The odd reality of life under China's all-seeing credit score system
wired.co.uk
wired.co.uk
Valve knowingly allows its cheat countermeasures to impact human lives in this way? I'd like to hear their response to this claim.
A person chooses to negatively affect quality of life of 10-20 other people. I can't find a word to describe that behavior other than asshole. With that in mind the issue can be reframed to - should assholes have a lower credit score?
I do not know. I certainly do not agree with Chinese methods, because I think positive reinforcement works better. With that said, I am curious what long term effect Chinese population hacking will have on their society.
On using positive reinforcement to shape the society. Imagine a city park where lights pulse green when someone picks up a piece of trash from the ground and throws it away into the trash can. Or a park that remembers people that do not litter and greets them with a positive reinforcement signal when they walk in.
https://mic.com/articles/189690/online-shooter-overwatch-to-...
They've been getting more and more requests for ways to penalize bad players, so I thought this was an interesting direction to push for features. A little more sophisticated that the general "commend a teammate" feature that was more or less just an upvote.
Reminds me of the Cobra effect. Cause trouble, fix it - unlimited positive reinforcement.
People who litter will have points deducted from their score and they'll no longer be allowed in parks. Unless they have money of course. "Donating to charity" can increase your score, so the rich will be able to whatever the fuck they want and the poor will lose access to parks.
> playing against aimbot is like banging head against the wall, it definitely lowers my quality of life
Some friendly advice from a fellow human - go take a nice long walk in a park. Enjoy the fresh air and sunshine, while you still can.
The whole point of the above comment was, in opposition of Chinese system, to only provide positive interactions. The surveillance genie is out of the bag and there is no going back. For better or for worse cameras are everywhere, it is only a matter of time until there is AI watching most of them. The traditional system is based heavily on punishment, so it does not take a lot of imagination to extend it to the automated enforcement.
Indeed one of the worst possible outcomes is when your karma is directly tied into your banking account. In that world the rich have nearly unlimited indulgences. I was trying to imagine a world where the technology is used to provide positive feedback instead of punishments.
> Some friendly advice from a fellow human - go take a nice long walk in a park. Enjoy the fresh air and sunshine, while you still can.
I do that quite often, but every once in a while I want some variety such as competitive games.
What if the park is polluted with litter? The point is that people can degrade your quality of life in many places, even if it's as "trivial" as leisure.
Sounds like a scene from a dystopian movie set in the future. Like a park in a city where the populace has lost its soul and everything is sterile and white and hopeless.
I would vandalize that positive reinforcement robot with some choice Newspeak words of my own.
IF YOUR REPUTATION FALLS BELOW ZERO YOU WILL BE ENCOURAGED TOWARDS THE NEAREST CITIZEN ENHANCEMENT CENTER.
YOUR REMAINING REPUTATION IS 42.
What I'd like to know, as an American sitting literally a world away from the people under this system, is to what extent wealth and influence purchase a high social credit score? Some factors are obvious: those with more money are less likely to incur debts, for instance. But what about connections to administrators? I imagine there isn't a politician in all of China who doesn't magically have a sterling social credit score.
I wonder whether the net result is a society in which a high standing resulting from material and social wealth leads to perks that in turn lead to more material and social wealth.
He is on the travel ban list due to credit problems in China, yet apparently rich and free in the U.S.
The first released travel ban list has 169 names on it: https://www.creditchina.gov.cn/toutiaoxinwen/201806/t2018060...
(according to Google Translate) "On June 1, the first list of restricted-riding trains was publicized on the “Credit China” website. The list of public opinions contained a total of 169 persons, of which 21 were provided by the State Administration of Taxation, mainly involving non-payment or underpayment of tax payables, illegal receipts of value-added tax invoices, etc.; the CSRC provided 31 persons involved in overdue performance of securities and futures Responsible parties related to listed companies failed to fulfill their public commitments within the overdue period; the Civil Aviation Administration provided 86 people, mainly related to finding trouble in airplanes, blocking traffic in airport security, occupying, impinging on security inspection channels, and assaulting other people, and checking out carry-on countries in airport security inspections. Laws and regulations stipulate that dangerous goods (stuck lighters) are subject to administrative penalties; the railway company provides 31 people, mainly involving smoking on EMU trains or smoking in non-smoking areas of other trains, without ticket or station ) Travel by car and refusing to make up for tickets etc. The public can click https://hmd.creditchina.gov.cn/ to view."
Why do you have to wonder and why do you need to look to China to learn this? This is how America worked and works, way before China got to it.
I know it's hard to introspect and all, but I'm glad having a China that looks more like America (than before) is making Americans finally see our own country more clearly.
