4 ms·
That's technically true, but not practically; tracking pixels, embedded 'like' buttons, etc. You are being followed around the internet by large companies, even
by numlocked 10y ago
That's technically true, but not practically; tracking pixels, embedded 'like' buttons, etc. You are being followed around the internet by large companies, even if you don't directly use their services and avoid FB, Google, etc. entirely (which I think is a reasonable standard for an average user).
I agree the distinction is important in that you can e.g. elect to not be a customer of a company, but can't exactly opt out of the government. But there are still plenty of underhanded privacy violations that companies can 'coerce' you into unknowingly.
The best-practice security and privacy tools you cite, like Tor, end-to-end crypto, etc, are just as effective protecting against government privacy violations as they are coporate ones.
- mortendahl 10y agoI agree with numlocked that the option of opt-out from companies is less clear, in part because we are on a course where this becomes increasingly strange and irrational. Reminded me of a post on algorithms (data) and conformity: https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2016/01/the_risksand_benefit.html https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2016/01/the_risksan...
- DanielBMarkham 10y agoAgreed. It's trivially true. Facile almost. It's the type of thing you'd say to yourself and others if you worked at one of those companies that mine people for data. Everybody can't be RMS. Hell, even RMS can't be RMS. For all practical purposes, you're stuck in a hell where you choose between options, all of which track you like a laboratory animal.