Walking the Orwellian tightrope

Technology has numerous implications on our culture. I will try to tackle them from a privacy perspective and present some of my various thoughts on the subject. This post will also give some examples of technology already in use today.
Life in the 21st century has just begun, but thus far we can conclude this: We are about to sacrifice essential liberties.

We humans absolutely adore abstractions. Without them life as we know it would be inconceivably complex and just not practical. Take for example the spoiled parasite brat of a college student living at home with his/her parent(s). Food automagically puts itself on the table and clean clothes are in some mysterious way delivered to the room. Not to mention the money. Don't disturb the delicate balance. If it works this way, why even bother to try figuring out the whys and the hows? Fucking brat. Sorry, I let myself get carried away. In your face, people of higher socioeconomic status.
Anyway, we all see things as abstractions and rightfully so. We shouldn't have to care about how a car engine works or how these letters appear on the screen as I type them on the keyboard. It's not putting anyone in danger. The potential danger arises when this type of thinking is carried over to personal and private information in general and surveillance in particular.

Surveillance has a way of working desensitisingly. On a regular stroll around in the city many not-always-so-candid security cameras watch our slightest move. One can not take for granted that this footage is not stored, and since no guarantees about retention can be given, it becomes potentially disturbing.
When people are informed of this privacy intrusion, they have a tendency to view it as a mere bagatelle. They have nothing to hide, they figure. Newsflash, fuckers: this argument is irrelevant to the discussion. If you have nothing to hide, why do you have curtains in your house or lock yourself in the bathroom when nature calls? Why do we even have clothes?
To justify this seemingly outrageous comparison, I have to present some quite convincing arguments, right? I mean, what could possibly justify THAT? Alright, here goes: You have a basic right to be left alone. It's just as simple as that, and I also believe it is one of the basic human rights endorsed by most governments that call their countries free. Privacy in a nutshell.
Without being aware of it, we are leaving digital footsteps that easily can be used (and misused). Take the relatively mature technology of cellular phones, for example. It uses the most ingenious system of triangulation in order to work. It's a fantastic piece of technology. For the service provider to be able to effectively relay a call to you they must know where you are, or at least know your vicinity. Doesn't sound to illogical, does it? If we were all carrying around these long wires connected to the back of our mobile phones, the illusion would disappear.
For practical reasons, the data regarding which grid you are in is stored. How this is done is not always clear to us. It has however been proven that this data has relevancy to justice when it has been subpoenaed out and used in court as evidence. The main concern here is that you have no control whatsoever of to whom this piece of information is available, or through which channels it is divulged.

The Internet was, and was not, created with the integrity of (personal) information in mind, depending on which one of the meanings of the word integrity you use. A special case of the Internet is, what we usually mean by the Internet - the World Wide Web. Plain old web surfing, that is.
Some people might, for purposes beyond our comprehension (there are many of them, like marketing research, (anti)terrorism, just might throw in blackmailing too), want to gain knowledge of which websites we visit or don't visit. Your surf habits are no one's business but your own. Your spouse's on the other hand...

It's a highly personal opinion, but I find the way people divulge personal information on the Internet alarmingly careless. One of the properties of digital information is that it is 'sticky', that is, once on the Internet it is unlikely to ever disappear. Sorry J.P., those nude pictures will keep circulating until doomsday.
Nevertheless, as fate would have it, we will live our lives on the Internet. It's a natural development and nothing can be done to reverse, let alone stall or retard the process. True, some people will continue to live their lives as they always have, but as time goes by it will become increasingly difficult for those of unwilling mind to oppose the menacing technology. They will grow out of touch with the surrounding world.
To cite an idea of how the world will look like in a few years, look at South Korea and its hugely successful Internet communities. We're getting there, and it's going fast.

