zaterdag 22 juni 2019
vrijdag 21 juni 2019
zondag 9 juni 2019
dinsdag 4 juni 2019
donderdag 30 mei 2019
zondag 26 mei 2019
vrijdag 24 mei 2019
zondag 19 mei 2019
vrijdag 10 mei 2019
maandag 6 mei 2019
vrijdag 3 mei 2019
vrijdag 26 april 2019
donderdag 25 april 2019
dinsdag 23 april 2019
nationale ecologische arbeiders partij
Onze voorzitter dhr. deRaaf maakte zojuist het partijprogramma bekent:
1. Restitutie van alle niet gedelfde slavenernij inkomsten sinds 1863 want met alleen slavernij was de huidige ecologische ramp nooit gebeurd.
2. Alle nucleaire rectoren moeten van het thoriumtype worden.
3a. Onze levensdrang in de ruimte dient vooral de menselijk beschaving.
3b. Planeet mars word met menselijke bewoning legitiem erkend als een broeder planeet, venus niet. 4. Nieuwerwetse technologieen worden eerst voorgelegd aan de inquisitieraad voor wetenschap om te beoordelen op verborgen nadelen voor de ecologie.
5. Het recht op confiture wordt opgenomen in de grondwet en alle dieren en grondstoffen zijn ook rechtspersonen.
6. Elke omgehakte boom moet worden vervangen door een CO2-O2 wisselaar.
7.Voor het welzijn van de planeet aarde mogen vrouwen op aarde nog maar eenmaal per man vruchtbaar zijn en mogen mannen nog maar een zaadlozing hebben.
De bordeelplicht wordt ingevoerd waarbij iedere volwassen nederlander een maand zijn burgerplicht in een bordeel doen moet want dat is de wil van het volk en er worden sociale krediet punten mee op gebouwt
8. De klimaatcrisis is onafwendbaar en het airconditioning-monsanto-walt disney-olie industrieel complex dient ter verantwoording te worden geroepen.
9. De transitie-economie wordt permanent volgens de wil van het volk.
10. Overleven in de natuur wordt een verplichte les in het onderwijs, surfles op internet vervalt.
11. Terroristische aanslagen staan voortaan onder staatstoezicht.
12. Browser en zoek historie worden staatseigendom.
13. Het mandaat van de partij ligt bij de volksraad die de parlementaire democratie vervangt en hierin hebben alle stamhoofden van de nederlandse stammen hun plaats.
14a. Hat basisinkomen en werk-zorgplicht komt als een plicht bij de werkgevers te liggen.
14b. Bedrijfshierarchie en verantwoordelijkheid komen onder toezicht te staan.
15. Het nieuwe ministerie van entertainment moet de burgers zedelijk en deugdzaam gedrag en principes aanleren, alle andere ministeries vervallen.
16a. Psychiatrische klinieken worden de nieuwe legitieme bestuurlijke centra van de macht.
16b. Gevangenissen worden de nieuwe legitieme centra van wetgevende macht.
16c. Cafe's worden de nieuwe legitieme centra van rechterlijke macht (en cafenamen worden beoordeelt door een staatscommissie).
17a. Verkiezingen worden afgeschaft omdat voortaan je geld je stem is.
17b. Alleen robots krijgen stemrecht waarbij ze alleen op menselijke politici mogen stemmen.
18. Alle soorten reclame in media en reclameburo's worden verboden.
19. Tijdreizen naar jaren die een priemgetal zijn wordt niet meer toegestaan.
1. Restitutie van alle niet gedelfde slavenernij inkomsten sinds 1863 want met alleen slavernij was de huidige ecologische ramp nooit gebeurd.
2. Alle nucleaire rectoren moeten van het thoriumtype worden.
3a. Onze levensdrang in de ruimte dient vooral de menselijk beschaving.
