Is Silicon Valley Building a Chinese-Style Social Credit System? (fastcompany.com) 136
schwit1 shared this thought-provoking article from Fast Company:
Many Westerners are disturbed by what they read about China's social credit system. But such systems, it turns out, are not unique to China. A parallel system is developing in the United States, in part as the result of Silicon Valley and technology-industry user policies, and in part by surveillance of social media activity by private companies. Here are some of the elements of America's growing social credit system.
- The New York State Department of Financial Services announced earlier this year that life insurance companies can base premiums on what they find in your social media posts...
- Airbnb can disable your account for life for any reason it chooses, and it reserves the right to not tell you the reason...
- You can be banned from communications apps, too. For example, you can be banned on WhatsApp if too many other users block you. You can also get banned for sending spam, threatening messages, trying to hack or reverse-engineer the WhatsApp app, or using the service with an unauthorized app...
The most disturbing attribute of a social credit system is not that it's invasive, but that it's extralegal. Crimes are punished outside the legal system, which means no presumption of innocence, no legal representation, no judge, no jury, and often no appeal. In other words, it's an alternative legal system where the accused have fewer rights. Social credit systems are an end-run around the pesky complications of the legal system. Unlike China's government policy, the social credit system emerging in the U.S. is enforced by private companies. If the public objects to how these laws are enforced, it can't elect new rule-makers...
If current trends hold, it's possible that in the future a majority of misdemeanors and even some felonies will be punished not by Washington, D.C., but by Silicon Valley. It's a slippery slope away from democracy and toward corporatocracy. In other words, in the future, law enforcement may be determined less by the Constitution and legal code, and more by end-user license agreements.
- The New York State Department of Financial Services announced earlier this year that life insurance companies can base premiums on what they find in your social media posts...
- Airbnb can disable your account for life for any reason it chooses, and it reserves the right to not tell you the reason...
- You can be banned from communications apps, too. For example, you can be banned on WhatsApp if too many other users block you. You can also get banned for sending spam, threatening messages, trying to hack or reverse-engineer the WhatsApp app, or using the service with an unauthorized app...
The most disturbing attribute of a social credit system is not that it's invasive, but that it's extralegal. Crimes are punished outside the legal system, which means no presumption of innocence, no legal representation, no judge, no jury, and often no appeal. In other words, it's an alternative legal system where the accused have fewer rights. Social credit systems are an end-run around the pesky complications of the legal system. Unlike China's government policy, the social credit system emerging in the U.S. is enforced by private companies. If the public objects to how these laws are enforced, it can't elect new rule-makers...
If current trends hold, it's possible that in the future a majority of misdemeanors and even some felonies will be punished not by Washington, D.C., but by Silicon Valley. It's a slippery slope away from democracy and toward corporatocracy. In other words, in the future, law enforcement may be determined less by the Constitution and legal code, and more by end-user license agreements.
And it's an opt-in extralegal system (Score:2)
You had a choice to join it or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. It's hard to avoid having a SSN, and Big Credit insists that it's a 'secret number' that can be used to apply for and receive credit right at the checkstand of stores by simply filling in that secret number.
The SSN should certainly be used as an index, but it should be a published index. Nobody's SSN should be a secret to unlock access to money.
Re:And it's an opt-in extralegal system (Score:5, Insightful)
Better analogies: feudalism, the midevil guild system, robber barons, regular barons, the mafia, and such. Those things just aren't trendy right now.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
it's doing this by making a analogy to China's social credit system
No, there is no comparison.
Tech companies have a right to refuse to do business with anyone for any legal reason. They are private businesses. You have no "right" to be an Airbnb customer. None of their services are essential. There are alternatives to Airbnb for online booking, and you can always contact a hotel directly. I have heard rumors that some people are even able to live without using Facebook, so it is possible.
China's system is different. First, it is run by the government. You can't opt
Re: (Score:3)
I have heard rumors that some people are even able to live without using Facebook, so it is possible.
"Rumors of me living without Facebook have been greatly exaggerated." -- Mark Twain
Re:And it's an opt-in extralegal system (Score:4, Insightful)
> Tech companies have a right to refuse to do business with anyone for any legal reason
What reasons are "legal"? Is it legal to discriminate on the bases of race? Gender? Age? Medical conditions? Skill? Cost? Many "extralegal" systems, like the "old boy networks" or interlocking directorships, function outside the scrutiny of normal members of the company. And while ordinary business dealings are not the business of law enforcement in capitalist societies, private bartering of favors can include insider trading, blackmail, embezzlement, fraud, slavery, and murder. Being private does not make business dealings automatically legal.