The collective opinion can be summarised as wanting more surveillance, not less. Don't worry, whether you want it or not, you will get more surveillance. It's safe to say that people hold a lot of erroneous beliefs. One of the most wide-spread ones (apart from religion, which probably will, if God is willing, be addressed in a later post): surveillance does not equals security. Everyone wants to be safe, that's just a natural human thing. It's however ludicrous that the aforementioned outcry has arisen out of a need for protection against a highly vague, faceless (no matter how you put it) enemy, namely terrorism. It's fucking bullshit (that is, by the way, the name of a good entertainment show that has addressed some of these issues). Fearmongering, power hunger and misinformation is the real cause. Be a PATRIOT - just say no. Don't fear the acronyms, because there is more to come.

Like I said, I had been trying to avoid the acronym mush this far, but now it's time to take a spoonful. ALF. Automated Law Enforcement. The idea behind this whole concept (apart from alluding to an 80s sitcom) is to let automated surveillance systems decide and deliver (e.g. fine, electroshock, mark someone for death, etc.) punishments for those disobeying the law. It saves money, it is said. Well, I can't argue against that, but I think that the costs will outweigh the potential benefits.
Systems are in use today to regulate the maximum speed of buses. How does this work? Well, some sort of GPS system is reporting the current speed to a mainframe, that in turn cross-references that with the maximum speed limit of the area. If speed > maximum speed then kill the fuel supply to the engine. But hey! What happens if I'm overtaking someone? Wouldn't that jeopardise the drivers' safety even more than someone driving a couple of miles per hour over the limit? This might very well sound like an appeal to ignorance, but if you have an answer, please enlighten me.
It's also interesting to see the results of the related systems now in use throughout the airports in the U.S.. People are barred from flying just because "the computer says so". It's no use arguing with a computer, they just do as they're told, at least for the time being.
All of this is creepy, to say the least. If I were labeled as a criminal by my own government I'd sure as hell want to know the reason. But you can't, it's a matter of national security that you are kept ignorant. I'm concerned that a massive arbitrary blacklisting of "uncomfortable" individuals will become more common in the future.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes, so (according to) Juvenal. Namedropping aside, this is not an unwarranted question. As long as humans are humans, humans will do human-like things. Like indulging their curiosity. I wouldn't want some Peeping Tom outside my window overlooking the act of physical lovemaking as I acknowledge yet another member of mine and Mr. Reed's immensely huge and rabid female fanbase. It goes without saying that you do things in private for a reason.
The problem of who watches the watchmen will not disappear just like that. I find it unthinkable to submit or give up my privacy to other, ordinary people. On the other hand if, like in one of the possible endings of the game Deus Ex, the world was ruled by a super-AI like Helios, I would gladly submit. Sadly, I don't see that happening in a near future.

Hopefully I'm not sounding too much like a prophet of doom or a conspiracy nut. The people of the future will probably look back and laugh at those who said the end of days was at hand. What really concerns me is that the balance of power will tip over in the direction of government and that this will result in police states where personal privacy is just an empty phrase, that the conversation subject of privacy will result in the same type of laughter that breaks out whenever the Chinese government claims that its citizens are free.
It's a delicate balance act to walk the Orwellian tightrope. New technology has enabled those in power to cling on to it more efficiently. What people need is awareness, to watch out so that we don't prematurely and quietly trade our freedom for meaningless comfort. Orwell wasn't a crank.

Abroad for further studies

The club has processed, debated and granted me a short leave of absence for further studies and material gathering for the treatise on humankind. It lies in the interest of the club for its members to conduct field studies, so it was no surprise that the approval came without too much bureaucratical disputes concerning my funding.

I will be temporarily relocated to a base of operations in northern Germany where I am to supervise a large scale psychological study on human beings under the influence of themselves, alcohol and loud music.
I will pay special attention to things such as group dynamics, identity within the group, nesting and mating habits, the process of leadership and, of course, the pricing of various intoxicants. As a secondary objective, my aspiration is to penetrate, acquire and assimilate the German collective soul. If this will result in me gladly wearing lederhosen¹ and partaking in compulsory singing, then so be it.

See you at the Hurricane.

¹A traditional religious garment used in ancient fertility rites.