3b. Planeet mars word met menselijke bewoning legitiem erkend als een broeder planeet, venus niet. 4. Nieuwerwetse technologieen worden eerst voorgelegd aan de inquisitieraad voor wetenschap om te beoordelen op verborgen nadelen voor de ecologie.
5. Het recht op confiture wordt opgenomen in de grondwet en alle dieren en grondstoffen zijn ook rechtspersonen.
6. Elke omgehakte boom moet worden vervangen door een CO2-O2 wisselaar.
7.
De bordeelplicht wordt ingevoerd waarbij iedere volwassen nederlander een maand zijn burgerplicht in een bordeel doen moet want dat is de wil van het volk en er worden sociale krediet punten mee op gebouwt
8. De klimaatcrisis is onafwendbaar en het airconditioning-monsanto-walt disney-olie industrieel complex dient ter verantwoording te worden geroepen.
9. De transitie-economie wordt permanent volgens de wil van het volk.
10. Overleven in de natuur wordt een verplichte les in het onderwijs, surfles op internet vervalt.
11. Terroristische aanslagen staan voortaan onder staatstoezicht.
12. Browser en zoek historie worden staatseigendom.
13. Het mandaat van de partij ligt bij de volksraad die de parlementaire democratie vervangt en hierin hebben alle stamhoofden van de nederlandse stammen hun plaats.
14a. Hat basisinkomen en werk-zorgplicht komt als een plicht bij de werkgevers te liggen.
14b. Bedrijfshierarchie en verantwoordelijkheid komen onder toezicht te staan.
15. Het nieuwe ministerie van entertainment moet de burgers zedelijk en deugdzaam gedrag en principes aanleren, alle andere ministeries vervallen.
16a. Psychiatrische klinieken worden de nieuwe legitieme bestuurlijke centra van de macht.
16b. Gevangenissen worden de nieuwe legitieme centra van wetgevende macht.
16c. Cafe's worden de nieuwe legitieme centra van rechterlijke macht (en cafenamen worden beoordeelt door een staatscommissie).
17a. Verkiezingen worden afgeschaft omdat voortaan je geld je stem is.
17b. Alleen robots krijgen stemrecht waarbij ze alleen op menselijke politici mogen stemmen.
18. Alle soorten reclame in media en reclameburo's worden verboden.
19. Tijdreizen naar jaren die een priemgetal zijn wordt niet meer toegestaan.
 |
| Nazi shit flag |
maandag 22 april 2019
Terrasjes weer
Met dit prachtig paasweer zit de hele stad op het terras.
En is er in de meivakantie niemand van school thuis om mee te gaan zwemmen.
Jaren later als je op het terras zit is iedereen thuis dankzij de hete zomerzon en heb je het hele terras voor je alleen tussen ongeveer 18.00 en 19.00.
Nooit zie je de buren waar je uitgaat en je collega's zeggen nooit waar ze uitgaan alleen dat ze zijn uit geweest en allemaal kennen ze de ballentent waar je uitging en zelfs welk bier ze er tappen.
Nog meer jaren later als iedereen met iedereen naar bed is geweest verwijten ze je culturele desinteresse en gebrek aan zelfvertrouwen.
En dus worden je grappen steeds grover en haat iedereen je cynische humor tot je in de situatie belandt dat zelfs je zelfspot ze niet meer tevreden stelt. En je zelfspot bespotten is hun laatste middel om je te verwijderen uit de genenpool terwijl het huwelijk je altijd al tegenstond.
Want had je maar... achter de deur... dan had je nu...gelogen geil...en had je niet...bedrogen afscheid...de bindende kracht van sex onderschat. Terwijl je al 100 jaar dood was beneden je middel uit zelfbehoud en omdat je niet beter wist, en het ging toch om intelligentie en het innerlijk?
En zoals bij elk mooi meisje dat je zag greep je alweer mis omdat ook zij wegliep met een andere casanova die er aan elke vinger al 10 had.
En iedere al dan niet nieuwe kennismaking alleen maar asocialer wordt gedaan dan de eraan voorafgaande want tja... ervaring betekent oud en oud is niet fris.