If you have 1000 million citizens, your social credit computation better have a sub-ppm false positive rate, or else you risk ostracizing thousands of innocent people.
Maybe on the whole it's worth it for the Chinese government.
Also, I wonder if increasing adoption of this system will create a black market of 'score hackers', people that try to fuzz the algo's into giving free or cheap social credit....
Only two countries have gotten to 1 billion inhabitants, and I'd say that the government of India is much less callous or calculating than that of China.
The founders of Communist Russia intended that the state be dissolved by 1980, that it be replaced by councils that work together in coöperation, such that everyone has a say. Did that bear fruit? No.
Did the founding fathers intend for the United States to spy on every single one of their citizens? No. Does it happen? Yes. Did the founding fathers intend for the state to be able to detain foreigners of the US indefinitely without trial? No. The patriot act allows it, however.
You cannot judge a country by founding principals and safeguards alone, they are easy to repeal and change; you can only judge a country on the current legislature and how much the current Constitution constrains the government.
System errors: falsely attributing you with certain penalties (or credits). The workaround here is the same as with a bank - provide a statement and a mechanism to dispute entries.
Fine errors: penalising you when you don't deserve it. This is like anything else in the justice system, although it has the advantage that it should be an accumulation of a larger number of smaller inputs (positive and negative), so individual errors should act like noise and remain negligible.
I seriously doubt that the Chinese government is interested in inviting dispute. Dispute is exactly what such a surveillance system is designed to suppress.
Well, Campbell's law...
> "The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor."
China doesn't have free speech or free press, so unfortunately a Chinese resident can only form "low-information" opinions about issues outside their immediate experience; as they spend their entire life under the brainwashing of an authoritarian government.
I've never heard an American or European say that (other than a case of hyperbole here or there. What could this refer to?
but is there really any doubt, at this point? the government seeks to control an ever-greater range of human behaviors, from the banal -- like borrowing an umbrella -- to the political.
it's unclear to me whether the chinese people want this sort of system for whatever reason or whether it's being forced onto them. what is clear to me is that this system would warrant a prompt and violent revolution if a similar implementation was attempted here.
once these systems take root, become normalized, and start to change the way that people behave, a society's chance at freedom is finished...
You have the modern mainland, which is where all these problems exist, the rural mainland which this probably doesn't affect as much, Hong Kong which is autonomous, and Chinese Taipei which might as well give up the ghost by this point.
These become indistinguishable by "manufacturing consent".
It doesn't take a genius to decide that you'd be better off consenting, whether that consent has been manufactured or outright enforced.
Perhaps others have not, considering the Post's dominance of the Google front page.
https://www.quora.com/Is-China-a-totalitarian-state
makes a good point:
> Authoritarian yes. Totalitarian, no.
> The difference between authoritarian and totalitarian is that in an authoritarian state, what is not banned is allowed. In a totalitarian one, what is not banned is required.
and that China is so much better than it was in the 1950s, that is deserves a better evaluation.
Still, from the perspective of a mostly-free society, the distinctions between Authoritarian and Totalitarian are blurred.
Different values for different folks. Some people are happy to live in conservative, stable, conformist, and low-risk societies (whether because they are brought up in such or not, though usually the former). Some people are not.
Where in society does 'untethered individual freedom' exist? I live in Canada, a very 'free' country, yet there are many rules and laws to follow. Enough that I probably break the law multiple times per day.
It's an old argument used by dictators to justify their repression: 'Individual freedom isn't our value; it's a Western thing.' But these are inalienable universal rights, not some cultural preference. If people want to live as the Chinese Communist Party says or in some other way, they have a right to the freedom, the self-determination, to make that choice.
The quote above is also obviously false. East Asia has free countries including Japan and South Korea. China has free regions, including Taiwan and, to an extent, Hong Kong. (Not coincidentally, these are by far the most prosperous political entities in East Asia.) The people of Taiwan and Hong Kong seem less than excited about giving up their freedom. Cultures all over the world implement and embrace these values, from East Asia to South Asia to Europe to almost all of the Americas. The only ones who don't are those who aren't given a choice.
There's never been any doubt among people who know China's recent history.[0]
The problem is that for the most part, Americans under 30 or so don't know about it. They are frequently confused when I remind them that China is communist. They grew up thinking of it as just another country, but with a slightly different government system. Like Germany or Japan.
If you tell them that the Chinese government murdered millions of its own people, they're dumbfounded until they, themselves, look it up.
The path that China is taking isn't a surprise to most older people (including diplomats and politicians). And it's why China is working so hard to whitewash its global repuration where it can, or attempt to erase history, where it's able.
Sadly, this turn of events was not unexpected.