State of The Club Address

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Reed, distinguished readers of all nationality, my fellow bloggers:

Since we were first introduced a couple of months back the landscape, in which we work, has undergone a glorious transformation - a blooming of the like few before us have witnessed. What I am talking about is of course is the establishment, and continuing development of this club of ours. During the course of this speech I will present to you the mission and purpose of the club, as well as the three resolute pillars that make up the foundation, on which our club rests.

We can look back at times of accomplishments and see that we have done so much already. But fellows, we have yet more goals to reach. I stand before you now in order to share a vision of those goals - a vision that like candlelight hopes to illuminate any dark and wavering regions of your minds.

According to the theory of cognitive dissonance, we all seek to minimise the difference between our thoughts about the world along with it's state of affairs and the way in which they come to us through perception.
If you are, for example, an ample ufologist, then you tend to seek approval from like-minded individuals and avoid people of conflicting mindset.
Birds of a feather flock together, so to speak.

That's why the formation of the club came so naturally to me and the good Mr. Reed. We share so many a virtues, and perhaps more importantly - vices. That says: we are both living the high life with fast cars and easy women.
Coming from various backgrounds and having different reasons for writing stuff on your Internet we can clearly state this: some forms of diversity is uniting. It is that form of creative harmony we seek to continually distill when writing for this thingy-thingy treatise.
In the treatise I believe to have found a no strings attached expressive outlet and a way to make the public heed the grave issues that so often is found on our club's agenda.

Though the posting has been rather sporadic, quality and satisfaction have always been two common denominators. All was good and fine with this until very recently.
The vultures of senseless criticism have started to besiege our safe nest of enlightenment and brotherly companionship. The situation at hand demands immediate action. I say the time has come to show them what we're made of. When our strength is unified and when we're pulling in the same direction, no force on Earth can hinder us from prevailing.

My dear fellows, this is the reason why I can assure you that the state of the club is strong. For every day that goes by, our combined efforts solidifies this - making it something you can take to the bank. The compoundable nature of our club sees to that this triumphs.

The mission of the club is of a strictly observational and organising nature. It is led forward towards culmination through the ongoing writing of the treatise on humankind. The discourse is by all intents and purposes both the end and the mean. Here we have only our own shoes to fill, and while some may deem it a daunting task, in the back of our heads we know that we are mere observers, and try to act accordingly.
To depict the common, uniting and unique aspects of humankind and civilisation; that has always, and will always be the goal of the club. Examples of topics from the treatise include: the plastic mind and body, the relation between self and others, the pleasures of the flesh, and language and truth.
With such wide an array of subjects, not even the sky is the limit. And to my delight we keep aiming higher and higher, my dear fellows.

Nothing appears out of nothing. Why is it that the need for a club has arisen? Put bluntly, the main purpose of the club is distribution of admiration between members. The first pillar is thus admiration.
Some find it fulfilling to admire themselves. Alas! This has in our culture some mental and social implications, so we are better left to find reverence for ourselves through others. It is not obvious, but this seems to be more rewarding than the alternative.
Others lack both foresight and hindsight. The alternative is selfish indulgence in activities that can only lead a sound person to start questioning one's own sanity. With a select few members the club restricts these portending megalomaniacally scavenging tendencies. Left alone you lack this protective net designed to enforce success. The club works. Hail to the club! (pause for unanimous ovation)

Now, are there any other essential components other than inner admiration operating in the group? I say, apart from admiration: a healthy dose of competition. This competition that is the second pillar first and foremost takes the form of a greater struggle within, a personal jihad of sorts, designed to bring top performance to the writing process.
On a comment to an earlier post I insinuated that one of the distinctive, if not key feature of the club implemented a raising of the verbal and expressive bar. This is the lesser of the struggles. Although the usage of fancy words might lead some to suspect some kind of Sokal hoax, remember that in doing so you tread on dangerous grounds. This has already been treated in the earlier rebuttal of such postmodern death sports.

The third and last pillar is that of ferocity. Eagle-like instincts and a simple understanding of the surrounding world has led us to adopt this doctrine. Our constant questioning of dogma has not yet been able to raize this notion to the ground. It's eat of be eaten, and as long as we are breathing there is no way that we are letting the vultures pick our corpses clean.
Through the ferocity we have attained a stance of disregard or disrespect. You may find it hard to believe that one can care a great deal, and have lots of respect for other peoples' thoughts and opinions, and at the same time not give a fuck about them. That is however what the third pillar is about.