Thuis gekomen blijken de buren je niet meer te kennen en is de druk om toch te blijven uitgaan de enige hypocriete leugen die de stad nog aan de gang houdt vawege het leuke geroezemoes, terwijl zelfs collega's bij de koffiemachine nergens meer uitgaan of bij de eerste lentezon je plots nooit gekend hebben.
Wat een geil succes hé?
Het enige menselijke contact bestaat nog uit lokettisten en cassieres die binnenkort ook worden vervangen door automaten. En nergens in dit desolate landschap was er een kastelein met een hart op de juiste plek voor monsters.
zondag 21 april 2019
zondag 7 april 2019
maandag 1 april 2019
dinsdag 26 maart 2019
Het Genadeloze Schoonheid
Daar stonk ze dan
Tussen een zomerzucht en avondzon
In de aandacht van een mijnramp
Zwegen haar lippen
Hoe een dominee zonder jurkje
Zieke Groet laten
het bier biljartballen tikte
maar na eenzaamheid
de wacht kustte.
en zijn weten falen liet
En uit verveling
Loog je je bed tegen me aan
In een toon van gevilde wensen
En barbehoeftig raakte
Ze hufterig
mijn pornoloze pik aan.
Tussen een zomerzucht en avondzon
In de aandacht van een mijnramp
Zwegen haar lippen
Hoe een dominee zonder jurkje
Zieke Groet laten
het bier biljartballen tikte
maar na eenzaamheid
de wacht kustte.
en zijn weten falen liet
En uit verveling
Loog je je bed tegen me aan
In een toon van gevilde wensen
En barbehoeftig raakte
Ze hufterig
mijn pornoloze pik aan.
zondag 24 maart 2019
FvD
welke angst bezielde de FVD stemmers? #PS2019 pic.twitter.com/dhSdDC5tPj— ratserel (@ratserel) 24 maart 2019
#FvD gaat uiteindelijk verliezen door de klimaatcrisis omdat er al door bedrijven en overheid honderden zoniet duizend miljarden in zijn geinvesteerd en dat kapitaal moet zich terug verdienen. Ze zullen verliezen door het kapitalisme.— ratserel (@ratserel) 23 maart 2019
Er is om de 10 jaar wel een nieuwe populistische partij in nederland (LPF, PVV en nu FvD) waarop iedereen meent te moeten stemmen.— ratserel (@ratserel) 22 maart 2019
Het enige wat ze hetzelfde hebben is hun fascistische geroeptoeter.
Tot over 10 jaar dan maar weer bij de volgende versplintering.
Volgens #Baudet komt het einde van de superieure westerse beschaving door 'omvolking' en niet door een klimaatcrisis, maar het is wel diezelfde superieure westerse beschaving die de klimaatcrisis veroorzaakt. Zo geweldig is de boreale beschaving als je alle foute kanten ontkent.— ratserel (@ratserel) 23 maart 2019
Het is duidelijk dat #FvD ook de grootste partij wil zijn na de klimaatcrisis.— ratserel (@ratserel) 22 maart 2019
Zodat mensen zich nog ergens omheen kunnen organiseren terwijl de beschaving de zee instroomt. #fallout maar dan met #madmax
Ze vonden een compromis door de immigratie te ontkennen en de klimaatcrisis aan de grens te stoppen?— ratserel (@ratserel) 23 maart 2019
Dat is wat politiek links alleen nog maar kan doen in gesprek met rechts: de immigratie ontkennen
Net zoals zij de klimaatcrisis ontkennen.
zaterdag 16 maart 2019
vrijdag 15 maart 2019
10 Schools of Philosophy that should be better known (in the West) | Julian Baggini | Granta
10 Schools of Philosophy that should be better known (in the West) | Julian Baggini | Granta
1. Mohism
In fifth-century BCE China the philosopher Mozi argued that ‘the business of a benevolent person is to promote what is beneficial to the world and eliminate what is harmful.’ This is remarkably similar to the utilitarian principle formulated by John Stuart Mill in the eighteenth century: ‘Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.’
