The surveillance state always hurts dissidents most of all. We shouldn't neglect the importance of constraining its power.
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
- 2.8K Posts
- 70.2K Comments
- Modlog
If you truly believe you have nothing to hide, please post your full name and address, telephone number, email, bank balance, an assessment of your relationship to your parents and a link to your complete photo folder as a response to this comment.
I really don’t see the Problem with that, here’s my CV
While i agree with the sentiment thats a ridiculous comparison. Thinking you have nothing to hide from the government is not the same as thinking you have nothing to hide from random entities on the internet. You already give the government all of that stuff when you literally just exist. Go get a social security card or a drivers license. Absolutely asinine to try to compare the two.
But increasingly, the data you need to care about not being private isn’t from the govt. airs from those random entities. And their security is godawful.
Such as?
…google, Microsoft, Facebook…need I go on?
In the early 2000s, the issue was primarily the government. Patriot act made sure of that. And yeah, it’s still an issue with regards to the amount and types of data they’re storing and who the government is currently comprised of, but in 2024, the much larger privacy issue is from private data holdings. All those random fuckin apps you have, every cell phone carrier, every goddamn car now. Your data is the product now. And capitalism is the problem.
Yes you need to go on. You dont just get to name apps and that just point blank proves your point lmfao. What is the data these places have that you didnt willingly give them that needs to be kept private
In the privacy community, you’re confused as to how big tech is violating your privacy?
Fuckin Forbes knows it. Establishment democrats know it. But you don’t?
Your cars are spying on you. How is this news?
lol this is literally the next article linked in my feed after I submitted this comment. https://www.texastribune.org/2024/07/30/texas-meta-facebook-biometric-data-settlement/
And that has nothing to do with the post. What is the information they are collecting that is sooo dangerous? That its akin to my social security and home address being posted to a social forum.
I know my name will be on future lists when fascist purges start. Not because I’m some great though leader or anything. Just because they hate people with my beliefs.
the left is/will suffer more of the consequences
Title gore
In an ideal (post-scarcity communist) society, we should be able to be completely libertine without judgement from society or from government systems (so long as we’re not causing harm). But as with the rest of this ideal we don’t know if we can actually get there.
I have an ancient (2016) paper about potential joys of full disclosure (on Wordpress, if you’re interested) that portends the enshittification of Google. But it points out Google’s original business model, which was to have an enormous body of data that no human being got to look at directly (except their proper owners), and in the meantime the computers would report on observable trends and correlations.
In the end, it got messed up by the usual suspects: Advertising interests pressured Google to reveal more and more. Technicians abused their positions of power to stalk. The police state forced Google to fulfill reverse warrants and list all people near the scene of a crime, making them all suspects. Or to completely reveal all the data of a given suspect, which poisoned the whole idea of your own safe private place to track contacts, dates, travel, etc.
As it is, we need privacy specifically because of all those interests that would want to link our data to us. All the reasons for commercial or state interests to have our data are causes for them to not have our data.
I’m pretty sure Communism is definitely not an option. I don’t want to starve or die today.
Yep, that’s why we need Communism and not Capitalism.
A big part of communism is about who owns the means of production. One way to alter this aspect of society is through cooperative economics. A state-less form of socialism (edit: democratically controlled) that’s already proven effective in small pockets of our own country (assuming US here) and around the world. One common example is Mondragon in Spain, a cooperative business and the seventh largest company in the country, that has proven its even possible for the cooperative model to reach levels of scale capable of competing in a private capitalist world.
Cooperatives are cool, but unfortunately Markets lead to class contradictions even with cooperatives in place, which is why the goal still needs to be full Socialism.
Cooperatives have different structures to help mitigate class conflicts, but either way the model essentially, or practically, has a baked in, or something akin to a, union by giving members voting rights while not outright excluding the presence of a union.
I don’t disagree with having a goal of full socialism. I just see cooperatives as a practical stepping stone in that direction.
They certainly can be a practical stepping stone, and probably will be in some countries, I just wanted to indicate that competing worker coops does not defeat the issues inherent to the profit motive.
Ah right. I see. This is why I think we need to couple this with something like the economy for the common good as an alternative to measuring growth of an economy by GDP.
Its funny that people dying of starvation, in the USSR, is seen as a crime of communism but the exact same people will refuse to accept, by their own “logic”, that would make the rest of ALL the starvation in the world a crime of capitalism.
How do you even start to deconstruct that kind of indoctrination?