As a representative of the club, I would like for the future to bear as much fruit as the past has done, and perhaps even more since the tree of wisdom continually grows higher and mightier alongside the club. To make this come true we shall continue our struggle, and we shall gladly do so with determination.

We must never forget that we are the vanguard of reason and the hour for our decisive battle is yet to come. So let us not be bothered by the croaking of the critics, but gaze forward at the challenges up ahead. If admiration, competitiveness and ferocity makes the club strong, so will our unwavering determination lead the club into a bright and promising future.

Thank you.

The Fine Art of Conversation

Whenever I and the good Mr. Libel happen to be in the same neighborhood we have Conversations. These talks are engaged after and during a certain intake of alcohol and have properly been named by whatever brewage that was at hand for the occasion, namely: “The Port Wine Conversations”, “The Beer, Peanut and Cheap Cigar Conversations” and “The Carlsberg Conversations”.
While alcohol is by no means a prerequisite for a good, thorough travel between one’s respective worlds of ideas it does add a twist to it.
As the venerable Mr. Libel concluded is his brilliant ”On a model of the inherent flaws of communication and the critical point at which it breaks down”:

“I consider the communication channels that operate between [me and Mr. Reed] to be perhaps the most well-tuned ones.
One might even say that we are somewhat close to understanding one another.”

With that being said I would like to point out the fact that there is satisfaction to be found in overcoming obstacles and conquering new territories. With our communication channels so finely tuned there is simply not much of a challenge to traverse said channels in a clear state of mind.
It is my hope that some wisdom survived these conversations, along with a few brain cells.

With a starting point in “On a model of the inherent flaws of communication and the critical point at which it breaks down” I would like to claim that when the brain is muddled in alcohol the degree of fuzziness in the world of ideas increase while the filter that encompass it is weakened. This filter is a social construct we – sometimes for better, most times for worse – build and maintain in order to coexist with people outside our own personal sphere, i.e. everyone else. It is the masks we wear to get by in situations where it might not be a good idea to fully express one’s opinion with the words that first come to mind. It is always in effect, mostly by unconscious habit, and to lower it requires a great deal of trust for the recipient or an exhibitionistic mindset. Either that or lots and lots of beer.

“Only children and drunks tell the truth” is a proverb that comes to mind. Children are rarely bothered with the consequences of their statements and do not pay much attention to the underlying message they might convey. After thought comes action, not hindered by the cumbersome process of filtering that which may be seen as inappropriate and/or offending. It is a very direct form of communication, by its nature seemingly excluding an ulterior motive, which makes it prone to be mistaken for innocence. This makes clever children even more dangerous¹.

While drinking may reduce your mental capabilities to that of a child it does not bring with it the illusion of innocence. What it does bring, however, is an increased urge for a more direct path towards progression in one’s goals²: “Giev […] now (gods damn it!)” instead of “I would perhaps like […] sometime in the future (if I may)”.
Following this reasoning it is clear that the people who undergo the most dramatic change after drinking are the ones that normally³ suppress their desires in a most unhealthy fashion. Incidentally they seem to be the exact same type of people who fiercely advocate sobriety, abstinence from sexual activities and other things that keep the mind and body “pure”.

There is more to be said on the topic of suppression of desire vis-à-vis mental stress but I will leave that to a possible future post.
For now, let us just conclude that you should nurse your temptations carefully lest you loose them and start thinking that getting a job deciding what's best for others might actually not be such a bad idea.


¹I have no children of my own and have only brushed the surface of their evil, but what I have seen frightens me.

² Since the world of ideas (or mind, if you will) is more distorted than usual and easily distracted in a drunken state the goals may vary from their sober counterparts. For instance, I have yet to meet a person who genuinely thinks it’s a good idea to urinate on an electric fence or to throw up in someone else’s mouth just for fun.

³Assuming that sobriety is the norm, of course.