[flagged]
There was a survey in Sweden last week about face detection/AI surveillance cameras being deployed in public and GenZ was way more supportive of that than Millennials
A few months ago a study was posted on HN which claimed 30% of gen z supported police cameras being installed inside homes to protect against domestic violence.
Meanwhile, in Dunedin, the number of cameras on the street was reduced in consultation with university students (aka gen z).
How can both of these statements be true? The answer is, they aren’t- the study posted on HN was fearmongering, manipulated data, trying to discredit the younger generation, to get older people to vote a specific way.
I’m a millennial but I’m sick of this rhetoric that gen z are stupid / oblivious / complicit etc. They aren’t.
To anyone downvoting my original comment, take a look at CATO, the style of writing used in their blog posts, their other studies, and their mission statement, and decide for yourself - are they trying to accurately represent gen z, or are they pushing an agenda?
It seems like far-right-wing organisations are expending extensive effort in an attempt to discredit gen z as a generation who are happy to have all their rights sold away and/or eroded. Yet if you speak to a young person today, it doesn’t line up.
“I read a study that said X about gen z” isn’t evidence that gen z believes / does those things.
Regardless, the study highlights exactly the difference the GP was saying: gen z is much more likely to be okay with the surveillance state. Even if the study question is worded in a way you disagree with or that you think is biased, you’ve presented no argument for why gen z would be disproportionately made to over-respond.
You admit to CATO being biased but you still believe their studies are concrete proof of a hypothesis?
> you’ve presented no argument for why gen z would be disproportionately made to over-respond.
I don’t see why it’s relevant to prove the mechanism CATO uses to get its results, when their data doesn’t line up with the real world.
I’m still looking for the exact link which has details/numbers (I’m currently on my phone on patchy 4g) but my counterpoint to CATO is that in Dunedin, either the University or DCC wanted to install surveillance cameras, and after consulting with the students, the number of cameras was reduced. So in this scenario, you have an older generation wanting more surveillance and the younger generation pushing back. This is not only completely opposite to CATOs study, but is also real opposed to hypothetical.
It was apparently part of the Swedish Internet Foundations yearly survey ( https://svenskarnaochinternet.se/english/ ).
Which is also correct. They're conditioned to consider it "normal", e.g. victims of abuse.
Doesn't have to absolutely apply to everyone in the group to be true - just to have a large effect on a significant share of group members.
Would you consider income taxes oppression? Or maybe mandatory schooling? What about universal surveillance? Mandatory vaccinations?
By no means am I likening the US today to the many examples of much worse oppression, but oppression is a spectrum and ultimately defined by the individual who either does or does not feel oppressed.
> Gen z and alpha will be the ones to solve these problems after the boomer luddites making insanely uninformed decisions are out of the picture.
That's a very optimistic hope, and I dare say naive. Aside from name-calling, I don't see an argument for your prediction.
In a thread that is filled with derision and contempt for gen z, directing criticism back the older generation is name calling? Seems the hypocrisy has been internalised and become invisible.
The broad and well-fanncanced campaign of slander against younger generation has been going on for decades, and unfortunately it is very successful.
There has never been a time in human history where old generation holds this much power and wealth relative to the younger one. Congress has never been this old, there has never been this level of exclusion of younger people from owning real estate, the future of younger generation has never been this much under threat and this ignored.
So Russia/China/Saudi are not oppressive? There are very few places that you can't leave, except maybe North Korea and Palestine
it's not the same comparison; oppression is a 24/7 conditional facet of life, but only a slim percent of companies will have a data breach that results in a QoL decrease for the individual.
spotty/sporadic bad treatment is a tough condition under which to spark revolution -- if it works and keeps most people happy, it likely won't change.
look at ring cameras for example. it's a visual portal for law enforcement to enact all sorts of privacy-concerned mostly-unauthorized abusive actions, but their customers are thrilled due to the value sell of the thing itself.
this can be seen all over tech in nearly every sector, people trade their rights for a convenient/shiny/popular/trendy object willingly and brag about the transaction -- I haven't seen much evidence of the newer generations breaking this cycle, if anything they seem to be leaning-in.
They're full on working with the face recognition with the face filters, they're advocating and promoting for the use of that at airport boarding (the new accounts on flyer talk at least are aggressively approving of it), and they're submitting pictures and selfies of their IDs as "account verification" to Facebook, linked in, and Instagram.
Not sure how old you are... But when you first signed up for Facebook would you have sent them a picture of your ID and yourself?