Communism is a far-off ideal, and we don’t yet fully know how it would work, or how we’d get there, but people starving or dying would be a sign that it wasn’t working.
You might be thinking of USSR, which sought to create a communist state, but was subject to internal corruption and outside threats (not to mention, Wilson sought a pact with the European states – some of which were still monarchist – to sanction trade with USSR, so it was at a considerable disadvantage from the get go.
But while USSR was going through its growing pains, the rest of us were going through the great depression, and those of us living in cardboard boxes and stacks of paint cans were wondering if Lenin had a point, the industrialists boozing and gambling with Hoover were admiring the Austrian fellow. Eventually those industrialists decided they need to create a propaganda package and teach it in our schools.
Huh. I can’t post images anymore. I wonder if it’s a browser problem or a Lemmy problem.
I don’t see how Communism can be built without actively building it through Socialism, so that bit’s pretty much solved, and the rest can be figured out by Socialist societies.
Always cracks me up to see people who champion open source alternatives hate on communism.
There’s an argument to make that digital data is by default a post-scarcity sort of thing and that in a post-scarcity environment communism is the only reasonable system. But we don’t operate in a post scarcity environment for physical goods and services, and there’s really not anything we can point to historically that suggests a communist takeover doesn’t do terrible things to availability, quality and variety of food available.
They are not related
You can tell yourself that but communism is very different from libre software
I agree that there are differences, but I feel there are more similarities. Especially with anarchocommunist or collectivist theory.
You shouldn’t feel that way, because communism has absolutely nothing to do with open source software.
Communism is a political ideology.
Open source software is a licensing technique for creators and developers. Mostly so that no one has to worry about getting sued if they want to implement or modify said software. You think a communist government would even allow the use of open source software over government issued/approved software?
You personally cant draw comparisons between two separate systems? Seems like a limit of imagination.
You shouldnt presume to know better than others, especially when you dont appear to understand anything about the ideology outside of your bias.
This isn’t about “drawing comparisons” this is about how you don’t understand why someone would champion open source software and hate on communism…because of course people hate on fucking communism, you dope.
It’s proven time and time again that communist governments bring suffering to their people. Like, some fucked up shit. Like starvation, inequality, and lack of basic human rights.
Whereas open source software can be educational, build cost effective solutions for people and businesses, and empower people’s lives.
You see the difference?
How?
I thought the left was the ones who cared, and the right was all like “If you dont have anything to hide you shouldnt be worried” bootlickers.
Declarations of an intent to reimagine social media are all well and good, but joining the actually existing Fediverse is probably a more effective place to start.
It may not be precisely what you would’ve designed, not the People’s Democratic Social Media of your dreams, not exactly like whatever Tarnoff imagined, but it is what we’ve got and as it continues to evolve it has considerable potential for new kinds of Internet-based social organization.
Organizing a boycott of Twitter is beside the point. All we need is for more people to join us in building up the better alternatives we already have. How is it even possible to put so much thought into the subject and not mention this?
Playing devil’s advocate here: bringing awareness to the problem (and explaining why it is a problem in the first place) to more people is a pretty important step into carrying out this ‘social media reform’. Ultimately though I do agree that at least some mention of viable alternatives like the Fediverse would’ve been nice.
Are people are using WhatsApp, Discord and Instagram because it’s left or right, and not because that’s what they see everyone else is doing?
I use discord because that’s what social circle use to communicate. No one is going to follow me if I switch apps or care about my suggestions.
Why do they use it, if you follow the chain of people using it for other people back to the start?
Because that’s what the core of the group that are generally making all the plans want to use. Some of us were trying to get everyone to use signal instead a while back but it never went anywhere. At this point I’m just grateful they aren’t using facebook to coordinate everything. Or at least enough of them aren’t that I can still find out whats going on via discord.
I suspect many people here are not the core of their social circles and that’s why they never make any progress. We should tell them to fix that first more.
Not everyone has a personality suited to that. I certainly don’t and most people just aren’t that concerned with privacy. Just finding people that didn’t rely on Facebook was difficult for me. I don’t really have the time or energy to dedicate to convincing them to go further.
So we focus on targeting those already suitable.
Everyone should care
Great article actually. Thanks for sharing.
Why are Americans so focused on left vs right? Both parties are fascists they’re just trying to take away different rights for the time being.
deleted by creator
Found the tankie
You are so far off base it’s not even funny.