> You have no "right" to be an Airbnb customer.
If Airbnb is treated as a public venue, then customers complying with the contracts and agreements of the service do, indeed have a right to that service, just as a restaurant in modern times may not deny service on the basis of race or gender.
Re: (Score:3)
What reasons are "legal"?
In America, there are enumerated Protected Groups [wikipedia.org].
If you are not in one of these groups, then you are not legally protected from discrimination. So it is perfectly legal to refuse to hire anyone with a nose ring or a tattoo.
The allowable discrimination also depends on what is being offered. Age discrimination is illegal in hiring, but is allowed in the sale of goods and services. So a "senior discount" or "student discount" at a movie theater is legal. Gender discrimination is also legal, so a nightclub
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure if you tried that, some female, somewhere, would sue your socks off.
Now, a gentlemen-free night would be perfectly fine....
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure if you tried that, some female, somewhere, would sue your socks off.
Now, a gentlemen-free night would be perfectly fine....
The dividing line is private or company affiliated/sponsored.
I can invite all of the men in my group to a get together at my house, and no one can do anything about it.
Get any company sponsorship, and you're risking a social credit meltdown.
My experience is the opposite, the female only get together is somehow different.
Years ago, our Institute had a Picnic for the men, and a holiday social for the women.
At some point the women insisted on going to the picnic. Some of the old guard guys were pis
Re: (Score:2)
Is it legal to discriminate on the bases of race? Gender? Age? Medical conditions? Skill? Cost?
For a company offering services in America, the answers are: no, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.
In what country or countries is it illegal to not hire a person based on their skill?
Re: (Score:2)
> In what country or countries is it illegal to not hire a person based on their skill?
Oh, Oh my. There are many talented immigrants whom we cannot hire based on their lack of the correct visa. There are also skilled people turned away from hiring or promotion due to racial, ethnic, or gender quotas. Those quotas may exist to try to correct historical bias, but they exist and have existed. And there are age limits to get a driver's license or to do full-time work.
Re: (Score:2)
> In what country or countries is it illegal to not hire a person based on their skill?
Oh, Oh my. There are many talented immigrants whom we cannot hire based on their lack of the correct visa. There are also skilled people turned away from hiring or promotion due to racial, ethnic, or gender quotas. Those quotas may exist to try to correct historical bias, but they exist and have existed. And there are age limits to get a driver's license or to do full-time work.
You might have had an issue parsing that sentence. I'm talking abour forced hiring of a person that doesn't posess the skillset to do the job at all. That either requires hiring a second competent person, or just paying the forced hiree to do nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
> I'm talking abour forced hiring of a person that doesn't posess the skillset to do the job at all.
I don't believe such rules normally say "you must hire this individual". But when they mandate particular percentages, there are usually going to be less skilled candidates hired out of the protected group, compared to the protected group.
> That either requires hiring a second competent person, or just paying the forced hiree to do nothing.
Or accepting the lesser quality of work because a crew cannot af
Re: (Score:2)
But when they mandate particular percentages, there are usually going to be less skilled candidates hired out of the protected group, compared to the protected group.
I have always wondered how protected people felt about this. Never knowing if they were hired because of what they identified as, or if they happened to be the most qualified candidate.
As a completely generic white male, I know I was hired because I was the best person for the job. In the professional fields that matters to people, even if some are pleased to take advantage of being protected.
Educational institutions which receive federal funding have particularly strong federal policies governing their hiring practices. The case is likely to go to the Supreme Court as one of the most liberal universities in the USA faces consequences for refusing to accept the most qualified students on the basis of their race and nationality.
This is the case against Harvard by Asian/Americans? There's only hundreds of cases against universities, so I to
Re: (Score:2)
> I have always wondered how protected people felt about this. Never knowing if they were hired because of what they identified as, or if they happened to be the most qualified candidate.
Ask them. And be ready to be fired for harassing them if they take it the wrong way. Some consider it their right to make up for previous abuses.
