I'm tired and I don't feel like thinking right now, so this is going to be pretty light. I wanted to write about work, but that strikes me as a poor idea in a world where thoughts and words are taken to mean much more when shared than when kept to oneself. I suppose that's fair in a sense, because we cannot yet infiltrate one anothers' minds, so there is a physical difference in how thoughts shared versus thoughts guarded affect the universe. Maybe in the not so distant future, privacy will be inverted such that you only have privacy so far as others grant it to you out of respect for social norms. This likely would not go far, since many people would be curious enough to pry even with strong social norms in place, so you'd be at the mercy of a second level social norm where people didn't act on the information that they gained through prying unless they were trying to help you. Even then it seems obvious that most people would occassionally and some people would often invade with the intent of using the information moreso for themself than for the invaded parties. All other things equal, by which I mean technologically static, you'd end up with a war of snooping thought technology against snooping detection technology.

The winning side would swing back and forth, but it would be possible to judge the likelihood of an impending swing and act in accord, probabilistically. The people who were best at taking advantage of prying would still exist on both sides of the goal spectrum (self- serving to altruistic), but social norms would likely drive the balance of such snoopers toward the self-serving side. This perhaps mirrors today's imbalance of power in the hands of those who are greedy and self-serving versus those who are philanthropic and kind-hearted. In many cases, to cultivate a balanced, we should encourage the shirking of social norms in favor of social outreach spurred on by what would otherwise seem to be vices. Even if exhibiting vices emphasizes the internalization of the vices themselves, the social normative aspect of virtue ought to be in the other direction and therefore potentially be able to counteract the natural reinforcing feedback loop. An experiment seems necessary; I should try to find one.