Mohism is more austere than utilitarianism, in that it considers pleasure too frivolous to count as something which is beneficial to society. Mozi doesn’t even see a point in musical performances, at least not those that ‘divert such vast resources that could be used to produce food and clothing for the people.’ Very similar arguments are heard today by those who object to state subsidies for the arts when health and education services are in such dire need.
Mohism is perhaps most noteworthy for its unequivocal commitment to absolute impartiality. ‘It is those who are partial in their dealings with others who are the real cause of all the great harms in the world,’ said Mozi. ‘Impartiality gives rise to all the great benefits in the world and partiality gives rise to all the great harms in the world.’ And most pithily: ‘Replace partiality with impartiality.’
4. The Kyoto School
The Kyoto School is the name given to a number of philosophers who never formally formed a group but shared a geographical and philosophical proximity to the early-twentieth-century Japanese philosopher Kitarō Nishida. The school engaged with Zen, Shintō and Western philosophies, developing distinctive ideas about the self and society. At the heart their philosophy was nothing, or rather ideas of nothingness (mu) and emptiness (ku) which have been central to East Asian thought before even Nāgārjuna.
To say reality or the self is empty is not to say that it does not exist. It simply means that it lacks a discrete essence, something that makes it what it is independent of what makes other things what they are. This is most evident when it comes to the self. To be an individual is to be in relation to others. There is no self independent of other selves.
Tetsurō Watsuji used one of the Japanese words for a person, ningen, to illustrate this. The word is made up of nin, meaning ‘human’ or ‘person’, and gen, meaning ‘space’ or ‘between’. Ningen are hence both individuals and interdependent, essentially defined by their relations to others. At a time when we are questioning whether individualism has gone too far in the West, such an understanding of the self is especially timely.
7. Modern Russian Philosophy
Russian philosophy has self-consciously stood as a kind of a bridge between Europe and Asia while not belonging to either. It rejects the centrality of the individual, rational mind in Western philosophy as a kind of hubris, arguing it does not have the resources to reach ultimate truth.
The place of rationality in the Cartesian system was taken in Russian philosophy by intuition. Truth is not so much understood as felt. At the same time the place of the individual was taken by the collective. Russia embraced the myth of the obshchina, a peaceful, harmonious peasant community of souls that was wilfully naive so as to avoid the corrupting atheism, competition and individualism that Western rationality had unleashed.
Russian philosophy also seems unconcerned with traditional notions of truth. Even the Russian language helps maintain the elasticity of truth, for which it has two words. Istina is natural truth, the truth of the universe and is immutable. Pravda, in contrast, describes the human world and is a human construction.
A permissive attitude to truth, a rejection of decadent Western values, a sense of national exceptionalism, the unimportance of the individual compared to the collective destiny: the connections between these ideas and the actions of Russian political leaders of all stripes is plain to see.
9. Cārvāka
The cliché of India as an inherently and exclusively spiritual nation is challenged by one of the major dissenting schools of the subcontinent’s philosophy. Cārvāka is rigorously materialistic, rejecting the idea accepted by every other school that the ultimate goal of life is mokṣa, liberation from the cycle of rebirth. It asserts instead that the only purpose of life is pleasure, and that with the death of the body follows the death of the self.
Cārvāka has no time for the testimonies of seers (ṛṣis), claiming that the only valid source of knowledge is sense perception. It not only rejects the claim that the ancient sacred texts, the Vedas, contain revealed truths, it mocked their authors as ‘buffoons, knaves, and demons’.
The fourteenth-century Cārvāka thinker Mādhavācarya articulated a problem that has also been central in Western philosophy. Our knowledge of how the world works requires us to generalise from particular experiences to general rules, such as ‘wherever there is smoke, there is fire’. But we only ever observe particular instances, never general rules so rationally speaking our generalisation in ungrounded, as his very choice of example helps suggest. No one with any knowledge of arguments such as this could dismiss Indian philosophy on the basis that it is not philosophy as we know it.
