人格测试
Big Tech companies make money by mining your data. They refine this data using machine learning then sell it for profit. This business model is okay for mining companies because they are mining rocks. But when the resource being mined is humans, is that okay?
大型高科技公司通过挖掘您的数据来赚钱。 他们使用机器学习来精炼此数据，然后出售以获取利润。 对于矿业公司来说，这种商业模式是可行的，因为它们正在开采岩石。 但是，当开采的资源是人类时，可以吗？
Big Tech companies are basically middlemen that don’t pass the profits from selling your data to you. This makes the average human similar to a serf living on the digital property of Big Tech feudal lords — you receive no compensation for your hard work toiling to make the property of the feudal lords better. However, it’s dangerous to leave their property and fend for yourself. You can’t survive without the protection of feudal lords’ hired armies or the compelling digital services provided by Big Tech’s army of brilliant programmers. You won’t leave the status quo unless you have the resources to fend for yourself. We need to give people either the resources to fend for themselves, or a more equitable social contract between the average person and these Big Tech feudal lords (a la The Enlightenment). Not everyone can create their own digital services, so the latter is more likely (and has historical precedence).
大型高科技公司基本上是中间人，他们不会将出售数据的利润转移给您。 这使得普通人类似于生活在Big Tech封建领主的数字财产中的农奴-您辛辛苦苦地劳作以使封建领主的财产更好而得不到任何补偿。 但是，离开他们的财产并自己照顾自己是危险的。 如果没有封建领主的雇佣军或Big Tech杰出的程序员大军提供的引人注目的数字服务，您将无法生存。 除非您有足够的资源来维持自己的生活，否则您不会离开现状。 我们需要给人们要么自己养家糊口的资源，要么给普通人和这些大技术封建领主(启蒙运动)之间更公平的社会契约。 并非每个人都可以创建自己的数字服务，因此后者的可能性更大(并且具有历史优先权)。
The sociological progression of tech mirrors the sociological progression of human history, albeit on a scale of 1000:10 — a millennia of societal change in human history corresponds to a decade of societal change in the tech industry. Similar to the lofty ideals of antiquity driven by Greece’s democratic ideals or Rome’s expansive & inclusive empire, the Internet started out as an open & free system easily accessible to all. Everyone shared their resources and everyone within the borders of the Internet agreed to altruistically work together, just like everyone within the borders of Rome.
科技的社会学进步反映了人类历史的社会学进步，尽管其比例为1000：10-人类历史上的一千年的社会变化相当于科技行业十年的社会变化。 类似于希腊的民主理想或罗马广阔而具有包容性的帝国所推动的古代远大理想，互联网最初是一个开放且免费的系统，所有人都可以轻松访问。 每个人都共享资源，互联网边界内的每个人都同意像罗马边界内的每个人一样，以利他主义的方式进行合作。
But if 2000s represented the idyllic idealism of Antiquity, the 2010s represents the inward-looking skepticism of the Middle Ages — large tech companies with walled off ecosystems started to hoard data within their walled-off digital ecosystems, refining this natural resource of data through machine learning algorithms to create powerful features that could lay siege to the offerings of other big tech feudal lords. Mark, Bezos, Musk, Cook, and Pichai are feudal lords competing with each other, each reigning over authoritarian tech companies filled with the most powerful minds of our generation in a quest to dominate the digital world and acquire as much data as possible.
但是，如果说2000年代代表了上古的田园诗般的理想主义，那么2010年代则代表了中世纪的内向型怀疑论–陷入困境的大型科技公司开始在其陷入困境的数字生态系统中ho积数据，通过机器完善这种自然的数据资源学习算法以创建强大的功能，这些功能可能会围困其他大型科技封建领主的产品。 马克，贝索斯，麝香，库克和皮查伊是相互竞争的封建领主，他们各自统治着拥有我们这一代最强大头脑的威权科技公司，以期统治数字世界并获取尽可能多的数据。
In history, the Middle Ages is viewed as a step backward, both politically, culturally and intellectually. It would be supplanted by the more modern ideas of the Enlightenment. Similarly, I think the feudal era of Big Tech will soon pass and be supplanted by the ideals of the Enlightenment — I predict we will wake up to this blind exploitation and eventually demand that each individual has a right to own his / her own data. I call this data personhood.
在历史上，中世纪在政治，文化和思想上都被视为一种落后。 它会被启蒙运动中更现代的思想所取代。 同样，我认为大技术的封建时代将很快过去，并被启蒙运动的理想所取代-我预计我们将被这种盲目剥削所唤醒，并最终要求每个人都有权拥有自己的数据。 我称这种数据为人格。
Large Wealth Outflow: Big Tech is making obscene profits because they are selling our data without paying any money to us, their resource.
