[HN Gopher] Trading trust
___________________________________________________________________
Trading trust
Author : ingve
Score : 109 points
Date : 2024-02-16 09:38 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (seths.blog)
(TXT) w3m dump (seths.blog)
| bell-cot wrote:
| Double plus ungood. History suggests that when the social trust
| goes away, the society will too.
| TomSwirly wrote:
| That the US military is the most trusted organization in America
| after losing one war after another against developing countries
| with Bronze Age technology simply astonishes me.
| flashfaffe2 wrote:
| Would be interested to know how this was computed. I guess this
| was a kind of survey and if so, based on the question: are
| proud of the US army or are you supporting us army action
| around the world then I wouldn't be surprised to observe
| difference.
| grotorea wrote:
| Couldn't find detailed questions for the study, but it says
| they literally asked for their level of confidence
|
| > In each survey, we asked respondents about their levels of
| confidence in a host of American institutions, as well as
| their personal policy preferences, their views on the
| direction of the country, their support for particular
| democratic norms, their use of social and traditional media,
| and a wide range of other questions.
| bell-cot wrote:
| Whether or not this poll tries to distinguish such details,
| social "trust" is many-dimensional.
|
| For the military, the most critical forms of trust are "don't
| attempt to coerce or overthrow our government", and "credibly
| wage war against our enemies if and when called upon to do so".
|
| Being able to nation-build in Afghanistan, under a delusional
| do-gooder mandate, is not important. For as long as their
| orders were (in effect) "pretend it's possible", they more-or-
| less tried.
| nindalf wrote:
| If anything they took trying their best to the extreme. They
| would try no matter the odds, to the point where they would
| want to stay and try to "win" in Iraq and Afghanistan no
| matter the situation. The solution to every problem was to
| throw more soldiers into the fight.
|
| Whereas only a commander in chief who isn't from a military
| background can say "no, we lost this one, time to take the L
| and pull out".
|
| But that's good I guess. A military that tries its best to
| finish the mission and a commander answerable to the people.
| jandrewrogers wrote:
| The US military as an institution has a long history and is
| notable as one of the few highly visible parts of US government
| that goes to great lengths to be apolitical and at arm's reach
| from the political parties. They do what they are asked to do,
| usually competently.
|
| Most sensible people realize that the outcome of campaigns is a
| political decision, not a military one. The US military
| generally wins every battle they are in but they don't get to
| choose how to execute a campaign.
| debok wrote:
| Am I reading that graph right? That confidence dropped in all the
| measured categories? That's wild.
| bell-cot wrote:
| It's the American Institutional Confidence Poll
|
| And from the Brookings (linked) article: "For the results we
| describe below, we rely on a two-wave panel survey in which the
| same respondents were interviewed twice: first pre-COVID in
| June and July 2018 and then in the midst of the COVID pandemic
| in July-October 2021."
|
| That really was not a good time period for institutional trust
| in America.
| EchoChamberMan wrote:
| you are reading that right!
|
| "double plus ungood" as mentioned on the root.
| tveita wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-trust_and_low-trust_socie...
|
| Trust is a technology, the transition to a high-trust society
| unlocks so much potential that was previously used on "basic"
| tasks like guarding your property, making sure your food is fit
| to eat, not getting scammed in a trade etc.
|
| Bruce Schneier has written a book about trust
| https://www.schneier.com/books/liars-and-outliers/ ; I don't want
| to oversell it, I didn't find it _amazing_ , but it has some very
| relevant discussion on how trust has _evolved_ into our society
| and institutions. Ultimately a society where people can 't trust
| each other and communicate efficiently will be outcompeted by a
| society where people can, either through individual altruism,
| societal norms or institutional enforcement.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| Trust is a valuable and precarious thing, It's hard and slow to
| build but easy to destroy. It's our greatest advantage against
| authoritarian regimes, and that's why destroying trust is a
| long term strategy of non-linear warfare against our culture.
|
| Like fossil fuels that take millions of years to form, but can
| be burned in half a century, trust is burned (enshitification)
| as cheap accumulated social capital by those without higher
| loyalty. This for me is why financialisation sucks the life out
| of nations and why greedy and selfish big-tech companies are
| some of the most treacherous of all entities.
| graemep wrote:
| Fiancialisation and short term incentives are part of the
| problem, but not all of it.