1. Mohism
In fifth-century BCE China the philosopher Mozi argued that ‘the business of a benevolent person is to promote what is beneficial to the world and eliminate what is harmful.’ This is remarkably similar to the utilitarian principle formulated by John Stuart Mill in the eighteenth century: ‘Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.’
Mohism is more austere than utilitarianism, in that it considers pleasure too frivolous to count as something which is beneficial to society. Mozi doesn’t even see a point in musical performances, at least not those that ‘divert such vast resources that could be used to produce food and clothing for the people.’ Very similar arguments are heard today by those who object to state subsidies for the arts when health and education services are in such dire need.
Mohism is perhaps most noteworthy for its unequivocal commitment to absolute impartiality. ‘It is those who are partial in their dealings with others who are the real cause of all the great harms in the world,’ said Mozi. ‘Impartiality gives rise to all the great benefits in the world and partiality gives rise to all the great harms in the world.’ And most pithily: ‘Replace partiality with impartiality.’
4. The Kyoto School
The Kyoto School is the name given to a number of philosophers who never formally formed a group but shared a geographical and philosophical proximity to the early-twentieth-century Japanese philosopher Kitarō Nishida. The school engaged with Zen, Shintō and Western philosophies, developing distinctive ideas about the self and society. At the heart their philosophy was nothing, or rather ideas of nothingness (mu) and emptiness (ku) which have been central to East Asian thought before even Nāgārjuna.
To say reality or the self is empty is not to say that it does not exist. It simply means that it lacks a discrete essence, something that makes it what it is independent of what makes other things what they are. This is most evident when it comes to the self. To be an individual is to be in relation to others. There is no self independent of other selves.
Tetsurō Watsuji used one of the Japanese words for a person, ningen, to illustrate this. The word is made up of nin, meaning ‘human’ or ‘person’, and gen, meaning ‘space’ or ‘between’. Ningen are hence both individuals and interdependent, essentially defined by their relations to others. At a time when we are questioning whether individualism has gone too far in the West, such an understanding of the self is especially timely.
7. Modern Russian Philosophy
Russian philosophy has self-consciously stood as a kind of a bridge between Europe and Asia while not belonging to either. It rejects the centrality of the individual, rational mind in Western philosophy as a kind of hubris, arguing it does not have the resources to reach ultimate truth.
The place of rationality in the Cartesian system was taken in Russian philosophy by intuition. Truth is not so much understood as felt. At the same time the place of the individual was taken by the collective. Russia embraced the myth of the obshchina, a peaceful, harmonious peasant community of souls that was wilfully naive so as to avoid the corrupting atheism, competition and individualism that Western rationality had unleashed.
Russian philosophy also seems unconcerned with traditional notions of truth. Even the Russian language helps maintain the elasticity of truth, for which it has two words. Istina is natural truth, the truth of the universe and is immutable. Pravda, in contrast, describes the human world and is a human construction.
A permissive attitude to truth, a rejection of decadent Western values, a sense of national exceptionalism, the unimportance of the individual compared to the collective destiny: the connections between these ideas and the actions of Russian political leaders of all stripes is plain to see.
9. Cārvāka
The cliché of India as an inherently and exclusively spiritual nation is challenged by one of the major dissenting schools of the subcontinent’s philosophy. Cārvāka is rigorously materialistic, rejecting the idea accepted by every other school that the ultimate goal of life is mokṣa, liberation from the cycle of rebirth. It asserts instead that the only purpose of life is pleasure, and that with the death of the body follows the death of the self.
Cārvāka has no time for the testimonies of seers (ṛṣis), claiming that the only valid source of knowledge is sense perception. It not only rejects the claim that the ancient sacred texts, the Vedas, contain revealed truths, it mocked their authors as ‘buffoons, knaves, and demons’.
