> right to be forgotten
1984 had a pretty good argument why it’s dystopian to tell people they are not allowed to remember or continue believing something.
1984 had a pretty good argument why it’s dystopian to tell people they are not allowed to remember or continue believing something.
Its a good book. It should also be tempered with a little Jane Austen, about the tyranny of unshakable reputation. My take is it's the "telling people what they are allowed to do" part that is dystopian. To that extent all laws are dystopian. However we do it all the time and obtain great wider benefit. For example, bad money choices might lead someone into insoluble debt, they declare bankruptcy, and seven years later that is deleted from public records so they can make a fresh start. In reality a "right to be forgotten" is more of a right to be forgiven. Asking that people forgive and discount past wrongs is not the same as poisoning and torturing them in a basement until their minds are wiped, as in some demonic MK-UTLTRA shitshow.
Add in the notion that the police and other important agencies can find a lot more than the Public can, because safety... and continue to completely break democracy while pretending you're doing all this for the greater good (where "for good" actually means "for concentration of power")
the problem here is the "collective mind" aka the cloud of collectively constructed digital information
This is such a ridiculous take it’s hard to take it seriously.
What about retention periods? About about paper copies? Should no data anywhere be regulated because it is somehow this nebulously and poorly defined “extension of the mind?”
and extremal counterpoint to this viewpoint is that all data be regulated because it's all digital and in the cloud.
just consider banning paper and pencils