What scares me more is the cheerleading and defense of this in the West, and the way this is voluntarily happening here.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01J24C0TI
This is a telescreen.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01J24C0TI
This is a telescreen.
China’s 2015 GDP Was Exaggerated By Fake Data, Analysis Shows (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-01/china-s-2...)
Another Chinese city admits 'fake' economic data (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-data/anothe...)
This Is How China's Regions Fare in the Fake GDP Data Stakes (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-19/this-is-h...)
They fake data to move gdp fractions of a percent.
Outright lying doesn't help further your argument. There's some excellent independent estimates of Chinas gdp out there.
I'm fine with societies experimenting with more surveillance with the aim of improving people's behavior. It just seems like the modern version of sitting around a fire face to face and not being an asshole.
If only that surveillance didn't open up avenues for exploitation, targeting, and suppression even more.
And I'm pretty sure we've got a little too much "cpmpliance" monitoring as we are right now... I'm ready for ALPRs, Stingrays, and a bunch of other LEO practices to get curtailed or even stopped outright.
The existence of a bad outcome is something to be avoided and guarded against, but I don't see why any possible tool which has a potential to be abused should be avoided.
It is true that societies are experimenting with policing what people say online; Germany's attempts to combat hate speech and fake news come to mind. But that is (hopefully) different from punishing political dissent.
Do you honestly believe that it is better for society if people can't openly say "I disagree with removing presidential term limits"?
A listening device in private homes is a genie that won't go back in its bottle. Are you willing to stand up and say, I trust every official, elected or otherwise, for the rest of my life, and the lives of any descendants I might have? Because you have just written a blank cheque that says exactly that.
Someone hasn't learned from history. The impulse you're feeling is tempting, but it never ends will.
Also, I think "anonymity paired with speech" is older than you think, and probably arose soon after the invention of the printing press. One notable instance of centuries-old anonymous speech are the Federalist Papers from 1787-88 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers#Authorsh...). Anonymous speech is also important for attacking oppressive regimes, even if it's more often used for far less lofty purposes.
Even good, trustworthy regimes go bad, and any surveillance system designed to be powerful enough to expose assholes can be perverted to serve oppressive ends. I'd rather those regimes have to build their surveillance from scratch rather than finding them ready-made.