|
| In tech (and increasingly elsewhere) businesses have realised
| there are other ways to keep repeat customers without needing
| customer trust: lock-in, buying out competitors, network
| effects, being the best for long enough to obliterate
| competition (at least in customer's minds), branding tied to
| identity etc. Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Google etc. have very
| little to gain from trust or products that are better for
| consumers as people will use their products regardless.
| ghaff wrote:
| Of course businesses require some level of trust. If Amazon
| simply took your money half the time and didn't ship your
| order, they would have problems. Of course, we can debate
| the degree to which they should be selective about and have
| more controls over third-party shippers, etc. But tradeoffs
| (and there are almost always tradeoffs) are different from
| saying that trust doesn't play a role at all.
| graemep wrote:
| Yes, but I am talking abut the long term trust the
| article talks about not rip offs that are quickly
| apparent to customers.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| > long term trust the article talks about
|
| Yes this goes beyond ordinary sharp practices. A larger,
| more dangerous phenomenon nibbles at our way of life.
|
| A couple of buzzwords/concepts rattling around my circles
| are "epistemic trust" and "systemic abuse" [0], the
| former is an effect of the latter. To cultivate it, in
| old-fashioned psyops talk, is "sapping". Epistemic
| mistrust changes the way we process all future
| information and is long lasting.
|
| [0] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psych-
| unseen/202012/...
| opportune wrote:
| The level of trust in society is game theoretical and unstable
| at the extremes. I don't really consider it technology either,
| you can easily envision hunter gatherers having high or low
| trust perspectives towards other bands based on eg prior
| interactions, shared language/beliefs/culture. Calling this
| technology is like calling language technology, maybe it is,
| but I think it's also something we developed evolutionarily
| because it was advantageous.
|
| From the game theory perspective, a high trust society makes it
| easy for bad actors to abuse that trust for personal gain,
| which at large scale lowers trust at the societal level. A low
| trust society incentivizes people to build subcommunities of
| higher trust to get things done (which can grow to encompass
| lots of society) or can be outcompeted by a higher trust
| society, as you say. Maybe this is all covered in that book.
|
| Clearly there is enough variance to say that societies do not
| all gravitate towards a fixed equilibrium though. I think a lot
| of this is due to institutions (eg religion, government,
| educational systems, militaries) and cultural factors (some
| cultures value cunning and ruthlessness, others conformity,
| etc. which can be influenced even by language or the physical
| environment). Many edgy internet commenters seem to equate
| low/high trust with race and ethnicity, but if you have ever
| been in a well run technology company or the US military, or a
| low-trust homogenous society, you'll see this obviously wrong.
|
| What I've been thinking about a lot lately while I bootstrap is
| whether it's possible for a group to be resilient to "selfish"
| bad actors by making cooperation strictly more optimal than
| defection. At small scales I think this can be accomplished
| through a BDFL but I'm really interested in figuring out if
| another approach can scale into the ~thousands.
| whatshisface wrote:
| What concerns me is the possibility of a zero-trust society
| that nonetheless shambles onward by having a lot of law
| enforcement. It's kind of like that in Russia, where you're
| often buying adulterated foods at the grocery store, but
| there is nothing you can do about it and the mafia (a.k.a.
| the government) won't let it get bad enough to outright kill
| everyone. So, it goes on forever. China might be another
| example, where the history of communism followed by
| capitalism under cultural authoritarianism has virtually
| eliminated the social fabric, but the system clings on
| through extraordinary measures.
|
| In fact, if you look at these "low-trust" societies, all of
| them have some reason why they haven't been replaced by the
| high-trust subcultures that you mentioned, reasons usually
| involving guns.
| drewcoo wrote:
| "Trust is a technology?"
|
| I had no idea that other social animals were so high-tech!
| eimrine wrote:
| Why there is no any religion organizations? Afaik USA is a deeply
| religious nation.
| darrmit wrote:
| The religious "trust" scale would likely look largely the same.
| While "deeply religious" may have been the reality for the US
| at one point, I think it would be hard to argue that with each
| generation we don't move a little further away from that. As
| someone who was previously "deeply religious" and am now "non-
| religious", I still wrestle with whether that's a good thing or
| not.
| Nevermark wrote:
| The politicization of religion could be argued to be a
| detriment to the country and also to religion.
|
| The partisan side of politics (as apposed to the policy and
| persuation sides) has a way of undermining or sidelining the
| virtues, and the ability to operate with nuance, for any
| movement that over-identifies with either party.