> As a completely generic white male, I know I was hired because I was the best person for the job.
Do you, really? As a youngster, I was taught to speak and dress and act ce
Re: (Score:3)
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, in what cases is it legal to say "no blind people allowed"?
Delivery truck driver, bus driver, airline pilot, tug boat operator, harbor pilot, there are thousands of jobs where adequate eye sight is either a practical or LEGAL requirement, and ADA doesn't change that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've walked through drive-thru's before and got served fine.
With autism, it's affects may disqualify for customer service for example.
Re: (Score:2)
But when is it legal to say "no blind customers allowed"?
A shooting range.
I have also seen health restrictions at companies offering skydiving, scuba diving, white water rafting, bunjee jumping, etc.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No, there is no comparison.
No there really is. The comparison is *right* *there* in the article title. I know no one here RTFA, or even RTFS, but if you don't read the title, how do you know what to be angry about?
Re: (Score:2)
overreaching US corporate power (Score:5, Interesting)
Tech companies have a right to refuse to do business with anyone for any legal reason. They are private businesses. You have no "right" to be an Airbnb customer. None of their services are essential. There are alternatives to Airbnb for online booking, and you can always contact a hotel directly. I have heard rumors that some people are even able to live without using Facebook, so it is possible.
I agree in theory with these ideas.
But there are problems in practice:
- Companies communicate with each other or even outsource some evaluation to 3rd parties. So you might not even be able to go to an alternative. (If one deems your Tweets non-politically correct or considers that your instagram feed shows irresponsible behaviour, chances are the alternatives will reject you too) (credit score might be so low that you're stamped "bad payer" and be refused at multiple places) (it's going to be difficult booking the hotel directly without a credit card)
- the insane level at which the US seems to ber overrelying on private companies for things that, e.g. here around in our Evil Euro-communist countries are public services and infrastructure financed publicly by the state.
Take healthcare. In the US most of the actors (e.g. inssurance) are companies and thus "have a right to refuse doing business with you" (because you do dangerous sports according to your instagram feed). Meanwhile, most of the remaining civilized countries have universal healthcare.
Take transportation. The only way in the US to go somewhere, like to your workplace, is to buy your own car, which is going to be complicated if you can't obtain a loan to buy one because the credit score companies think you're a to high financial risk. Meanwhile, to get to work in a significant number of countries here around, you just jump into one of the extremely efficient and reliable public transportation services.
so yes in theory it's up to the customer to shop elsewhere.
in practice it seems to me that in the US it's getting difficult to do so without interacting with large corporations that will throw shit to you because "they have right to not do business with you".
Re: (Score:2)
you're stamped "bad payer" and be refused at multiple places
Can you cite a single example of this happening in America due to "social credit" score? That is behavior or views expressed on one company's site, leading to bans on other companies' sites?
it's going to be difficult booking the hotel directly without a credit card
Can you cite a single example of someone in America that was denied a credit card because of their political views? Or opinions expressed online?
In the US most of the actors (e.g. inssurance) are companies and thus "have a right to refuse doing business with you"
The ACA places significant restrictions on the ability of insurance companies to refuse coverage.
buy your own car, which is going to be complicated if you can't obtain a loan to buy one because the credit score companies think you're a to high financial risk.
You are conflating two entirely different issues. OF COURSE they are going to
Re: overreaching US corporate power (Score:2)
1. The "social credit" that you put in quotes is from China. They are drawing an analogy to it : the analogy only goes so far as "credit". All analogies fail at some point, this one too. No point getting hung up on the imperfection of an analogy.
2. " because of " : you are asking for instances where services were refused because of something e.g. written text on another company's site. But you missed the point , or probably didn't even read the summary : companies are not obliged to tell you the reason for
Re: (Score:2)
This is nothing new - the phone company could boot you off their network, the electricity company could disconnect your supply etc. We decided that for some essential services that people need to survive they wouldn't be allowed to do that, and put laws to that effect in place.
They all shared information, e.g. the water company would report your failure to pay the bill to a credit agency and they would tell all your other utilities.
So really the questions are what do we want to consider an essential service
Re: (Score:2)
In Canada, internet access is considered an essential service, so none payment of bills is about the only reason to be denied service.
When my ISP dropped dialup access, it kept right on working until they built a cell tower as an alternative access point as they couldn't just shut down an essential service.
