Tuesday, January 7, 2020
Episode 142: 2020 Hindsight
Play Now!New year looks back should be done when conditions grant the best insights. What better sight is there than that described as 20/20? Hence, Episode 142: 2020 Hindsight.In this episode, I read from: a Guardian article interviewing a NYTs editor, and the headline from Fox News it generated; Shoshanna Zuboff's book, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism; from Robert McChesney and John Nichol's book Dollarocracy; and a Guardian story listener Kevin sent me concerning companies pulling back from listening in on their customers (something mainstream media insists they simply do not do). I play: Frontline's James Jacoby interviewing Brad Parscale for a 2018 documentary.Musically, I play: et* doing "Intro" and "Black"; and Podington Bear doing "Nocturne Opus 27 Number 1". KMFDM opens with Bernie Sanders correcting the record about what news does; and I close with et.I'm releasing this and all my episodes under a Creative Commons 4.0 attribution, share-alike, and non-commercial license.*Note: Again, the internets have concealed from finding… or scrubbed, in this case, I've no idea which… an entire band whose album I downloaded many years ago. I'm so going to have to update them files. I apologize for the continuing lack of linkage.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Great episode about back-checking one's assertions! I enjoyed it!
ReplyDeleteWhat would be funniest about that Guardian article (regarding cellphones eavesdropping) -- it would be funny, if it wasn't so pathetic -- is how rarely that evidence actually settles the argument.
I feel like 80% of the American population has probably been on one side or the other of that argument: "Is my cell phone eavesdropping on me?" As you can tell, since I sent you The Guardian article, I am of the opinion that cell phones do eavesdrop.
But stop me if this sounds familiar:
"I _knew_ my phone was eavesdropping! Here's a Guardian article that documents how the devices from four different companies had programs where human testers were eavesdropping on users without their knowledge!"
"Nahhhh, you weren't being listened to. That was just a test program."
"Maybe I was a test subject."
"Nahhhh, the article says they stopped doing that."
"But it doesn't say when. And it says the company denied people were listening, during the period when people were, in fact, listening. Why should we trust that it's stopped?"
"Look, those weren't people. They were subcontractors that the company hired."
"But the company hired them to, y'know, give their data to... the company."
"I'm sure there were privacy protections and firewalls. That's why they hired subcontractors."
"You don't know that. Companies hire subcontractors to cut costs. And all these companies have lied about data breaches and privacy before."
"Look, your phone isn't eavesdropping on you. It's all a coincidence. Just leave it at that."
"How do you know?"
"Because there's no evidence."
Wishful thinking? Too frightened to face the truth? Misunderstanding that "absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence"?
If I had any hair left I would tear it out.
I write frequently about "Scientism" frequently when I'm on EffBook. I define Scientism as, "the belief that, just because _you_ know a general scientific principle or law, that means that someone _else_ did not observe what they say they observed."
ReplyDeleteThe Scientific Method teaches us not to _privilege_ our own personal observations or anecdotes. Somehow Americans today have twisted that into, "Anyone else's personal observation or anecdote must necessarily be false if it disagrees with my thesis, because Science." Totally not the same thing.
Kevin! Welcome back to commentary land!
Delete"Scientism". I like it. It reminds me of Thomas Picketty's "scientificity", where he refers to a bunch of complicated stuff (not merely complex, as in intricate, but deliberately convoluted and hard to follow) designed to make the author's pre-determined theories sound, well, sound.
As to self-examination: Yeah, it's tough to be tough on myself, but I do it. I guess I'm a sucker for self-abuse….