Sublime

To claim that “both sides”—the more powerful who seek individual liberty and the weaker who seek social justice—have equal moral claims is to avert one’s eyes from this reality. Lobbyists for large corporations, publicists for the wealthy, lawmakers for the privileged, pundits for the powerful, celebrity peddlers of racism and xenophobia—none of

PREMIÈRE VOIE : CONTRÔLER TOUJOURS PLUS CE QUE FONT LEURS RÉSIDENTS, VIA UNE SURVEILLANCE NUMÉRIQUE PERMANENTE ET L’UTILISATION DE L’IA ET DU MACHINE LEARNING (LA VOIE DE LA CHINE) C’est une tentation qu’ont quasiment tous les pays démocratiques, et en particulier (mais pas seulement) le « pays de la liberté », les États-Unis.

Most important, Schwartz foresaw that the scale of the still-emerging crisis would impose risks that exceed the scope of privacy law: “The danger that the computer poses is to human autonomy. The more that is known about a person, the easier it is to control him. Insuring the liberty that nourishes democracy requires a structuring of societal use

When describing “modern technology platforms,” he writes that “almost nothing, short of a biological virus, can scale as quickly, efficiently, or aggressively as these technology platforms, and this makes the people who build, control, and use them powerful too.”11

Égalité Le futur appartient à qui possède les data

Today we have largely abandoned the idea that one’s privacy can somehow be diminished by how one spends one’s attention, in addition to questions of snooping, surveillance, and exhibitionism. The reason for this, as I suggested in the introduction, is that the previous understanding of privacy was gradually supplanted by a neoliberal, voluntaristic