Re: (Score:2)
I have heard rumors that some people are even able to live without using Facebook, so it is possible.
You YOU!! You shut up! You shutupshutupshutupshutup! sob....wahhhhha! Mommyy Make him shut uppppp!
Do tell (Score:2)
What are these supposed legal reasons?
"opt-in" (Score:3)
If you don't like riding at the back of the bus, you can just not ride the bus at all!
Re:And it's an opt-in extralegal system (Score:5, Insightful)
No, you don't really. That's why we have such things as antitrust law. It's why we regulate monopolies differently from other services.
Today you have to use Facebook if you want to be as informed as other people. That it is also a prime vessel for misinformation is just one of life's most predictable ironies. Any successful communications medium will be used for purposes both fair and foul.
It's not okay to let corporations seize control of society and then throw up your hands with excuses of "people make choices". Civilizations depend upon accurate information. One cannot make intelligent decisions sans intelligence.
Re: (Score:2)
Today you have to use Facebook if you want to be as informed as other people.
Examples of vital info referenced here? I avoid Facebook like the plague and I don't feel uninformed. I'm more on top of news than my girlfriend who basically lives on there. Anything major going on with people I know I find out by talking directly on the regular. What am I missing out on?
Re: (Score:3)
Examples of vital info referenced here?
Persons of color weren't starving because they couldn't eat in every restaurant, but it was still wrong to permit them to be excluded. And speaking of restaurants, the only meaningful contact with many of them is now through Facebook. Many other businesses are the same.
Facebook should not be allowed to refuse to let people use their platform any more than the phone company.
Re: (Score:2)
Is racial discrimination happening here? That's changing the subject.
This is about discrimination based on behavior, which is how society works.
As to "meaningful" interactions, that adjective just sets up a "no true Scotsman" argument.
Facebook != informed (Score:2)
That's a false statement.
Re: (Score:2)
Today you have to use Facebook if you want to be as informed as other people.
Today you have to use Facebook if you want to be as misinformed as other people.
FTFY
What a tragedy (Score:2)
Airbnb can disable your account for life for any reason it chooses,
I don't know how people handle the horror. You know at one time there was a draft in this country?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know how people handle the horror. You know at one time there was a draft in this country?
Funny that you say that, I'm coming from a country where there still is a draft, and they use social networks to see if someone is lying to dodge the army.
Re: (Score:2)
Fortu
Re: (Score:2)
Airbnb can disable your account for life for any reason it chooses,
I don't know how people handle the horror. ...
You say that cavalierly but if a baker does the same suddenly it's an issue. The double standards are to society what technical debt is to technology - get too much of it and the whole thing falls apart at the seams. At the current rate of accrual I can see the US breaking up like the former Soviet Union within my lifetime - if I'm lucky. If I'm unlucky I'll see a civil war.
Re: What a tragedy (Score:2)
Some confusion here (Score:4, Insightful)
a majority of misdemeanors and even some felonies will be punished not by Washington, D.C.
The majority of misdemeanors are not punished by Washington DC today. I don't think we want to change that.
Lots of confusion here, honestly (Score:2)
The concern is not merely with who is doing the punishment, or whether it is traditionally legal rather than extralegal. The biggest concern is how pervasive the system is, and how easy it is to lead a typical life if the system has judged you "bad". The Chinese system is quite bad in those respects. Facebook and Twitter are not that bad now, and may never become that bad.
Its fine.... (Score:4, Insightful)
What happens when you assume (Score:2)
That's quite an assumption there... Specifically, what "apps" do you think that you can't live a normal life without?
You missed out the part... (Score:2)
Re:You missed out the part... (Score:5, Informative)
You missed out the part where websites like Twitter will ban you for behavior outside of their website. Absolutely ridiculous
Even more ridiculous and far more dangerous, TFS also fails to mention banks like Chase and payment services like PayPal as well as fund raising services like Patreon that will ban you for legal behavior and speech occurring outside of their platforms/services/sites.
The people cheering for this sort of Orwellian shit now because it's not currently attacking them are fools totally ignorant of history if they don't think the pendulum will eventually swing back towards them once it's set in motion, as these entities are actually driven by wealth & power, not by allegiance to any particular political Party or ideology being that they are multinational. As soon as they see an advantage to doing so, they will happily do an about-face and go after their former allies and supporters.