The fourteenth-century Cārvāka thinker Mādhavācarya articulated a problem that has also been central in Western philosophy. Our knowledge of how the world works requires us to generalise from particular experiences to general rules, such as ‘wherever there is smoke, there is fire’. But we only ever observe particular instances, never general rules so rationally speaking our generalisation in ungrounded, as his very choice of example helps suggest. No one with any knowledge of arguments such as this could dismiss Indian philosophy on the basis that it is not philosophy as we know it.
donderdag 14 maart 2019
woensdag 13 maart 2019
maandag 11 maart 2019
zondag 10 maart 2019
zaterdag 9 maart 2019
vrijdag 8 maart 2019
donderdag 7 maart 2019
woensdag 6 maart 2019
maandag 4 maart 2019
zaterdag 2 maart 2019
vrijdag 1 maart 2019
donderdag 28 februari 2019
zondag 24 februari 2019
dinsdag 19 februari 2019
maandag 18 februari 2019
maandag 11 februari 2019
zaterdag 9 februari 2019
vrijdag 8 februari 2019
Why Passivity Breeds Mediocrity and Mental Illness
En zijn er duizenden redenen bedacht waarom je niet en nooit trots zou mogen zijn omdat je het voor hun spannend moet houden en dat blijkbaar beter met zelfhaat.
woensdag 6 februari 2019
zondag 3 februari 2019
zaterdag 2 februari 2019
vrijdag 1 februari 2019
zondag 27 januari 2019
zaterdag 26 januari 2019
vrijdag 25 januari 2019
zondag 20 januari 2019
'The goal is to automate us': welcome to the age of surveillance capitalism | Technology | The Guardian
'The goal is to automate us': welcome to the age of surveillance capitalism | Technology | The Guardian:
The combination of state surveillance and its capitalist counterpart means that digital technology is separating the citizens in all societies into two groups: the watchers (invisible, unknown and unaccountable) and the watched. This has profound consequences for democracy because asymmetry of knowledge translates into asymmetries of power. But whereas most democratic societies have at least some degree of oversight of state surveillance, we currently have almost no regulatory oversight of its privatised counterpart. This is intolerable.
...
Surveillance capitalism was invented around 2001 as the solution to financial emergency in the teeth of the dotcom bust when the fledgling company faced the loss of investor confidence. As investor pressure mounted, Google’s leaders abandoned their declared antipathy toward advertising. Instead they decided to boost ad revenue by using their exclusive access to user data logs (once known as “data exhaust”) in combination with their already substantial analytical capabilities and computational power, to generate predictions of user click-through rates, taken as a signal of an ad’s relevance.
...
The success of these new mechanisms only became visible when Google went public in 2004. That’s when it finally revealed that between 2001 and its 2004 IPO, revenues increased by 3,590%.
...
And it was a Google executive – Sheryl Sandberg – who played the role of Typhoid Mary, bringing surveillance capitalism from Google to Facebook, when she signed on as Mark Zuckerberg’s number two in 2008.
...
Google began by unilaterally declaring that the world wide web was its to take for its search engine.
Surveillance capitalism originated in a second declaration that claimed our private experience for its revenues that flow from telling and selling our fortunes to other businesses. In both cases, it took without asking. Page [Larry, Google co-founder] foresaw that surplus operations would move beyond the online milieu to the real world, where data on human experience would be free for the taking.
...
Once we searched Google, but now Google searches us. Once we thought of digital services as free, but now surveillance capitalists think of us as free.
...
While it is impossible to imagine surveillance capitalism without the digital, it is easy to imagine the digital without surveillance capitalism. The point cannot be emphasised enough: surveillance capitalism is not technology. Digital technologies can take many forms and have many effects, depending upon the social and economic logics that bring them to life. Surveillance capitalism relies on algorithms and sensors, machine intelligence and platforms, but it is not the same as any of those.
...
