Existentialists fully expect “the internet of things” to be the picture of The Scream. There is an expected pattern of probability.
There is the angst of a failed expectation that forms the probability (the knowledge) of the risk (and thus responsibility for its use).
The painting of The Scream, remember, is an existential expression. It expressed a vanishing expectation.
Science and technology would be the natural law (the grace of God) that encourages the angels of our better nature. WWI, however, saw employing the promise of natural providence to be the new means to self-destructive ends. The wonder of knowing the secrets of nature became the shock-and-awe picture of “The Scream.”
It’s a predictable pattern of probability we see today. The “promise” of coded compression becomes the “compromise” of a newly expected risk.
So, what the hack!
Despite the probable risk, we do the detriment anyway.
Naturally, we are “technologically pulled” into the means of our own devices. “The medium is the message.” We are technically “determined” to confirm “being” the object of a natural existence…an “if-then” statement (a categorical imperative) that, given the capacity to determine it, demands we recognize the existence of moral values that form objective reality.
Yes, we are determined to live within the means of our own devices, describing patterns of existence that prescribe patterns of resistance.
Notice how capitalism, for example, rewards technological advance with the measure (the advantage) of success but then must “react” to resist the probable use (the authority) of its current value to conserve the probable advantage by determining the propriety of its use.
Nations encourage authoring apps, but then ban the authority (the value) of their proper use on demand.
(In America, use-value is being reduced to “fast or slow” in the name of free-market efficiency, determined by the ability to pay, being reduced closer and closer to zero for most people by “the internet of things.”)
Propriety exists in the the alpha-risk dimension. Resistance supports the predictable, probable pattern of its use (the categorical imperative of its utility) authored on demand.
Propriety determines the utility of the risk.
Proprietary risk is something each person owns with common divisibility. The less proprietary risk a person has, the more probable the resistance to its authority in the collective-common, gamma-risk dimension.
Risk that goes gamma measures the failed expectations, and natural instability, of the social contract. As the cost of the contractual obligation gets closer and closer to zero, built-out and routinely tasked, the means to that end become more and more unstable, which typically exists, over time, on command with a false, on-demand attribution, giving cause for resistance.
(Articles on “proprietary risk” by griffithlighton can be found on the World Wide Web.)
While the medium of change advances, the patterns of probability remain the same, which is the message.