Strat
Re: (Score:3)
The people cheering for this sort of Orwellian shit ...
I am not cheering for it. I think it is wrong, and I believe they are making a mistake.
But it is, and should be, legal. They are private businesses, and should be free to chose whom they do business with, even if I disagree with their choices.
Re: You missed out the part... (Score:5, Insightful)
Problem is, many of these "private businesses" enjoy substantial monopoly power. And when you look a little deeper, almost every tech company in Surveillance Valley is owned by the same tiny handful of tycoons, the Sandhill Road money cartel.
So yeah, the best solution is for Uncle Sam to break up the Big Tech monopolists and smash the Sandhill Road money cartel. Restore _real_ competition.
Until that happens, let's not pretend this is just a private business making an evil decision. It's not like the cafe across the street hanging up a "no gays, blacks, or Irish" sign on their door. It's more like every cafe in town doing it, because behind the scenes they're all owned by the same three guys. It is a serious social problem that demands a political solution.
Re: (Score:2)
Problem is, many of these "private businesses" enjoy substantial monopoly power.
No, they really don't. There are plenty of social media companies. Amazon controls 5% of retail. Google dominates search, but bans no one from searching.
the same tiny handful of tycoons, the Sandhill Road money cartel.
If you think VCs are dictating these policies, you need to get some better tinfoil.
Re:You missed out the part... (Score:5, Insightful)
But it is, and should be, legal. They are private businesses, and should be free to chose whom they do business with, even if I disagree with their choices.
In one sense I agree. However, there are anti-Trust laws and also Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act that needs to be litigated to force social media companies to choose one or the other, publisher or platform. I believe it's perfectly reasonable and within the law to begin hearings on a possible break up of Alphabet/Google, maybe some others like FB and Amazon. Much of the troubling behaviors and practices including domestic election interference of Silicon Valley would end if only the political will to enforce the law as written existed
I find it fascinating that so many who are very vocally opposed to capitalism and the supposed evils of the 1% billionaires and their tax-haven-seeking, privacy-invading mega corps will defend multinational mega-corps and the handful of billionaires that own them when the topic of censorship comes up like they're on the Chamber of Commerce or in the Bilderberg group.
Strat
Re: (Score:2)
The death of Section 230 would turn the Internet into cable news.
What the hell are you talking about? Nobody wants to "kill Section 230"! Exactly the opposite, as it's been in a zombified state, neither alive nor dead. Section 230 needs to be *enforced*. Right now it may as well not exist for all the difference it makes to the social media giants, as they get to play both sides: they act as a publisher when it's convenient and a platform when someone wants to sue. That's unacceptable, period.
It's amazing the level of mental gymnastics some people will go to, all to defen
There's a large push from the right wing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You missed out the part where websites like Twitter will ban you for behavior outside of their website. Absolutely ridiculous
Twitter can choose who it does business with. If you act like a total dickhead they are free to not do business with you. I don't really know why people think they are somehow segmented into categories, one per platform, and that people are obliged to treat each of those segments as completely independent.
You're a single person and those segments of you are not segments. It's all you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You didn't address my comment at all.
The question is, is entity A allowed to refuse to deal with entity B if entity does something that A does not like in venue C.
Or, if B does something which A objects to in venue C, is A obliged to ignore it because A does not have control of venue C.
Thing is what you're saying cuts both ways. Are you obliged to ignore bad behaviour from someone if they're not personally behaving badly towards you?
Now if twitter was big enough for antitrust to apply then yes, there would
Re: (Score:2)
Being banned from Twitter is like being kicked out of a cab. If you're so bad of a customer that losing your business is a good thing then anyone has the right to refuse you service. If businesses aren't allowed to refuse service then bad customers discourage good customers and said business loses money while shitty social behavior is encouraged.
The ability to post to Twitter is not critical or life threatening.
No. (Score:2)
No. The one system being build in China is a single system backed by, and with the authority of, their government. The systems (multiple) here are being built by many different companies, without the force of law behind them. So this is an inaccurate comparison, mostly with the goal of providing an inflammatory title in order to get people to read the article. "Silicon Valley" is not a single entity, but a very vague collection of many corporate entities located in a general geographic area.