Surveillance capitalism moves from a focus on individual users to a focus on populations, like cities, and eventually on society as a whole. Think of the capital that can be attracted to futures markets in which population predictions evolve to approximate certainty.
...
It is no longer enough to automate information flows about us; the goal now is to automate us. These processes are meticulously designed to produce ignorance by circumventing individual awareness and thus eliminate any possibility of self-determination. As one data scientist explained to me, “We can engineer the context around a particular behaviour and force change that way… We are learning how to write the music, and then we let the music make them dance.”
...
Finally, surveillance capitalism depends upon undermining individual self-determination, autonomy and decision rights for the sake of an unobstructed flow of behavioural data to feed markets that are about us but not for us.
This antidemocratic and anti-egalitarian juggernaut is best described as a market-driven coup from above: an overthrow of the people concealed as the technological Trojan horse of digital technology. On the strength of its annexation of human experience, this coup achieves exclusive concentrations of knowledge and power that sustain privileged influence over the division of learning in society. It is a form of tyranny that feeds on people but is not of the people. Paradoxically, this coup is celebrated as “personalisation”, although it defiles, ignores, overrides, and displaces everything about you and me that is personal.
...
Despite surveillance capitalism’s domination of the digital milieu and its illegitimate power to take private experience and to shape human behaviour, most people find it difficult to withdraw, and many ponder if it is even possible. This does not mean, however, that we are foolish, lazy, or hapless.
...
The tech leaders desperately want us to believe that technology is the inevitable force here, and their hands are tied. But there is a rich history of digital applications before surveillance capitalism that really were empowering and consistent with democratic values. Technology is the puppet, but surveillance capitalism is the puppet master.
Surveillance capitalism is a human-made phenomenon and it is in the realm of politics that it must be confronted. The resources of our democratic institutions must be mobilised, including our elected officials. GDPR [a recent EU law on data protection and privacy for all individuals within the EU] is a good start, and time will tell if we can build on that sufficiently to help found and enforce a new paradigm of information capitalism. Our societies have tamed the dangerous excesses of raw capitalism before, and we must do it again.
...
We need new paradigms born of a close understanding of surveillance capitalism’s economic imperatives and foundational mechanisms.”
For example, the idea of “data ownership” is often championed as a solution. But what is the point of owning data that should not exist in the first place? All that does is further institutionalise and legitimate data capture. It’s like negotiating how many hours a day a seven-year-old should be allowed to work, rather than contesting the fundamental legitimacy of child labour. Data ownership also fails to reckon with the realities of behavioural surplus. Surveillance capitalists extract predictive value from the exclamation points in your post, not merely the content of what you write, or from how you walk and not merely where you walk. Users might get “ownership” of the data that they give to surveillance capitalists in the first place, but they will not get ownership of the surplus or the predictions gleaned from it – not without new legal concepts built on an understanding of these operations.
...
The combination of state surveillance and its capitalist counterpart means that digital technology is separating the citizens in all societies into two groups: the watchers (invisible, unknown and unaccountable) and the watched. This has profound consequences for democracy because asymmetry of knowledge translates into asymmetries of power. But whereas most democratic societies have at least some degree of oversight of state surveillance, we currently have almost no regulatory oversight of its privatised counterpart. This is intolerable.
...
Surveillance capitalism was invented around 2001 as the solution to financial emergency in the teeth of the dotcom bust when the fledgling company faced the loss of investor confidence. As investor pressure mounted, Google’s leaders abandoned their declared antipathy toward advertising. Instead they decided to boost ad revenue by using their exclusive access to user data logs (once known as “data exhaust”) in combination with their already substantial analytical capabilities and computational power, to generate predictions of user click-through rates, taken as a signal of an ad’s relevance.
...
The success of these new mechanisms only became visible when Google went public in 2004. That’s when it finally revealed that between 2001 and its 2004 IPO, revenues increased by 3,590%.
...
