I agree it's a useful distinction. Neither are epiphenomena in the "unintentional" sense. In the Snowden case, it's difficult for me to imagine Snowden, as a whistleblower who felt he had to escape from one "oppressive" regime to take harbor in another oppressive regime, *not* having thought explicitly about any chilling effect such a blown whistle would have. He's too smarmy for me to credit him with naivete. And the NSA may have more stupid members than we think (http://harmful.cat-v.org/people/basic-laws-of-human-stupidity/); but most of us know that measuring a system often modifies the system being measured.
But your use of "investment" helps lay out, perhaps, that there are *categories* of side effect, in the "additional" or "secondary" sense. At least: • don't care • nice to have • collateral damage I still argue as I did with SteveS, that such a concept, qualified with categories or not, is only relevant in a closed game or axiomatic system. In an open game, those categories explode and cross over too much for any of it to be useful. I.e. epiphenomenon is a useless concept in any real world context. On 11/12/21 8:15 AM, Jon Zingale wrote: > I can see that I was being too clumsy. In the SLAPP case and the > SB8 case chilling is pretty straightforward, but in the case I linked[☃] > (which jumps to a highlighted section "Chilling effects on Wikipedia > users" on the Wikipedia page for *chilling effect*) I see an example > where I don't believe that Wikipedia, Snowden, nor the NSA had any > investment in chilling out Wikipedia users. Instead, it seems more like > a novel side effect, a consequence of the subject matter, many citizens > perceptions of their government, and a revelation of information. > So I suppose like anything, things may have side effects, and I am not > sure it contributes anything to mention it. > > Comparing "Wikipedia Foundation versus NSA" with the *Clear Channel > memorandum*[♪] is interesting to me (a sarcastic thanks again to the > Telecomm act[⏚]). There, a decision was made to preemptively chill the > radio of its "affects and percepts"[D]. I'm not entirely sure what the > concerning response to hearing Lennon's "Imagine" was supposed to be and > less so for "She's not there" by the Zombies. > > [☃] > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect#:~:text=13%5D%5Bfailed%20verification%5D-,Chilling%20effects%20on%20Wikipedia%20users,-%5Bedit%5D > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect#:~:text=13%5D%5Bfailed%20verification%5D-,Chilling%20effects%20on%20Wikipedia%20users,-%5Bedit%5D> > [♪] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_Channel_memorandum > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_Channel_memorandum> > [⏚] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996 > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996> > [D] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affect_(philosophy)#In_Deleuze_and_Guattari > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affect_(philosophy)#In_Deleuze_and_Guattari> -- "Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie." ☤>$ uǝlƃ .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
