Invisible Slavery System - II
First of all, an "invisible puzzle" is just that, a puzzle that is invisible without some special way to view it. As it pertains to my theory, "invisible puzzle" more specifically refers to the deniable lines of function that are hidden inside the products and systems that we interact with. These invisible puzzles are there to control us in very direct tangible ways while shedding off proof of the real purposes behind them.
For example, when the bank processes several checks in one day for a specific customer they now wait to the end of the day and sort them by size, biggest first, smallest last. Many people wait to the last minute to deposit their money, so an unsuspecting customer walks in during the day and deposits the amount to cover the checks, asks for his balance, and breathes a sigh of relief to see that he was in time. The balance according to the deposit slip is in the black. He goes home with the feeling that everything is in order. However, the checks that were held to the end of the day can be back-posted to a time before the deposit, since that is when they really came in. So the customer's account is then returned to the red prior to his deposit, as the checks that were not reflected before are back-posted. Then these checks get posted in size order instead of chronological order, causing the most possible overdrafts to be generated. Then as the overdraft fees stack up, the customer's account goes further negative than it would have otherwise, making the deposit ineffective at stopping subsequent overdrafts from the following day's checks. The customer's account spins out of control by potentially hundreds of dollars without his immediate knowledge so that he won't know in time to fix it before the full damage takes place. The combination of these things cause overdraft income to increase three to four times on average. And that's if he deposited cash. If he deposited a check then the deposit may post three days later (an arbitrary decision on the part of the bank) - and it doesn't matter if it’s from a bank across the street. You could have just walked the cash across the street but that makes no difference to the bank. Sure, the bank can make any rule it wants, and the customer is legally at fault for letting his/her account go negative. But then the bank purposely manipulates their paperwork to triple their income from it. And they do it legally. How? All they had to do to triple their overdraft income was to issue a notice to their customers stating something to the effect: "From this point forward, in an effort to better serve our customers, whenever there are multiple checks to process in the same day we will process the biggest one first, the second biggest one second, and so on, processing the smallest one last. In this way if there are insufficient funds you are more likely to get your most important check through, such as your mortgage or car payment." This notice makes it impossible for the customer to accuse the bank of manipulating the paperwork for profit. The deniable alternate purpose (manipulation of paperwork to triple overdraft profits) is hidden behind a perception cloak (the statement that the change in calculations is to get your most important check through). As a result, this situation becomes an invisible puzzle.
Invisible puzzles are used to manipulate, although difficult to prove as the stated purpose makes the potentially manipulative purpose deniable.
For example, when the bank processes several checks in one day for a specific customer they now wait to the end of the day and sort them by size, biggest first, smallest last. Many people wait to the last minute to deposit their money, so an unsuspecting customer walks in during the day and deposits the amount to cover the checks, asks for his balance, and breathes a sigh of relief to see that he was in time. The balance according to the deposit slip is in the black. He goes home with the feeling that everything is in order. However, the checks that were held to the end of the day can be back-posted to a time before the deposit, since that is when they really came in. So the customer's account is then returned to the red prior to his deposit, as the checks that were not reflected before are back-posted. Then these checks get posted in size order instead of chronological order, causing the most possible overdrafts to be generated. Then as the overdraft fees stack up, the customer's account goes further negative than it would have otherwise, making the deposit ineffective at stopping subsequent overdrafts from the following day's checks. The customer's account spins out of control by potentially hundreds of dollars without his immediate knowledge so that he won't know in time to fix it before the full damage takes place. The combination of these things cause overdraft income to increase three to four times on average. And that's if he deposited cash. If he deposited a check then the deposit may post three days later (an arbitrary decision on the part of the bank) - and it doesn't matter if it’s from a bank across the street. You could have just walked the cash across the street but that makes no difference to the bank. Sure, the bank can make any rule it wants, and the customer is legally at fault for letting his/her account go negative. But then the bank purposely manipulates their paperwork to triple their income from it. And they do it legally. How? All they had to do to triple their overdraft income was to issue a notice to their customers stating something to the effect: "From this point forward, in an effort to better serve our customers, whenever there are multiple checks to process in the same day we will process the biggest one first, the second biggest one second, and so on, processing the smallest one last. In this way if there are insufficient funds you are more likely to get your most important check through, such as your mortgage or car payment." This notice makes it impossible for the customer to accuse the bank of manipulating the paperwork for profit. The deniable alternate purpose (manipulation of paperwork to triple overdraft profits) is hidden behind a perception cloak (the statement that the change in calculations is to get your most important check through). As a result, this situation becomes an invisible puzzle.
Invisible puzzles are used to manipulate, although difficult to prove as the stated purpose makes the potentially manipulative purpose deniable.
posted by Emmett Dabru at 2:49 PM
