5 ms·

> A fair percentage of people (myself included) are far more concerned about protecting our data from marketers, advertisers, and data brokers, than we are abou

> A fair percentage of people (myself included) are far more concerned about protecting our data from marketers, advertisers, and data brokers, than we are about going 100% 'tinfoil hat' mode and worrying whether the NSA is monitoring my messages for thought crimes. The main issue here is that people aren't worried about either of those problems :) otherwise Facebook, Google and other advertising companies would only have a handful of users. > These are two very distinct issues and not everyone is concerned about both equally. Divide and conquer... not. The issue is the same, we should fight together for more privacy, not disregard other people's reasons for requesting more privacy. In any case, as you were replying to my previous comment, my point was that if the company has access to your data, Law Enforcement has got it too. Also if Law Enforcement has access to your data it means it wasn't also available for the company. Hence why one implies the other. You might be worried about one, but you've got two :)

tombrossman 10y ago
Thanks, that's clearer to me now. When marketers collect my personal info, it's far more likely to be distributed widely so I place a greater emphasis on protecting it from them. I don't like the fact that nation-states are spying on the citizenry, but I don't know what I can do about that. I DO know what to do about the surveillance capitalists.
eternalban 10y ago
> we should fight together for more privacy It needs to be established as a human right. I'm personally very disappointed to see the how good intentions of the aware subset of the citizenry are consistently channeled towards technical solutions to a problem that is fundamentally political. At a meta-level, we saw the same (useless) dissipation of energies in the Occupy-x movement. And it should also be pointed out that the subtext of such approaches is de facto deligitimization of legal governance of societies and (speaking of "kings") establishing corporations as the arbitrators of social norms. Get congress to pass a comprehensive privacy act and "Alphabets" (of the corporate and governmental variety) will have to toe the law of the land. [edit:spelling]
- tremon 10y ago
  It needs to be established as a human right. It already is. Article 12 of the universal declaration of human rights: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

tombrossman 10y ago

Thanks, that's clearer to me now. When marketers collect my personal info, it's far more likely to be distributed widely so I place a greater emphasis on protecting it from them. I don't like the fact that nation-states are spying on the citizenry, but I don't know what I can do about that. I DO know what to do about the surveillance capitalists.

eternalban 10y ago

> we should fight together for more privacy It needs to be established as a human right. I'm personally very disappointed to see the how good intentions of the aware subset of the citizenry are consistently channeled towards technical solutions to a problem that is fundamentally political. At a meta-level, we saw the same (useless) dissipation of energies in the Occupy-x movement. And it should also be pointed out that the subtext of such approaches is de facto deligitimization of legal governance of societies and (speaking of "kings") establishing corporations as the arbitrators of social norms. Get congress to pass a comprehensive privacy act and "Alphabets" (of the corporate and governmental variety) will have to toe the law of the land. [edit:spelling]

tremon 10y ago
It needs to be established as a human right. It already is. Article 12 of the universal declaration of human rights: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.