (think Trump on his third term) having access to mountains of data of anyone and everyone...they could taylor laws to get rid of any potential opposition before it even arises. Society could be oppressed and brought into line at at speed that would make the GeStaPo go green with envy...they only had a few index cards and paper files after all.

Wibbs

Patww79 wrote: »

Essential for blowhard avoidance.

If I think I meet a couple of arseholes every so often, then they could well be arseholes, or having a bad day. If I think that a majority of people I meet are arseholes, then they're not the arsehole.

Bold = 100,000,000%

So you're saying you're a selfish and self sufficient individual eh? Again I hate to break it to you, but you rely on many thousands of people every day to live your self centred life. You're alright Jack, because many people over many centuries have made it possible for you to be.

Also, you pointing out that someone isn't automatically right doesn't afford you the same. People believe what they believe and minds won't be changed and to be honest I think most of what you've argued above is tripe but more power to you if you want to live by it.

The salient difference between our arguments is I went beyond "tripe" as a response. I may be right, I may be wrong, but I at least have demonstrated an understanding of the debate.

amacca wrote: »

Thats one of the potentially scary things about it for me anyway....I don't like being brought along for the ride by a bunch of brainwashed morons who can't or won't think for themselves.

A large chunk of people can't or won't think outside the box. If anything this has become worse as many working people are so busy trying to keep up with a lifestyle, even a basic one, that they simply don't have the time or energy to ask some questions. So they'll naturally swallow the easy answers. That's how dodgy regimes get started and grow.

El_Duderino 09

If you want to be afraid of technology that's fine. Soil yourself to your heart's content. I suppose the next question is to ask what those people with soggy britches actually do differently to the rest of us? The ones on these thread obviously don't avoid the internet. He OP started by telling us about a piece of optional tech they use but absolutely doesn't have to. And another poster told us about how all this tech is forced upon us.

What does a 21st century Luddite do?

Franz Von Peppercorn

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If you want to be afraid of technology that's fine. Soil yourself to your heart's content. I suppose the next question is to ask what those people with soggy britches actually do differently to the rest of us? The ones on these thread obviously don't avoid the internet. He OP started by telling us about a piece of optional tech they use but absolutely doesn't have to. And another poster told us about how all this tech is forced upon us.

What does a 21st century Luddite do?

I’m a technologist. I work in the space. I even work in AI. Doesn’t mean I agree that all technology is good.

Frunchy

The developement of true AI poses an existential threat to humans. This isn't science fiction any more.

paleoperson

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I’m a technologist. I work in the space. I even work in AI. Doesn’t mean I agree that all technology is good.

I really hate the ignorant and clueless people who use words like "luddite" and say something like "why don't you live in mudhuts" to dismiss anti-technology sentiments. Like can they really have that simple-minded a thinking process, it's so much more complicated than that. Technology can be a good or a bad thing depending on the circumstances, humans (and their evolutionary ancestors) survived pretty well for millions of years before modern technology.

FixdePitchmark

The targeted adds are just getting a bit scary

They are using your location
Anything you do

It is freaky and ridiculously invasive.

They GDPR - it is not inconceivable that they will have to protect location at some point legally.

Bubbaclaus

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

The targeted adds are just getting a bit scary

They are using your location
Anything you do

It is freaky and ridiculously invasive.

They GDPR - it is not inconceivable that they will have to protect location at some point legally.

I want my adds to be targeted. Not really interested in tampon ads as a bloke.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

paleoperson wrote: »

I really hate the ignorant and clueless people who use words like "luddite" and say something like "why don't you live in mudhuts" to dismiss anti-technology sentiments. Like can they really have that simple-minded a thinking process, it's so much more complicated than that.

Exactly. I think technological progress is generally good for humankind. That doesn't mean that I agree with letting tech giants and governments track my every move, monitor my heart rate and sleep patterns, know the details of every financial transaction I ever make, and read every document or email or text message I ever write. In fact, there are a number of other technologies (including Tor, PGP, encrypted messaging, etc.) that people can use to preserve their privacy, if they care to do so.