05-27-2024, 10:24 PM
This post was last modified 05-27-2024, 10:24 PM by VulcanWerks. 
(05-27-2024, 09:20 PM)Maxmars Wrote: Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't feel reducing the human condition to algorithmically-compliant numbers is in keeping with a "normal human" existence. It's like creating a new "master" to serve.
Also, the utility of making a life about a 'score' implies a radical antagonistic reaction to the inevitable reality of individuality and personal sovereignty.
Sure they may be able to point to 'benefits for all' - as long as it is defined by 'someone else' via computer processing. I just don't want to 'serve' a machine... because I'm not one... so while we can never be individually equal... but me and everyone else with my same score are now "interchangeable" within all social score system operations. Somehow I feel that diminishes me.
Maybe I'm wrong... but in the case of algorithmic compliance, I prefer to be ungovernable.
I fully agree with you.
I’m going to assume you’re gainfully employed and self-sufficient. Or, you did that already and are now “out of the game” and living off your toils.
The reduction in human existence comes from the watered down nature of human existence.
If you have a total net worth that is > $1mm USD then you’re in the top 1% of global wealth. Think about that.
There are so many humans who won’t be able to provide utility that you have to create some structure that isn’t monetary-based for the masses.
This thread made me come to that realization. It’s sad. It’s not something I want. But you do need it. And the lines will get drawn around following the rules - which ironically is fully necessitated so the gainfully employed don’t suffer a Marie Antoinette moment, I suspect.
It’s a complicated world.