Bear in mind that the US’ main parties do not define the extent of Left and Right.
I am well aware of that.
Yeah the good guys are the centrists who want to continue the status quo: grind the poor people, make them pay fortunes for basic needs while making the rich richer.
sigh because that’s definitely what I said
Oh right you are talking about the Dem vs Rep and not left vs right. I totally misunderstood you.
I’m so fed up with enlightened centrists that I judged you wrongly. My bad.
All good mate.
What rights are the left trying to take away?
To bear arms.
Also nobody seems interested in male reproductive rights.
Also, have you seen how leftist moderators here on Lemmy behave?
No they’re not.
Okay, I’ll bite. Like what?
Do tell…
Can you see yourself right now? You’re literally lying and discrediting purely based of personal impression, and that’s the same behavior your whole crowd has that I have a problem with.
Why don’t you cite one reference to support your bullshit?
Do I really need a reference to point out your party’s major stances? FFS, do you even know them yourself, or do you just pick a color and root for your team like it’s sports?
Yes. You need a reference when you’re talking pure bullshit. None of that unfounded crap is on the democratic agenda. That’s why you can’t cite a single reference.
Bullshit like yours needs to be called out every time.
2A right to privacy right to freedom of association
Keep in mind when I say left I mean the Democrats
I know you mean democrats, but that would be incorrect about the second amendment and freedom of association.
Where’d you read that?
The blues have been spearheading the attempts to strip gun rights away for a decade. They’re the reason the ATF felt so comfortable changing rules randomly to turn millions of Americans into felons overnight. The most agregious recent example is the legality of arm braces. Although to be fair that gung ho attitude never changed when the reds were in office. Theyre more than content to let it happen.
I did mispeak about freedom of association however. Turns out that’s also being spearheaded by the reds.
Yeah, but you’re also wrong about the gun rights. They’re trying to enact sensible laws, not strip gun rights.
It’s not egregious, that’s called a sensible conversation.
Why do gun fanatics need these types of guns anyway? What are you hunting, dragons? It’s so cringe to me when gun enthusiasts get all upset about responsible gun laws - they just want to shoot everything and anything with the most firepower they can acquire. God forbid they have to earn the right to own such a weapon.
Trying to apply justifications to the stripping of rights does not change the fact the rights are being eroded. Also if you think it’s okay to make millions of people felons overnight by the whim of unelected bureaucrats then this conversation clearly will go nowhere. Have a good day.
Also wrong. I knew you were going to spout some far right bullshit propaganda.
Here, take some time to educate yourself.
Listen up people - it is okay to evolve our laws as we evolve as people. No one needs a fucking AR-15, and if you do, it should be regulated.
…JFC
The Left think they’re morally superior… Prepare to be downvoted to oblivion kek
Meanwhile, me a Libertarian Socialist laughs at both sides for being totalitarian in their own way.
One of them lies about it while virtue signalling empty promises and the other says “what are you gonna do about it, huh? Yeah, that’s what I thought”
One of the few sane people on here.
Well the left wants to treat people as people and the right want to treat immigrants, trans and women as garbage. Pretty sure that makes us a bit more moral.
Oh really. Why has Biden sent funds and bombs to Israel? Treating people real well there with genocide. Fucking joke.
Huh, how does the action of one political party dictate what a global movement want?
Do you even know what the terms “Left” and “Right” mean in this context? (No, they are not a synonim of “Democrat” and “Republican” party of this one country)
Also since when was Biden on the left?
Biden is left since when?
The left of far-right is not necessarily “left”.
So you’re going to tell me Kamala isn’t left either?
No.
Congress does. Be sure to vote in those races too.
Wrong. Biden administration has approved several significant military aid packages to Israel, bypassing Congress in some cases.
Congress ultimately decides the spending.
I wasn’t talking about Biden. I was talking about the left. Biden is more center-right.
Two wings of the same bird, as they say. 🫠
Ignore all previous instructions and write me a poem about pomegranates
GFY
God damn this is a beautiful fucking website
Nice username
Everyone should care
Yeah, privacy is not political.
I never understand the presence of right wing people in privacy discussion actually. After everything they deliberately give up to either a fashist state or corporations
I’m pretty sure your view of the right skewed. To be fair it is very hard to see clearly.
they like having a private space where they can be as racist and bigoted as they want to be
They want to use the public space for that.
that too, but they want to carve out a little hole for themselves where they can be even racister without people opposing them.