And it was a Google executive – Sheryl Sandberg – who played the role of Typhoid Mary, bringing surveillance capitalism from Google to Facebook, when she signed on as Mark Zuckerberg’s number two in 2008.
...
Google began by unilaterally declaring that the world wide web was its to take for its search engine.
Surveillance capitalism originated in a second declaration that claimed our private experience for its revenues that flow from telling and selling our fortunes to other businesses. In both cases, it took without asking. Page [Larry, Google co-founder] foresaw that surplus operations would move beyond the online milieu to the real world, where data on human experience would be free for the taking.
...
Once we searched Google, but now Google searches us. Once we thought of digital services as free, but now surveillance capitalists think of us as free.
...
While it is impossible to imagine surveillance capitalism without the digital, it is easy to imagine the digital without surveillance capitalism. The point cannot be emphasised enough: surveillance capitalism is not technology. Digital technologies can take many forms and have many effects, depending upon the social and economic logics that bring them to life. Surveillance capitalism relies on algorithms and sensors, machine intelligence and platforms, but it is not the same as any of those.
...
Surveillance capitalism moves from a focus on individual users to a focus on populations, like cities, and eventually on society as a whole. Think of the capital that can be attracted to futures markets in which population predictions evolve to approximate certainty.
...
It is no longer enough to automate information flows about us; the goal now is to automate us. These processes are meticulously designed to produce ignorance by circumventing individual awareness and thus eliminate any possibility of self-determination. As one data scientist explained to me, “We can engineer the context around a particular behaviour and force change that way… We are learning how to write the music, and then we let the music make them dance.”
...
Finally, surveillance capitalism depends upon undermining individual self-determination, autonomy and decision rights for the sake of an unobstructed flow of behavioural data to feed markets that are about us but not for us.
This antidemocratic and anti-egalitarian juggernaut is best described as a market-driven coup from above: an overthrow of the people concealed as the technological Trojan horse of digital technology. On the strength of its annexation of human experience, this coup achieves exclusive concentrations of knowledge and power that sustain privileged influence over the division of learning in society. It is a form of tyranny that feeds on people but is not of the people. Paradoxically, this coup is celebrated as “personalisation”, although it defiles, ignores, overrides, and displaces everything about you and me that is personal.
...
Despite surveillance capitalism’s domination of the digital milieu and its illegitimate power to take private experience and to shape human behaviour, most people find it difficult to withdraw, and many ponder if it is even possible. This does not mean, however, that we are foolish, lazy, or hapless.
...
The tech leaders desperately want us to believe that technology is the inevitable force here, and their hands are tied. But there is a rich history of digital applications before surveillance capitalism that really were empowering and consistent with democratic values. Technology is the puppet, but surveillance capitalism is the puppet master.
Surveillance capitalism is a human-made phenomenon and it is in the realm of politics that it must be confronted. The resources of our democratic institutions must be mobilised, including our elected officials. GDPR [a recent EU law on data protection and privacy for all individuals within the EU] is a good start, and time will tell if we can build on that sufficiently to help found and enforce a new paradigm of information capitalism. Our societies have tamed the dangerous excesses of raw capitalism before, and we must do it again.
...
We need new paradigms born of a close understanding of surveillance capitalism’s economic imperatives and foundational mechanisms.”
For example, the idea of “data ownership” is often championed as a solution. But what is the point of owning data that should not exist in the first place? All that does is further institutionalise and legitimate data capture. It’s like negotiating how many hours a day a seven-year-old should be allowed to work, rather than contesting the fundamental legitimacy of child labour. Data ownership also fails to reckon with the realities of behavioural surplus. Surveillance capitalists extract predictive value from the exclamation points in your post, not merely the content of what you write, or from how you walk and not merely where you walk. Users might get “ownership” of the data that they give to surveillance capitalists in the first place, but they will not get ownership of the surplus or the predictions gleaned from it – not without new legal concepts built on an understanding of these operations.
...
vrijdag 4 januari 2019
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)