Civic Hygiene: Don't Build Tech That Could Enable a Police State
Civic Hygiene – avoid building technologies that could be used by a police state
In this thought-provoking piece, Terence Eden warns against creating technologies that could be easily misused by a future authoritarian government. Drawing on the example of a government database tracking citizens' sexuality, he argues that even well-intentioned data collection can become a tool of oppression if power changes hands. Citing Bruce Schneier's concept of 'civic hygiene,' Eden urges developers and policymakers to consider the potential for abuse in any system they build, emphasizing that we must not trust that the next government will be as benign as the current one.
It's bad civic hygiene to build technologies that could someday be used to facilitate a police state.
- gmerc
Harder than it looks. Everything is dual use. Certainly didn't expect my game development telemetry[1] system used to improve artillery [2]...
[1] https://gdcvault.com/play/1012227/Development-Telemetry-in-V...
[2] https://www.army.mil/article/85934/solution_to_weapon_develo...
- roughly
The other rule here is that you cannot avoid politics if you want to create a better world. If you want the freedom to develop technology without worrying it will be used by a police state, you need to put in the work to make sure a police state doesn't happen - you cannot ignore politics and just "focus on technology."
- bad_haircut72
Recently my wife got locked out of her bank account - all cards blocked, unable to log in to the website or app, so effectively her whole finances were frozen - because she was trying to order a new bank card over the phone and some system couldnt do voice recognition (which we did not know they even used). We were getting ready to get on a plane to NYC, from California (she banks with TD bank) but after a tearful session of phoning anyone and everyone we could at TD, suddenly it magically got reversed.
The problem is not just the tech, its building systems where humans are essentially slaves to the system, with no recourse or power over whats happening.
- not_wyoming
This entire thread is such a strong case for why all undergrad CS programs should have a core requirement of at least one ethics course.
- limagnolia
The automobile, the transistor, the Internet, and basically every other technology ~could~ be used by a police state. I'm not sure how that is a helpful rule at all.
- codeulike
I'm in the UK and it always seems weird to me how in the USA its totally normal to publically register yourself as either a Democrat or a Republican. To me seems like the kind of thing that should be private. In the UK I might choose to be a member of a political party but no-one needs to know that except that particular party. Or I can just join no party and vote in private on polling day.
- gumby271
I've been arguing with folks on Reddit about this lately when it comes to Google's changes to Android (where they've made it more difficult to install any software on your device without Google first tracking the identity of the developer). My argument ultimately comes down to the fact that Google (and Apple already) have built a technology that gives them immense power to control individual computing freedoms, and no matter their internal policy, they still must follow US law. No amount of promises or legit good faith on their part matter, they've made a dangerous technology and are behold to a government that is very eager to censor anything it doesn't like. It's so disappointing to see 1. Google engineers build such a thing, and 2. For people to support it.
- cupcakecommons
Defaulting to discussing the US here: let's start with reducing the state's size - it shouldn't be the world's largest employer, it shouldn't be able to run an unfathomably large deficit, it shouldn't be able to declare war without congressional approval. Technology to run a police state is just the last step in a long line of ridiculously unacceptable steps.
- Xeoncross
I'm a tech worker.
I'm given a promotion for adding invasive features based on "insights".
I'm incentivized to create something patent-able to restrict competition.
I'm rewarded for more detailed metrics to reveal more.
I'm hired by how many people were affected by my previous work regardless of ethics.
There is no reward for protection, privacy, and restricting access to data.
- PaulRobinson
This is missing the "(2013)" at the end of the HN link, but it does seem weirdly prescient as we say a rise of more polarised politics across the World, just 13 years later.