|
|
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ We can start from the textbf{state}, and we can notice that it has been the firs
|
|
|
Then there are the privates, or in other words the big internet \textbf{corporations}, that make the surveillance possible by enacting the data surveillance over our communications and personal data. This category is of course mapped on the priests, thus the name of the presentation itself.\\
|
|
|
The last actor is identified with the \textbf{society} itself, and is naturally mapped with the family in the previous case. It is thanks to this last actor, that is possible to realize and to impose the surveillance culture, thanks to which the systems sustains itself, being feed with all the data provided by ourself.\\
|
|
|
This concludes the mapping of actors between the two scenario. We can see that, even by not agreeing completely with the point of view and the passages of Biondi, the similarities are very well highlighted. The conclusions that the presenter draws are more radical, and I'll briefly talk about them since, even not being essential for the following of the analysis, can help in understanding the previous mapping.\\
|
|
|
-Biondi says that in some studies have been enlightened that the birth of capitalism brought with itself the concept of the body seen as a \textbf{tool of performance}, and this also concurred in the crusade against onanism, since the possibility of behaviors that in some way could intact the abilities of the body to perform were seen much more in a negative way.\\
|
|
|
+Biondi says that in some studies has been enlightened that the birth of capitalism brought with itself the concept of the body seen as a \textbf{tool of performance}, and this also concurred in the crusade against onanism, since the possibility of behaviors that in some way could intact the abilities of the body to perform were seen much more in a negative way.\\
|
|
|
Capitalism also in some way brings the idea that private vice is transformed in \textbf{public good} or virtue through commerce. And in the digital age we may withdraw the conclusion that opposing to the free circulation of information can be destructive for the good of the society and stop this creation of public virtue, or, written in another way, public security. This ultimately brings us to the commodification of everything, even private and social aspects of our lives.\\
|
|
|
This last point of view seems to be based on a too huge leap. Personally, looking at our society I don't think that these conclusions are so unreasonable, but for sure they need another type of discussion, and they also touch other big and debated ethical issues, that can't be discussed here. As said before these last conclusions are not essentials to the following of the discussion, probably even Biondi knows that these conclusions are too stretched, but she tried to sketch some possible discussion points for further analysis and discussions.\\
|
|
|
What I think is important to keep from this section is the comparison between two at first sight completely different scenarios, and the problem that in this kind of surveillance culture we are giving up some rights over our privacy like that could affect our relationships as highlighted by Rachels \cite{privacyimportant}, and in the next section we'll try to go further and try to sketch some other implications and issues.
|
