First sentence is understandable, but second, "data about people = people", is just untrue.
-
-
-
I elaborate in my writing/talks – if I store a thought on my phone instead of/in addition to my brain, is that not part of me?
-
If I store a thought into your brain, is that part of me?
-
If I can scan every thought in your brain, is that you? Can I use it to simulate you? Is it OK if I own your simulation?
-
"And upon asking that question Aral was enlightened."
-
lots of fun things on this subject, ex:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWtE3r2CUBI …
-
(also, not saying you don't raise excellent points; only that way those points are expressed/stated needs to not be misunderstood)
-
Yes, 2nd that. Excellent points, but carefully with implicative words.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
totally agree with that. I mean, call it whatever, really - long as people learn what's out there to stop them from being snooped on
-
Indeed. My issue with “data” as a term is that we use it to mean “information on rocks” as well as “information about people”…
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.