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| There are some definite benefits to religion. It _can_
| promote a sense of place and belonging in people, facilities
| communities, cooperation, etc.
|
| It can also do the exact opposite at times. It will be
| interesting to see how it all plays out in the long run.
| whatshisface wrote:
| Virtually any organization can promote a sense of place and
| belonging in people, facilitate communities, encourage
| cooperation, etc. Only one type of organization does it by
| arranging very serious lectures about things that didn't
| happen.
| CM30 wrote:
| Watching large tech companies seemingly just destroy everyone's
| trust in them has been equal parts fascinating and depressing to
| see. People actually liked Google, Amazon, Facebook, etc at one
| point. Sure, they didn't like them all equally, (Google's
| reputation was usually a lot better than Facebook/Meta's), but
| there was something of an expectation that they did good work and
| offered good products/services.
|
| Now it seems an increasing percentage of the population outright
| loathe them, and see them as basically everything wrong with the
| modern internet. Criticism of Google search is way more common
| now, criticism of Google shutting down products quickly is way
| more common, complaints about knockoffs and poor quality goods on
| Amazon are way more common, etc.
|
| It's just wild to see.
| euroderf wrote:
| A contributing factor might be the financialization of
| everything, including SV.
| jerf wrote:
| I think the "financialization" and the mindset it comes with
| is a major contributor to the ability of executives to sit in
| a board room and with deliberation choose to trade trust for
| money.
|
| More old-fashioned and perhaps less "sophisticated" ways of
| doing business might just bluntly prioritize trust over many
| other things, and leave money on the table in the short term.
| It isn't just that they choose maintaining trust over making
| the most possible money, it is that they lack the toolset to
| even really conceptualize what they could make by breaking
| trust.
|
| Not modern MBAs, though. They'll quantify how much trust
| you're trading away for how much money no sweat. Even if
| they're wrong about the exact values they sure are completely
| capable of conceptualizing the question, and if they notice
| the externality of transferring a general lack of trust onto
| the society around them, well, so much the better for being
| able to monetize an externality, which is the
| financialization equivalent of hitting the jackpot.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| I wouldn't entirely blame the executives though, there are
| 192 other countries in the world, and eventually their
| counterparts in at least one of them would do the same if
| they didn't.
|
| It's a coordination problem since there's no way to ensure
| honesty is 100% rewarded 100% of the time even within the
| US, let alone across the Earth.
| lukas099 wrote:
| Was Silicon Valley not financialized before? What changed
| exactly?
| JackC wrote:
| I think I had a set of wrong heuristics that were like,
| companies won't break the thing that made them rich. Google
| won't blur the line between search and ads, Facebook won't be
| creepy about things you share, etc, I predicted, not because
| they're saints but because they'll build their processes around
| protecting the thing that made them dominant. I now have the
| opposite heuristic -- if a startup has a unique selling
| proposition, that's the thing that will be cashed in when the
| founders cash out.
| pgwhalen wrote:
| People definitely complain about Amazon in real life now, but
| is criticism of Google search something that actually happens
| outside of HN? It's not something I've seen.
| empath-nirvana wrote:
| Yes I have heard from multiple non-tech people that they only
| use chat gpt and never use google any more.
| CM30 wrote:
| It happens all the time, especially online. See lots of posts
| on social media sites about how Google Search is terrible now
| and how they can't find anything useful there. Heck, it's
| even gotta notable enough that even some of the folks most
| directly responsible for the issue (the SEO industry) are
| questioning Google's results quality now.
| _huayra_ wrote:
| I recently had to explain to some Gen-Z folks what things were
| like ~12 years ago when I worked for Twitter. Their initial
| reaction was as if I said "Yeah I worked for the Galactic
| Empire on the Deathstar project a while back".
|
| It was truly amazing that one could start / join a conversation
| with so many relevant and insightful folks (depends on the
| community; there was always useless noise). I remember trying
| to learn Erlang a bit and whenever I'd tweet something about
| it, Joe Armstrong himself would often start a short thread with
| me to resolve my misunderstanding.
|
| I think the term "enshittification" really covers the process
| well [0] to explain what happened.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification
| grotorea wrote:
| > The first is that focused and persistent propaganda is able to
| shift public opinion about institutions they don't have direct
| interaction with.
|
| I don't get why the author says this, confidence dropped for
| everyone. Who is doing this successful propaganda?
