There is a tremendous cognitive bias in play here. The idea that because most people around you don't weaponize certain types of information means no one anywhere will ever weaponize that information, even if it is globally and indefinitely available.
It's all a variant of "candy today; diabetes in 20 years." Public health experts have probably thought the hardest about how to get people to take the long term into account. There must be something in their playbook that could benefit the anti-surveillance cause.
For example, most people can imagine living with diabetes, but they have no idea what it would feel like if some entity started using their leaked data against them. It's a much more complex scenario with lots of possible outcomes and variables.
So yeah, people can lack mental capacity without being stupid. They are nevertheless extremely uninteresting people who can't fathom, much like cattle, how they are being harvested.
Even security cameras are now part of performance culture
Surveillance -- including stuff like profiling people by analyzing their voluntary social media posts -- is imposed on a person by someone else. It is taking away the surveilled person's free choice, and its entire purpose is to gain power over them.
There's also absolutely no inherent reason that surveillance -- the deliberate steps of gathering/cataloging/analyzing -- has to come along with people being able to post things in public. That's just a f'd-up practice that our society has adopted.
Do I like to get some Karma on HN/Reddit or reactions on Discord or replies on all 3? Yeah, I do, but not because of some "desire to be noticed" (I think) but because it means someone thinks I have provided some input to a conversation and they want to talk about it at the very least it lets me know I'm not a crazy person talking out of my ass. In fact, I'd prefer that nobody knows my real name or what I look like on all 3 of those sites. I can be a bit more authentic and candid than I'd feel comfortable being otherwise.
Well said. Brilliantly well said. Pithy and correct. I will be sharing your words.
We could start with the nonstop, look-at-me nature of Instagram (or any other social site). They satisfy a deep craving that just keeps growing. We could marvel at the Jan. 6 rioters posting their moments in history for all to see. It's endless, and it isn't slowing down.
Yes, there's a powerful argument to be made that nonstop surveillance could work out badly. But after 15 years of seeing such pieces thunder into obscurity, rehashing the same arguments in isolation seems futile.
Anyone who wants to contribute to the conversation needs to spend serious time thinking about the reasons why so many people want strangers to know about them. It's a deep-felt desire. For a lot of people, the dread of being unknown/un-noticed/ignored is greater than the risks that come from being noticed. Once we understand why that's so, we might be able to move forward.