What harm does public data have to you? Couldn’t one just ignore the ads? You can’t see anyone watching you, is public data good for public records? (I’m just curious). I know this sounds weird but is public data good for historical preservation and knowledge increasing the importance of the individual? And does public data lead to better products?
Privacy brings security under totalitarian regimes or in countries that shift in that direction. They might say if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, but there are unjust conditions under which you have to hide things, like that you belong to minority that is targeted by the authorities. Like the nazis did in the third reich, where privacy was reduced during their takeover. Or that you belong to a party that is suddenly framed as evil and enemies of the nation. Or if you have connections to “traitors” or other “scum”.
The red scare is a pretty good example for the US
Hell go with the lavender scare too while we’re at it
Wow, I had never heard about the lavender scare until now. Just did a little bit of reading on it. Can’t say I’m surprised, just extremely disappointed.
Check out Exit Stage Left: The Snagglepuss Chronicles. It’s just two arcs of a comic book, you could knock it out in an afternoon if you really wanted to. It is absolutely breathtaking, but make no mistake, it is incredibly brutal at key moments. I revisit it every year or two around the commemoration of the stonewall riots. You will not be disappointed.
You don’t even have to go that far back. It’s literally happening right now as red states seek to punish women who seek abortions.
What was it? Kansas? That literally opened an anonymous report page for people who were trans or supported trans rights? What will they do with that data, is the question. Because they’re definitely not pushing HRT, therapy or counselling via ads.
Very true. The red scare was just the first thing to pop into my mind. Probably because I just saw Oppenheimer last weekend, lol
Yep, security enables privacy, this is why the two are often referenced together.
These days, with “big data” analysis being possible on such a large scale, it’s possible to gauge the position of the general population, or of subgroup of such with ease. This makes it easy to divide and conquer, to manufacture consent, for whatever those who have access to said analysis desire.
I always tell people, it’s not about your data, it’s about our data.
What about neo nazis and white supremacists who use privacy tools to coordinate domestic terrorism like Charlottesville and January 6th? There’s two sides to the privacy coin.
You can also use a chair to bludgeon someone to death. Should we ban chairs? I believe the good side of privacy far overcomes the bad One can do with it
It comes down to a balance between cost and social benefit.
And privacy has a far greater value.
Thing is people who have bad things in mind are always more likely to use their own codes. You dont need an encrypted messenger to send encrypted messages. It’s a boy.
But normal people who think that they have nothing to fear and therefore nothing to hide won’t take that efforts upon them. They will live their lifes and one day they could be targeted by a government that wants to eradicate them. Using the data their predecessors gathered.
And those people sometimes shoot innocent people with guns, but that doesn’t mean that people like Malcolm X shouldn’t have one to protect themselves against that.
Just because something can be misused doesn’t mean it should be illegal to use it properly. Often the improper use itself is criminalized and making it illegal just tacks on an extra charge that people aren’t worried about by then, because they already have murder charges to fight.
To add: the FBI was asked by congress to justify project prism by telling just one example of something they stopped with warrantless mass surveillance. Turns out, they had none, the case they provided they’d have been able to get a warrant for the guys and they were put on the FBI’s radar by other means, not the mass surveillance. They don’t even stop anything with it.
I promise you that Google’s attempts to break AdGuard or the federal government’s begging Apple and co to create backdoors are not an attempt to stop domestic terrorism.
The right wing has built its own network called Rumble where they spread disinformation to their uneducated superstitious masses. These brainwashed zombies thrive behind a mask of anonymity. IRL these absolute loons are interspersed throughout the public, and our institutions are none the wiser. ID verification is needed to increase visibility and accountability.
There is no planet where you will convince me I need to present my state ID in order to browse the internet.
I am very familiar with rumble. We have seen its type over and over again. The same thing happens every single time. Because of their “commitment to free-speech,“ law enforcement just hangs out and either pressures the admins, who are facing financial pressures from nobody wanting to fund a website that has that kind of content, reasonable people feel repulsed, or eventually the feds get involved because something criminal is happening or threatened. Ask Voat. Ask Gab. Ask Truth Social.
Alex Jones did a lot more damage with YouTube and Twitter than he ever will on Rumble. These platforms will always pop up, but they are ineffectual in the long run. Ultimately, it’s about commandeering existing, massive channels. It’s about access to new people.
We need to target the hate problem at the root. Hateful speech comes from a hateful heart. How can we heal a heart problem if we can’t even ID the patient?
And on the topic of healthcare how do we accomplish contact tracing without complete records? Do you want to risk bumping into unvaccinated RFK?
deleted by creator
Deplatforming is not a stable long-term solution. It’s already a game of whack-a-mole. Cut one head off the hydra, two grow back. And the platforms themselves evolve or get bought by the next zillionaire. We need a more grass roots level of accountability, and that starts with authentication verification. Unique device identifiers are a big step in the right direction. And law enforcement has to follow the law. Just make it illegal for police to use the secure databases. Only federal agencies like CISA and the FBI/DoJ can access.
deleted by creator
Yes. But we still need it.
In the USA, the 4th amendment gives us the right to be secure … unless there is a warrant….
A big part of the privacy issue is first with government; we can’t have the erosion of those standards or we’ll never get them back.
Second is business, my existence is not a license for data collection of my activities. Like being with one person all the time, but never getting 5 minutes alone.
Because data brokers are obligating the need for a warrant when my info can just be purchased.
Yeah. Even though encryption protects bad guys, it protects my credit card when I buy something.
It has to cover both
The same things that protects vulnerable people’s privacy also gives shelter to terrorism.
Yes. We know. We went through this already 20 years ago, except the boogyman was the Taliban and not the local fascists.
It changes nothing. Sacrificing individual privacy is not an adequate trade-off for the illusion of safety.
Anonymity also emboldens hate speech, arguably an even bigger and more immediate threat. When hate is allowed to fester in the dark, it casts shadows into the light.
Anonymity and privacy are not the same thing