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?
You must log in or register to comment.
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don’t promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 57 users / day
- 383 users / week
- 1.5K users / month
- 5.7K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 2.45K Posts
- 57.9K Comments
- Modlog
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.
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 most effective thing you can do to reduce domestic terrorism in the US, which is usually stochastic in nature, is to deplatform the people riling these people up.
Did you not notice how much quieter it was with Trump off of Twitter? When was the last time you heard anything about Alex Jones that wasn’t about his legal woes?
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
The past is the past, I have to believe we can learn from our mistakes and develop a smarter system, probably integrating AI to regain control of the public narrative, totally eliminate misinfo, and foster a more cohesive society. I suspect a lot of our division stems from the easy pseudo anonymity afforded by the net today. Don’t you think extremism would evaporate if we had to communicate with our real identities?
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
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.
Amen. I see that argument a lot in relation to Tor. People don’t understand that for every one bad actor, there are a myriad more who live in places where they are unable or find it unsafe to communicate online.
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
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.
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 privacy has a far greater value.