I wish I had not
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Governments consist of thousands of decision makers who try to be impartial and fair to their citizens.
Silicon valley has maybe 10 obscenely rich guys who decide the rules and dictate the rules based purely on their personal preferences rather than what's fair or logical (looking at you Jack / Twitter).
It's closer to a system backed by a monarchy than a government backed one; far less checks and balances, far less accountability.
Fine. Stop using so-called 'social media'. (Score:2)
Re:Fine. Stop using so-called 'social media'. (Score:5, Informative)
It's not as simple as this. The problem is starting to leak into the real world also.
For example, your social media presence is being checked out by recruiters. And I can tell you, they find it extremely suspicious when a candidate abstains from patronizing Linkedin or Facebook. In other words, you're at a disadvantage to find a job if you keep a low online profile.
Re: (Score:2)
For example, your social media presence is being checked out by recruiters. And I can tell you, they find it extremely suspicious when a candidate abstains from patronizing Linkedin or Facebook. In other words, you're at a disadvantage to find a job if you keep a low online profile.
I know recruiters like linked in because it allows people to flag that they're in the market for jobs and gives recruiters powerful search and management tools. So yes if you are not on linkedin you'll have fewer people reach out
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have a LinkedIn account or any social media accounts with my real name on them, and have never had trouble finding work or been told that it's at all odd.
TBH if I was told that I'd surely not want that job anyway. It's pretty creepy to say the lest, and what kind of crap employer is more interested in your social media than your skills and a face-to-face meeting?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds like an excellent way to weed out shady employers. What kind of idiot would want to work for a company like this?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What do you think this is?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What's the alternative? (Score:2)
How else are you going to keep people who leave their trash on the bleachers from raising costs on the rest of us? Arrest them for littering?
The perpetually dirty restrooms in the Bay Area could also use some behavior modification. Maybe that's where this is all coming from.
Re: (Score:2)
How else are you going to keep people who leave their trash on the bleachers from raising costs on the rest of us? Arrest them for littering?
The perpetually dirty restrooms in the Bay Area could also use some behavior modification. Maybe that's where this is all coming from.
Left my home in Georgia just a heading for the Frisco' Bay, I got nothin' to live for looks like nothin' gonna come my way, Now I'm Shittin' in the dock of the bay...wastin' time
You ain't seen nothin' compared to what it was like in the 60's bub! The Greyhound wash rooms were positively vile and the shore line stunk like shit from all the fishing and industrial pollution compared to what it smells and looks like today. Sillycon valley is a bunch of namby pamby Starbucks junkies and the conversation going o
Re: What's the alternative? (Score:2)
"the conversation going on in the coffee shop is about as interesting as listening to paint dry"
Only if the paint is drying with blockchain and AI..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Who needs sex drugs and rock roll when you have porn and apps.
Re: (Score:3)
The perpetually dirty restrooms in the Bay Area could also use some behavior modification.
There are restrooms in the Bay Area? From the comments posted here I just thought everyone there just used the streets.
. . . extra points for taking a dump on a eScooter.
yes (Score:3, Insightful)
USA is just like China, only China is a bit ahead in the future, they managed to repress ordinary people much more efficiently, they didn't need to pretend having fake democracy and human rights. Rulers of the USA can't wait to get the same 'privileges' as their Chinese 'colleagues' and they are on a good way to get there.
Of course if anyone had any sense there would be protests each time someone tried this shit but absence of such action only shows the above prediction is most likely correct.
This is a Good Thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Retaliation (Score:3)
It is prudent for businesses to keep blacklists of consumers who attempt to exercise their legal entitlements. For example, Equifax should include in your credit report the fact that you attempted to claim the class action settlement against them, or any other lawsuits that you have been involved in with any other large business. That would limit liability for companies and deter lawsuits.
Re: (Score:2)
Been going on for years! Where were you? (Score:5, Interesting)
Silicon Valley has been running on a social/technological caste system for years now, with job placement, social behaviour and performance all part of the mix:
Not driving a BMW?
Not Drinking Starbucks?
Not wearing the "Right Labels"?
Not connected to the right social circles?
Not drinking juiced kale and such for breakfast?
In general, not showing the Right signs of affluence?
You're a Social Pariah! Don't even *Try* to get a job at certain places, or go to certain clubs, or even shop at certain stores, or you will be treated poorly/shamed into leaving!