|
| And one interesting quote from the linked survey
|
| > Finally, the drops in American confidence may be merely
| harbingers of wider shifts across the globe, where these
| companies already operate and where the majority of their future
| growth is expected to arise. In a special report addended to
| their annual Trust Barometer, Edelman found that while technology
| remained the most trusted industry, 14 of their 22 sampled
| markets around the globe had reported drops in trust in tech
| companies since the year previous.8 While the U.S. experienced
| the largest drop, it was followed closely behind by most of the
| advanced democracies. In these countries, respondents also
| reported adopting new technology at a much lower level than in
| countries where tech confidence was higher. This is deeply
| problematic for companies whose rare new innovations require
| large-scale adoption to be profitable.
| skinkestek wrote:
| > > The first is that focused and persistent propaganda is able
| to shift public opinion about institutions they don't have
| direct interaction with.
|
| > I don't get why the author says this, confidence dropped for
| everyone.
|
| I stopped a little to think, and my answer is:
|
| Exactly. It wasn't what I started out with but I think it is a
| main takeaway:
|
| Our entire web of trust is torn apart.
|
| > Who is doing this successful propaganda?
|
| Our enemies. But they are being smart and lucky. As the
| Ukrainian meme goes: "we are lucky they are so #%$&@ stupid".
|
| Only here we are the stupid ones and russian and Chinese are
| the smart ones.
|
| They play both sides of BLM. They play both GOP and DEMs.
|
| They play anti-vaxxers - and get enourmous help from big tech
| ham fistedly like no others trying to help authorities in a way
| that even I as a vaccinated and boosted person find crazy.
|
| (What could they have done instead of trying to shut down
| discussion? It would probably have done wonders if tech execs
| and politicians had instead shown up in the regular queues for
| vaccinations. Adult Norwegians still know the reference about
| the King on the tram during the oil crisis half a century
| later.)
|
| Media in its chase for clicks also help them, tearing apart
| again and again trying to make sensations out of everything.
| mistermann wrote:
| It's certainly been a popular story in the press for many
| years now, but I remain skeptical.
|
| What percentage of the comprehensive causal chain do you
| attribute to foreign propaganda versus it simply being
| various domestic phenomena, and upon what do you base your
| calculations?
| efitz wrote:
| There are several different things going on in that poll, but
| nothing specifically points at propaganda as a cause of loss of
| trust.
|
| For public companies, the loss is likely just observable
| behavior - higher prices, worse service, etc. - and likely the
| root cause is poor incentive structure - incentivizing
| executives for short term profits over everything else.
|
| For government, the largest factors are likely (1) the way
| COVID was handled and (2) the behavior of the US federal
| government since the election of Donald Trump in 2016. Note
| that this is purely separate from trust in Trump himself, which
| is its own story but not in the poll. And Congress has always
| had extraordinarily low trust ratings, so no surprise there.
|
| The press is interesting. Likely there is some propaganda
| aspect there (I have no data but half the country detests the
| "mainstream media", sometimes with good cause). But I think
| that the main issue is likely that many press outlets have come
| out as naked partisans in the last decade.
|
| The main takeaway I got from this was that arguments from
| authority are going to be especially ineffective moving
| forward, no one is going to grant you credibility because of
| your position as government/press/scientist/doctor/whatever,
| because people have been abused too many times. And it will
| take decades to rebuild trust in existing institutions, and
| won't happen at all without significant transparency and
| reform.
| roenxi wrote:
| The article and the data in the graph are a little out of kilter.
| The data is suggesting that as people are becoming less trusting
| (I'd hazard because of better access to information through the
| internet).
|
| I don't think there is any strong evidence that the tech giants
| are trading in trust. It looks more like there is something
| bimodal happening where media companies have low trust (Google
| should probably converge to Twitter/Facebook levels of trust over
| time) and typical companies score a 2.6 (Amazon should probably
| converge to being about as trustworthy as a bank).
|
| It was never a sane position to believe these companies are
| unusually trustworthy. They are companies. Nothing special.
| Everything is smiles and sunshine while an industry is growing,
| the knives come out once there is a steady state and they
| corporate dynamics become a bit more fixed-pie. People had
| unrealistic expectations; that trust was never sustainable.
| bell-cot wrote:
| While you make some good points...there are good reasons why
| "enshittification" received a Word of the Year award within one
| year of being invented.
