First: I think this comment should be a daily post on HN - a staple mantra of sorts, until it dents the stolid bonehead of collective consciousness. Glad it's top comment, even if the lasers got less light...

Secondly to everyone; my admittedly and hopefully incorrect perspective deduced from such examples (there are many) is that there is a quiet, surreptitious attitude in elite tech that if there's adequate intelligence to get away with something profitable, it's unconditionally fair to do so - so long as it's not explicitly illegal in a way that can't be bypassed by any conceivable means. I immediately think of a common tendency for (most?) humans to justify the often grotesque treatment of animals in some industrial environments, which seems based on, rather than any baseline of decency, the intelligence of the creatures vs humans and final satisfaction of the debateably necessary end product; eg the same exact actions by an individual done for recreational purposes would be a felony. But I strongly suspect this attitude readily crosses the species gap and much of humanity is viewed thusly. They're dumb, vulnerable, ignorant, defenseless, etc, so let's squeeze em for all we can!$$$! Who wants to be millionaire?

Because I perceive much of modern tech as exploitative and even parasitic, I wonder what a comparison between pretech and modern tech exploitation might reveal about the LTS version of ethics vs beta. I suspect that historically, exploitation was more kinetic, unambiguous, conspicuous and effort oriented, whereas modern versions are more ethereal and can take place remotely on an LCD screen pretty passively. In the past, a person typically required persuasion or proximity to make divulge unamiable information. Now, it is involuntarily invisibly siphoned and reapplied to them often undetectably, systematically. I suspect a novel form of unchecked pathological detachment in the ever-growing tech industry, when billions can be rapidly affected by simply executing a blob of effective code, and the consequences reaped as bank deposits, preferred coups, mass behavioral changes, etc. In this environment, even good-natured people can do bad natured shit while keeping ostensibly clean hands and feeling dignified - it's detached, and it's a job. Though I fear a serious diversion between what ought to be more parallel vectors of ethics and development/advancement. A rapidly accelerating diversion. Would this newfangled wizbang be more fugly if viewed holistically and are we weaving a labyrinth of inextricable connections that will only make less and less sense if viewed so? Is there really a future in merchandising every aspect of ourselves, selves that are targets themselves, intended to be corralled into market categories of exteriorly defined self?

There are obvious complexities with concepts mentioned, in a nascent world where so many trades and crafts are becoming obsolete and people need to survive or thrive by any means necessary, increasingly digitally so. There's actually great incentive to produce really clever but dubious shit. I can't help but see an epoch of anomie, of unprecedented fundamental changes in self perception and values, a new human resulting. I don't presume to predict the consummation of this, but sure wouldn't mind skipping the median phase. I'll now tuck my cauda and hide, but with a question:

We see that as modern technology develops, the individual is and has been adapting to decreasing influence of presence and control of it, both in personal and external application. If this trend continues, what are we getting ourselves into? Are we leaping into a collectively agreed-upon, consensually interpreted greater humanity that I wasn't informed of? Or are we a moth in deep space, fluttering toward a new light every moment with no shortage of singularities?