Been happening for years, and few people outside of it have been paying attention.
Just the mobile techno-serfdom of the area should tell everything about it. They can't break into the "good" jobs, so they can't even afford basic housing, because the cost of living has been inflated to such a level that you have to make darned near 6 figures to have a basic apartment. That's why they live in trailers/vans/cars, and have to shuffle around from burb to burb like serfs under the grace of the local nobility.
I wonder what would happen to The Valley if they all went elsewhere to work, and left the locals high and dry?
Oh, wait. They can't.
They don't have enough social credit to do that.
Never mind then...
It's already here, just not in the same format.
Re: (Score:3)
That's just keeping up with the Jones (Score:2)
Now imagine if all that's available online. Worse, imagine if a company starts gathe
Re: (Score:2)
"Not driving a BMW?
Not Drinking Starbucks?
Not wearing the "Right Labels"?
Not connected to the right social circles?
Not drinking juiced kale and such for breakfast?
In general, not showing the Right signs of affluence?"
In other words, Sillycrap Valley is just like High School.
Now why would anybody other then the ones at the very top of the totem pole live in ultra expensive Sillycrap Valley and put up with this shit, and not move to the rest of the country like a huge chunk of the tech industr
Betteridge say 'NO' (Score:2)
And so it is.
As if (Score:2)
>"Unlike China's government policy, the social credit system emerging in the U.S. is enforced by private companies. If the public objects to how these laws are enforced, it can't elect new rule-makers..."
As if the Chinese citizens can elect new rule-makers? I've got news for you...
>"If current trends hold, it's possible that in the future a majority of misdemeanors and even some felonies will be punished not by Washington, D.C., but by Silicon Valley. It's a slippery slope away from democracy and tow
Anonymity is important (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Because flying, renting a vehicle, and banking should all be done without bothering to confirm identity?
Re: (Score:2)
Play well with others (Score:2)
The most disturbing attribute of a social credit system is not that it's invasive, but that it's extralegal.
Didn't you learn anything in kindergarten? If you don't play well with others you won't be invited to birthday parties or get any valentines. Social pressure is what keeps a society civilized.
And really snowflake, being banned from twitter has nothing to do with the legal system.
When kindergarten fails to teach autistic children (Score:2)
Didn't you learn anything in kindergarten? If you don't play well with others you won't be invited to birthday parties or get any valentines.
Some children need help learning how to play well with others, especially in edge cases. This includes many with autism or other mental conditions that affect social function. Kindergartens have in many cases failed to teach many of these children, and with the right wing aggressively pursuing statewide property tax cuts, lack of individual attention due to classroom overcrowding can only get worse.
It's called "Access Culture". Or "Access Society". (Score:2)
You probably better know it under the term "Cyberpunk".
Welcome to the Age of Cyberpunk.
It's not fun like in your favorite novel or RPG. It actually sucks most of the time.
Can a company control who uses it's product? (Score:2)
If you answer 'yes': no problem. It's not 'extra-legal'. It's a question of who is allowed to be a member.
If you answer 'no': then how far does that non-control extend and how would you propose enforcing it?
Discrimination laws exist (Score:2)
If you answer 'yes': no problem. It's not 'extra-legal'. It's a question of who is allowed to be a member.
Which of these policies do you think a company ought to be allowed to put in place?
"Only people with light skin are allowed to be members"
"Only people with a functioning pancreas are allowed to be members"
"Only people not showing symptoms of autism are allowed to be members"
Silicon Valley? (Score:2)
Fuck off. Capitalism will build a system that rewards good consumers. If you buy outside walled gardens then expect to be screwed.
technically that's a statement about the law (Score:3)
Air BNB (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People who parrot this bullshit line seem to all be (probably willfully) ignorant of that fact that people have and continue to try to create their own alternatives, but people like you make it almost impossible without reinventing the entire internet from square one.
Re: That's not even remotely the same. (Score:2)
"People who parrot this bullshit line seem to all be shilling for the Sandhill Road cartel."
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
I mean it sounds like they're free to not do business with you and you're free to not do business with them. The system works?
Re: (Score:2)
Only when there's no collusion between neo-nazi businesses. See the very article this thread is on.
Re: (Score:2)