| macNchz wrote:
| > I'd hazard because of better access to information through
| the internet
|
| I'm not sure much changed with regard to access to information
| on the internet in the US between 2018 and 2021.
|
| > I don't think there is any strong evidence that the tech
| giants are trading in trust.
|
| There have been a number of lively discussions here on HN over
| the past few years about the volume of garbage and/or
| counterfeit products on Amazon, and their unwillingness to
| address essentially fraudulent activity re reviews and product
| listings among their marketplace sellers.
|
| Seeing this transition happen myself (as someone who got an
| Amazon rewards credit card in 2007, Prime in 2010) I absolutely
| viewed it as Amazon trading trust for short-term profits. Once
| upon a time I had trust that I could order from them without a
| huge amount of research and get quality, authentic products
| quickly. That has changed significantly, and I think broader
| sentiment is slowly catching up.
| philip1209 wrote:
| I've been thinking about how excess capitalism erodes trust. I
| believe capitalism is important and powerful, but it does cause
| people to be constantly fighting and trying to destroy each
| other. Plus, trust doesn't show up on a balance sheet - so might
| as well erode that to get some cash. Capitalism leads to Apple
| maintaining a 30% App Store take rate (thus eroding trust and
| perhaps sinking the launch of Vision Pro), profitable tech
| companies doing layoffs (thus eroding trust but increasing
| profits further), and military contractors building better
| killing tools (thus eroding trust but making more money).
| Perhaps, in an age where we have the technology to feed everybody
| in the world, we need to increase the societal guardrails to make
| people's lives more stable - and thus increase trust.
|
| Apparently Maslo updated his eponymous pyramid of needs before
| his death to add "Self-transendence" above "self-actualization"
| [1], which you could interpret as "moving from only caring about
| yourself to caring about other people." I think there's an angle
| here where perhaps the USA as a whole is stuck on "self-
| actualization", i.e. caring only about each person and individual
| success, and is failing to have a shared identity where people
| care about each other.
|
| If we don't solve our trust problem, I think people will stop
| having kids in the USA and we'll eventually end up like Japan -
| in population decline and having all the associated economic
| problems with it. I think that can be directly be linked to
| excess capitalism - if we focus so much on making money, then we
| don't have time (or stability or resources) to raise the next
| generation.
|
| [1] https://bigthink.com/neuropsych/maslow-self-transcendence/
| OkayPhysicist wrote:
| It's not just Capitalism, it's a symptom of all hierarchies.
| Hierarchies are a social contract, existing only so long as
| enough people are willing to participate. That will manifests
| differently at different layers of the hierarchy, with the
| downtrodden base class for instance mostly participating out of
| a resigned faith in the hierarchy's inevitability, but for
| those in the middle, the trust that their ongoing participation
| will be rewarded with both a share of the spoils of the
| hierarchy (extracted from the bottom classes) and the
| opportunity to advance up the hierarchy is CRUCIAL in
| maintaining the structure.
|
| The fatal flaw in all this is that the hierarchies provide
| perverse incentives at every level to hoard the benefits of
| participation to oneself. It's a tragedy of the commons
| situation, where any given individuals misbehavior in
| supporting the system is unlikely to break it, but if everyone
| does it absolutely will be shattered.
| dist-epoch wrote:
| Google less trusted than banks.
|
| Amazon about as trusted as banks.
|
| This is wild.
| jmrm wrote:
| It isn't for me. I would say I distrust Amazon as much as their
| bank (or vice versa).
|
| Maybe I won't believe my bank won't give me access to my money
| tomorrow, or I won't believe Amazon will keep my money and
| won't send me the product I bought, but I know my bank try at
| all cost to introduce me to products that won't benefit me as
| much but would benefit them a lot, and I know Amazon would post
| Chinese knock-off products aside legit ones without any way to
| filter them.
| lukas099 wrote:
| Is it even possible for an institution to build trust in the
| current environment? If not, doesn't it make sense for companies
| not to prioritize it?
| distortionfield wrote:
| It's absolutely possible, it's just hard, as all trust is.
| another_poster wrote:
| Trust involves multiple factors, e.g.,
|
| * Character. Is the public trusting? Are they anxious?
|
| * Framing. Is the institution described compassionately, for
| example, as a national champion or underdog? Or is it described
| as a villain?
|
| * Sectarianism. Are there motivated partisans who want to
| disparage the institution?
