Friday, April 15, 2005

a warning?

hullo. misha sent me this link.

check this out.

i found it scary and entirely plausible. what d'you think?

Labels:

8 Comments:

Blogger H said...

Scary. Plausible. Highly probable. Very Orwellian. I have a bet running that it is already happening on paper literally - that's the alarmist take. The fatalist take is that more data will keep getting on the 'internet' and do this proposed magic.

Hopefully by 2014, all of those services will come out of their (BETA) tags.

8:57 am  
Blogger Sanketh said...

What low-tech paranoia is this? :) This has been around for a long long time.

What the hell scared you?

1:26 pm  
Blogger Sridhar said...

it's not that bad yet, but it might get worse. I decided to run a trial and ran some searches on people i know. Most of them turn up immediately and i can get a whole lot of personal info on them. However, i think your privacy paranoia is working. i couldn't get much about you on the net :D.

moral of the story: an anonymous life is a possibility, but i dont know for how long.

google maps now has satellite maps which have a decent resolution. in a few years time we may even have real-time hi-definition satellite based snooping become public.

12:51 am  
Blogger Woodworm said...

Plausible Yes. Scary - maybe not?

You know - these days I am more paranoid about how much these credit care and mobile services companies know about me than anything else... You should attend to one of their calls these days, and you would know how totally vulnerable you are...

But my take is, when searchable personal data about say 3 billion people online in 10 years time make it seem scary, think of the irrelevance of what that could mean. In a world of 7 billion people, what you mean to the corpocracy would be peanuts. You can expect a more "seemingly personalized service" with all the horrific aura of "awe" around it - but at the end of the day - the back office guy (probably in Phillippines by then) would just not be able to access anything about you - without any specific need to. Think of what that would mean in terms of deterioration of service.

If anything it is that scares me, it is this commodification of people's interests. Paranoia about privacy and all - have been there for aeons. Nothing new.

You are never going to get more important - than people around you... and my take is, with 3 billion paranoid people, the situation will exactly be the same.

3:16 am  
Blogger m. said...

@H: agree totally... except for the beta tags part - what the heck is that??!

sanketh... hah! what would you know about the fears of the technologically challenged huh? :p lol...

sridhar - migosh! i thought only convicts and politicians would have have their names dredged up google. ghastly idea.. and nope - im neither cornell nor the play acting one! :d so far (knock wood) im truly anon.

woodworm... squishful and reassuring to an extent! ;-) but no.. i still find this an extremely disturbing concept.

1:38 pm  
Blogger Sridhar said...

@woodworm - :)) now that was a very interesting take on the whole issue. and yes, the only thing that really scares me are the telemarketers who seem to know everything about me when they call up. a friend of mine says it's because ICICI gives out personal info to other companies, but I dont know how true that would be.

@m. convicts and politicians would have have their names dredged up google ???
why convicts?

3:20 am  
Blogger m. said...

@sridhar: well. convicts/ politicians ... is there much of a difference?! :d

9:48 am  
Blogger Vitalstatistix said...

I think they missed out mentioning google's orkut.

8:09 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home



Visit Greenpeace.org to help prevent environmental destruction.
Creative Commons License
This blog's content is protected. Whack this and you get whacked.