大量财富外流：大型技术公司之所以能获得可观的利润，是因为他们出售我们的数据而没有向我们及其资源支付任何钱。
No Wealth Inflow: Additionally, they invest nearly all their money into growth (e.g., R&D, new market expansion, acquisition of competitors). By spending a lot of money on these expenses, they report very low actual pre-tax income and are taxed very little. As a result, the US Government is not able to collect taxes on the huge gains made by tech companies and re-distribute this wealth to the average American via infrastructure programs or benefits, leaving us all poorer at the expense of Big Tech’s economic gains.
没有财富流入：此外，他们几乎将所有资金投入到增长中(例如，研发，新市场扩展，收购竞争对手)。 通过在这些支出上花很多钱，他们报告的实际税前收入非常低，而且征税很少。 结果，美国政府无法对科技公司的巨大收益征税，无法通过基础设施计划或收益将这些财富重新分配给普通美国人，从而使我们所有人都变得更穷，而牺牲了大科技的经济收益。
Instead of passing legislation and performing political gymnastics to find a way to tax Big Tech’s gains, why don’t we just plug the hole causing the unfair wealth transfer in the first place? If Big Tech companies just pay us for our data, we’ll finally be valued like humans (a la Enlightenment ideals) instead of resources (a la Middle Age serfs). This will also provide every person that uses digital services (basically everyone) a constant stream of income akin to a Universal Basic Income. This UBI would likely be more effective and balanced than anything the government attempts, due to their inefficiency and political strife. In this case, the invisible hand of the market would do the trick.
与其通过立法和进行政治体操来寻找对大科技的收益征税的方法，我们为什么不首先填补造成不公平财富转移的漏洞？ 如果大型科技公司只是为我们的数据付费，那么我们最终将像人类一样(被视为启蒙运动的理想)而不是资源(被视为中年农奴)被重视。 这还将为使用数字服务的每个人(基本上每个人)提供类似于通用基本收入的恒定收入来源。 由于效率低下和政治纷争，这个UBI可能比政府尝试的任何事情都更加有效和平衡。 在这种情况下，市场的无形之手就能解决问题。
How do we get Big Tech to pay us for their data when they can just collect it for free right now? Well, first there has to be a cultural and intellectual shift in the way people think about data. Instead of thinking about data as an abstract and useless set of information, people need to start valuing their data as a valuable resource that they emit. After all, this data is certainly valuable to the Big Tech feudal lords.
当大技术公司现在可以免费收集数据时，我们如何让大技术公司为他们支付数据费用？ 嗯，首先人们在思考数据的方式上必须发生文化和思想上的转变。 人们不必将数据视为抽象且无用的信息集，而需要开始将其数据视为自己发出的宝贵资源。 毕竟，这些数据对于大技术封建领主无疑是有价值的。
Also, a new entity, whether political or corporate (honestly, I have little faith the government can pull this off) needs to offer forth a new social & economic contract that provides a compelling renegotiation between data buyers and data providers (us). Just like the great political experiment known as nation-states that took off following the Middle Ages, I believe we’ll eventually see a renegotiation of our data social contract towards something that gives data providers (us) more leverage and freedoms relative to these data buyers (Big Tech feudal lords).
另外，无论是政治组织还是企业组织(诚实的说，我几乎不相信政府能够做到这一点)，一个新实体都需要提供一份新的社会与经济合同，从而在数据购买者与数据提供者(美国)之间进行令人信服的重新谈判。 就像在中世纪之后盛行的称为民族国家的伟大政治实验一样，我相信我们最终将看到我们的数据社会契约进行重新谈判，以期赋予数据提供者(我们)相对于这些数据更多的杠杆作用和自由买家(Big Tech封建领主)。
On a side note, I think a smart-phone enabled focus group platform that provides opportunities for direct interface between companies and consumers could create a gig economy with a large enough user base that we could activate a passive data aggregation feature. This would allow individuals to use a sliding scale to decide how much data they’re willing to give up (e.g., location data, purchase history) in exchange for differing levels of payment.
从侧面讲，我认为启用智能电话的焦点小组平台可为公司与消费者之间的直接接口提供机会，可以创造一个具有足够大用户群的演出经济，我们可以激活被动数据聚合功能。 这将允许个人使用滑动比例来决定他们愿意放弃多少数据(例如，位置数据，购买历史记录)以换取不同的付款水平。
This would teach people that yes, data is your property, so you should be able to have control over it. We relinquished our control to take part in the digital world (just like human relinquished their freedoms to take part in the civilized world, leaving pre-history behind) but in the name of the humanist ideals of justice and fairness, we will have our freedom back. Give me liberty, or cancel my social media profiles (which is basically death, these days).
这会告诉人们，是的，数据是您的财产，因此您应该能够控制它。 我们放弃了参与数字世界的控制权(就像人类放弃了他们参与文明世界的自由，留下了史前时代一样)，但是以人道主义的正义与公平理想的名义，我们将拥有我们的自由背部。 给我自由，或取消我的社交媒体资料(如今，这基本上是死亡)。
翻译自: https://medium.com/@weberwong/data-personhood-f1c0cf519633
人格测试
1855
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