|
| * Evidence. What particular evidence exists for unethical
| behavior?
|
| * Ethics. What unethical behaviors have the institution done?
|
| I am skeptical that institutions have become less ethical today
| compared to the past (e.g., today we would be appalled if a
| European country waged war against another state to sell
| narcotics, but Britain literally did that 150 years ago), so I
| have a hunch that other factors are the primary drivers for
| declining trust.
| csours wrote:
| Every so often people point out that appliances are throw away
| crap.
|
| I'd love it if a brand just built good stuff - BUT - if they did,
| some corpo raider would look at that brand value and think about
| ways to juice it.
|
| It really makes me sick, you know.
|
| ---
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cqU1pFRqYE "Every morning
| there's a halo hanging from the corner of my girlfriend's four
| post bed"
|
| Everyone is trying to figure out how to juice everything.
|
| The military is at the top of the chart - think about the
| different ways politicians use that for their own purposes - not
| by deploying troops, but the feelings people have about 'the
| troops'.
| paultopia wrote:
| " Many companies, particularly tech ones, are deliberately
| trading trust for short-term profits."
|
| This is a general level dynamic. Leaders of all kinds of
| organizations, from companies to governments, need to build
| methods of self-control to force themselves to prefer their long-
| term interests (trusted brands, etc,) over their short term
| interests. That's basically what corporate governance is. It's
| also basically what constitutional law is, see the scholarship of
| folks like Jon Elster and Mancur Olson. (Source: my being a guy
| with a polisci phd.)
|
| Shameless self-promotion: I wrote about this dynamic as a major
| driver of platform governance challenges across social media as
| well as transactional platforms like Amazon in chapter 4 of _The
| Networked Leviathan: For Democratic Platforms_ (Cambridge
| University Press, August 2023). You can read an open access
| edition under a CC license for free at https://networked-
| leviathan.com/
|
| Cory Doctorow's "enshittification" framework is also a great way
| of explaining how these problems get worse as companies acquire
| market power.
| jonnycat wrote:
| I think there's another, more frightening takeaway from this -
| people are losing trust in everything. While you can argue on a
| case by case basis that it's all for good reason, it pretty much
| devolves into nihilism. More and more people are unwilling to
| believe _anything_ that, for example, the "media" says -
| regardless of how tame and reasonable the claim might be.
| yowayb wrote:
| I think we've been spoiled and lulled into trusting too much.
| While I agree it leads to nihilistic behavior, I think enough
| people will simply be more careful and companies will have to
| get better, including the technical part that the top comment
| mentions. Similarly, I think we've been too willing to believe
| anything the media or advertisers say. I'm in my 40s now and I
| look back and feel embarrassed at all the things media and ads
| told me that I believed.
| EchoChamberMan wrote:
| While it's true people are losing trust, it's because
| companies, or more realistically, the people running those
| companies, are no longer trustworthy. I don't want news
| "claims," I want investigative reporting that presents multiple
| facets of an argument, conclusions are ok, so I can understand,
| integrate, and draw my own conclusions.
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| Robert Putnum saw this coming a decade ago and was denounced as
| a Nazi for his research, which his critics couldn't refute but
| name calling was enough. Now a decade later, people are even
| more cowered and unable to even think about speaking the truth
| or somehow their souls will be destroyed. It's amazing how
| people can see it happening right in front of their faces and
| deny what their own senses are telling them.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| _> Once you burn some trust, it's almost impossible to earn it
| back._
|
| The old saying is that it takes years to build trust, and seconds
| to lose it.
|
| In my own life, I have tried to live a life of personal
| Integrity. It's pretty disheartening, when some people treat me
| as if I'm being "snotty," and assume that there's no such thing
| as Personal Integrity (There is such a thing; I assure you).
|
| But most folks seem to appreciate it. I sleep well.
| drewcoo wrote:
| Isn't this just the other side of trading privacy away? Most of
| the groups in the chart also harvest what was once private.
|
| We trade our privacy for "free" goods. We are then constantly
| surveilled.
|
| The institutions doing the surveillance can better gauge how much
| trust they can afford to trade for profit.
|
| If this isn't their profit model, what is?
| roosgit wrote:
| "Trust grows at the speed of a coconut tree and falls at the
| speed of a coconut."
|
| I remember this from the book Alchemy by Rory Sutherland.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-02-16 23:01 UTC)