Context : CollectiveIntelligence
Does technology make it easier to enforce or break laws?
Or rather, technology empowers individuals. Does it make it easier for fewer in a minority, to attack and destroy the majority consensus?
Or does it empower the majority to keep the minorities in check?
Dana thinks this question is over-simplistic.
First, technology does increase the need for consensus, rather than narrow majorities, in order to hold society together, because the percentage of "objectors" needed to threaten society does go down as technological sophistication increases. This is not a bad thing. In fact, consensus is far more stable than democracy. Consensus is what keeps the Internet together.
Second, civilization is analog, not digital. The alternative to the absolute triumph of law and order is not chaos. We're talking about a much more complex structure. A certain amount of chaos must be acceptable in order for progress to continue. Shrinkage is natural. We work to balance shrinkage with costs in all our enforcement efforts. It's the only rational way to go.
See also :