Talk:Philosophies

From iA wiki

Philosophy of Misinformation

NOTE: This is a really rough idea that's been bouncing around my head for some time now. Will develop as ideas or relevance permit.

I've been trying to create or develop a philosophy of mis-information. That is, to make public databases of people and their information less accurate, less trusted, less reliable. The reason for this is the way statistics and data harvesting are being used, not to improve society through efficiency but to hurt it. Certainly examples of how statistics have improved society happen all the time when a news story encourages people to eat healthy. Yet I watch consumer data turn people into cattle - predictable mindless hordes who will respond to simple coaxing. Hollywood makes movies that are so plain vanilla and take no risks.

What this philosophy entails is the idea that, wherever possible, you misrepresent yourself, you give false information, and you "correct" databases that are considered perfect by adding a few incorrect entries. This seems like either an act of insanity or vandalism because what it creates is headaches. It would create untrusted networks, unhappy customers - chaos.

This process already exists in the form of the Virus and Cracker. They harming systems almost without regard for their user. However, the tack that I'm suggesting is much more subtle, much more slight. So that people in power and "big brother" types cannot trust the systems they administer. That computers never become that all-knowing all-seeing solution due to their lack of reliability that everyone is constantly seeking.

Most administrators will often start over completely with a system they even *think* has been compromised because of the increasing complexity of computers, . This serves as a recognition that the increasing complexity of systems has become like a fire that can't be put out - you just let the building burn down or bulldoze and start anew. The vast majority of users, however, will just cross their fingers or try in vein to find anti-virus tools if their system starts acting in a peculiar manner. The average user has no idea HOW they got the virus, only that something's wrong.

So essentially what I'm suggesting is anti-establishment. I don't really want to wipe the computer my grandma uses to check e-mail.

This seems to have been taken care of by a number of establishments, including the federal government's terribly flawed no-fly list, the inability for Internet filters to correctly filter pornography, and the way I regularly get calls for someone I'm not. If databases were even close to perfect, at least a number of these problems would have dissapeared by now.

Every chance I get lately, I always try to put down false or misleading information. I never put down my correct zip code - even lately I don't put down my correct name when asked to. I haven't been caught yet but I'm wondering what will happen if I am. Do I pronounce my adoption of this anti-catagorization idea when mostly it just comes down to the fact that, in a world more connected than ever before, I don't want phone calls and Spam and nonsense.

Certainly, there are places where misinformation has been really beneiftial. Myths about how marrying your brother or sister (before genetic breakthroughs) that will bring the wrath of the Gods come to mind. "Gonzo Journalism" comes to mind, which encourages the use of telling a deliberately false story that can be, in some ways, a more accurate account that stark facts do not communicate

However, what if this philosophy were to make less trusted data that was clearly suggestion the world was overheating or the likelyhood of a coming earthquake. In this sense, chaos would breed more chaos, not freedom through an attack on the work to make people predictable and robotic.

Thoughts and feedback are welcome.

Do you fill in your real personal information in RealPlayer? I never did. I stopped entering correct information about myself when i got stalked by someone from the internet. He took all my information from my ICQ number which he then used to call me. However what you propose goes beyond the internet about which i never thought about. It's interesting though. So next time some marketing person calls me and asks for me or someone else i say: "That person doesn't live here. You must have dialed the wrong number. Bye. *Click*." Unfortunately, i can't see their face :) i suppose these people believe the people they're interacting with are honest cattle for them so it should work. -- dpi

Absolutley. This philosophy bugs me as it seems to represent the death of honesty. In the past it was a point of pride to tell someone your first and last name. Now I give them my nickname, never my full name. Certainly its not our fault. I've thought about telling people I was once a victim of identity theft as a reason for not giving any information about myself. Its the reason I don't own a credit card.

I just hate the idea that I'm merely a number and I don't want to end up thinking of others that way. A fucking statistic. Webfork

Hmm i disagree that this represents the death of honesty. What this represents, is that one cannot trust everyone. It represents some humans are assholes in such way to use your identity as part of their profit and that this behaviour has been adopting not only IRL but also IVL.

What it also does represent, in my opinion, is that for some the default rule is now kinda like the firewall rule "deny all; allow some". And, i think more and more people are adopting this, though Orkut would show a different result as niche aspect.

It doesn't mean i am not honest about my realname / address either - to people i trust. Who do exist on the Internet. It just means that by default i don't give my realname (anymore). It also doesn't mean everyone acts according to this philosophy, since some clearly don't (a lot of FLOSS developers, Orkut users, for example).

It doesn't matter to play such cat vs mouse game against my government either, since they already know my realname when they want to [and i take it granted yours has this ability too]. And, my government is my worst enemy... although proletarians follow closely. It reminds me about these stories i hear from the Free radio pioneers here. When getting in touch with some other (commercial) pirate it went like "Using my frequency? Hey asshole, you better stop or else i'll break your transmitter or throw a molotov cocktail in your house."

As for it isn't our fault. I don't see it like that. If one gives away information, one can expect that information to be used for whatever purpose. Those people on Orkut should know what they're doing and if they don't, it still is their responsibility. I rather see it like everything you say can and will be used against you and if i ever get caught for not securing my information (ie. P2P...) i'll think: "Shit happens" and accept i made my mistake by not using a more secure way (it might take some time to get to this point, depending on the situation, but eventually i get to this point, i know for sure). I knew the risk. I learned from the stalker too, you know.

As for the statistic. Do you ever join in some online poll? Like the ones on /. for example? Statistics... i haven't thought about this one much yet.

More food for thinking -- dpi