Freedom, Consumerism, and the Price of Traces

Freedom is frequently treated as abstract and undefinable in discussions of human experience. When examining physical objects, however, we refer to degrees of freedom—ranges of movement and possibility. This distinction matters: freedom isn't abstract but an attribute defining the capacity to change within specific conditions. Greater degrees of freedom demand more learning, higher skill, and increased effort to maintain control.

Consumerism and Instant Feedback

Consumerism doesn't require instant feedback. One of the internet's capabilities involves accessing information silently, without leaving traces, without explicit requests—when information is publicly available. This silent access functions as both benefit and risk. The same mechanism enabling anonymous learning can also facilitate data leaks and privacy violations when combined with authoritarian social structures.

The tension between silent access and traceability creates a fundamental conflict in how we interact with digital spaces. We value the ability to learn without leaving footprints, yet modern systems are built on the assumption that every interaction should be tracked, measured, and monetized.

This conflict extends beyond technology to the realm of human relationships. When we engage with others—whether in professional or personal contexts—we navigate similar tensions: the desire for connection versus the need for boundaries, the value of transparency versus the cost of vulnerability. These tensions shape not just how we use technology, but how we relate to each other.

Personal Boundaries and Vulnerabilities

There's a certain awareness that comes with stepping into the field of others' personal problems and vulnerabilities. It's not fear, but recognition of the risks and the stress it produces. This stress is the price of genuine connection and meaningful work. When we engage with others' vulnerabilities, we accept responsibility for the impact of our actions.

This awareness extends to professional relationships as well. The boundaries between personal and professional become blurred when we work closely with others. The stress of navigating these boundaries is real, but it's also necessary for authentic collaboration.

These blurred boundaries raise questions about professional development itself. What does it mean to build a career? How do we navigate the transition from volunteer work to paid work, from community contribution to commercial transaction? The answers reveal something about freedom: not as abstract concept, but as practical attribute that defines our capacity to change within specific conditions.

Career and Professional Development

The definition of career is not always clear. For many, coding and professional work began long before it became a source of income. Countless projects were done "just for community" and experience—hundreds, even thousands of contributions made without expectation of payment. This raises a question: can one truly start a professional career without volunteer experience or doing things without getting paid?

The reward might be anything—knowledge, recognition, community, or simply the satisfaction of creating something useful. But is one truly looking for the reward, or is the work itself the reward?

Professional development often requires learning to navigate the marketplace. This involves understanding the dynamics of selling and buying, of demonstrating value and negotiating terms. Some find this process uncomfortable, preferring to focus on the work itself rather than the transaction. The marketplace operates on its own rules: you have to demo, sell, and buy. There are no other rules than that.

Ethical questions become particularly difficult when everything gets mixed—when personal values intersect with professional requirements, when community work meets commercial interests, when authenticity meets market demands.

These intersections force us to reconsider what freedom means in practice. Is freedom the absence of constraints, or the capacity to navigate them? Is it the ability to choose without consequences, or the responsibility that comes with choice? These questions lead us back to a more fundamental understanding: freedom as an attribute, not an abstraction.

Freedom as an Attribute

When we talk about freedom in relation to physical objects, we discuss points of freedom—degrees of movement and possibility. A physical object with more points of freedom requires more effort to control, more learning to understand, and higher skill to manipulate according to intention.

Having control means manipulating an object so that it moves according to one's intention. This requires understanding the object's points of freedom and learning to work within those constraints.

It's a mistake to say that freedom is abstract and undefinable. Freedom is an attribute that defines the ability to change within exact conditions. This applies to both physical objects and human experience. More freedom requires more learning, higher skill, and greater responsibility.

In professional and personal contexts, freedom intersects with expectations, accountability, transparency, commitments, personal autonomy, and team autonomy. These concepts create a framework for understanding how freedom operates in practice.

This framework operates within a constraint we cannot escape: we are not free from emotions. They affect everything—our decisions, our actions, our relationships. This lack of freedom from emotions introduces entropy into our decision-making, adding complexity and unpredictability. Recognizing this limitation becomes essential for understanding how freedom actually functions.

Emotions and Decision-Making

We are not free from emotions. They affect everything and drive our actions. This lack of freedom from emotions adds entropy to our decision-making process and actions. Recognizing this limitation is the first step toward understanding how emotions shape our choices and interactions.

The challenge is not to eliminate emotions, but to understand their role in our decision-making. Emotions provide information and motivation, but they also introduce complexity and unpredictability. Accepting this complexity is part of accepting the reality of human experience.

This acceptance becomes particularly relevant when we consider how modern systems operate. Consumerism, driven by security concerns, requires us to leave traces—to make our actions visible, trackable, verifiable. These traces create vulnerabilities. The same mechanisms that provide security through traceability also expose us to risk. This paradox—security through visibility, vulnerability through exposure—defines the modern relationship between freedom, consumerism, and the traces we leave.

Consumerism, Security, and Traces

Consumerism represents the modern approach and will likely persist, primarily driven by security concerns. The underlying motivation is security—who genuinely prioritizes economy and wealth in abstract terms? The "don't leave a trace" principle conflicts with consumerism and collective participation, because sharing, being public, or contributing to community requires leaving traces.

Everything behind consumerism makes one leave as many traces as possible: ecosystem accounts, cookies, card payments, webshops, accounts everywhere. Even regulations like GDPR, while protecting privacy, also create more traceable interactions. Blockchain technology? Yes, leaving confirmable and provable traces.

This creates a fundamental tension: to participate in modern society, to share, to be public, to contribute to community, one must leave traces. These traces create vulnerabilities—data that can be leaked, sold, or misused. The security that consumerism provides comes at the cost of privacy and anonymity.

This tension cannot be resolved—only navigated. We make choices about what traces to leave, what boundaries to respect, what freedoms to exercise, and what prices to pay. These choices, made within the constraints of emotions, professional requirements, and security needs, define how freedom operates in practice. Not as abstract ideal, but as concrete attribute that shapes our capacity to change within specific conditions.

Conclusion

Freedom, consumerism, personal boundaries, and the traces we leave are all interconnected. Freedom operates not as abstract ideal but as concrete attribute—defining our ability to change within specific conditions, shaped by emotions, professional requirements, and security needs. Consumerism provides security through traceability, but at the cost of privacy. Personal boundaries require navigating the stress of engaging with others' vulnerabilities. Professional development requires learning to operate in a marketplace where demonstration, selling, and buying are the fundamental rules.

The challenge is to make these choices consciously, understanding the trade-offs and accepting the consequences. We navigate tensions that cannot be resolved—only understood, accepted, and worked with. In this navigation, freedom reveals itself not as the absence of constraints, but as the capacity to change within them, to make choices that reflect our values, to accept responsibility for the traces we leave and the boundaries we respect.