4 ms·

The lesson from this is to not trust corporations with out privacy. Sadly, it seems many of us are not learning it.

by Esau 10y ago

zzzcpan 10y ago
Would it even be possible to make similar, but privacy centered products without corporations?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- dredmorbius 10y ago
  That's what Free Software is about. And it does. The problems are of establishing protocols and standards, and seeing that others adopt them, and of creating self-contained systems that are bulletproof to set up and operate. There are projects working on this, but the hurdle for having Joe Random User operate their own server is fairly high. I'd much rather see a highly, but not entirely distributed system, with pervasive security, and very strong legal protections. I don't know if that can happen.
mason240 10y ago
Yes, it's totally the fault of tech companies that the US Federal government forces them to give up access to any information they want, and a non-profit email org would immune US intelligence agencies. /s
- mirimir 10y ago
  Well, Sigaint is rather immune to this, no? The US government arguably doesn't know where its servers are located, or who operates them.
- lkbm 10y ago
  Non-profit is not the opposite of corporation. In fact, most non-profits are corporations. The message is obviously to control your own security to the maximum extent practicable. Esau didn't assign fault in their comment. You might disagree with their assertion, but your comment is attacking a straw man, rather than the claim posted.
  - mason240 10y ago
    That's the problem with responding to people who don't actually make complete arguments.
CamperBob2 10y ago
So who do we trust? Governments? Whatever you can say about Yahoo, they're not the one holding the gun.
- lkbm 10y ago
  > So who do we trust? Governments? Yourself? The idea that you have to either trust governments or corporations is very much a false dichotomy. GPG, running your own mail server, etc. may not be for you (they aren't for me), but let's not pretend cloud-hosted mail is the only option, or that encryption is impossible.
mindcrime 10y ago
The lesson from this is to not trust corporations with out privacy. I'm as upset about this as anybody, but realistically speaking... they had a gun to their heads. The real problem here isn't Yahoo! (or the other corporations), it's the government.
- lkbm 10y ago
  The thing you quoted doesn't assign blame. It simple says you can't trust that corporations will/can protect your privacy.
  - bduerst 10y ago
    It's referring to cause of the symptom. Paraphrased differently: If the government can hold a gun to any organization or individuals' head for information, then the privacy distrust doesn't stop with just corporations.
    - lkbm 10y ago
      True, the government can compel me to turn over all my data, but if I'm managing it myself, I'll know this has happened[0]. Additionally, if I'm managing the data myself, they'll only get access because they thought I was a worthwhile target. If I'm using Yahoo!, I get caught in a dragnet. In general, the larger the service, the better a position they are to fight these orders, but also the more likely the government is to bother dragneting it. I'm not worth my own NSL, but this one's a freebie: the marginal effort the government has to put into spying on my Yahoo! account is zero, because they've already got access. [0] Well, I might know. They can also do it surreptitiously unless I'm very competent and very diligent, but if I receive an NSL, I'll know.
lrem 10y ago
Do you think a small start-up will be in a better position to stand up against its government?
codedokode 10y ago
Maybe not to trust the government? Yahoo is not your personal lawyer to defend you from NSA.

The lesson from this is to not trust corporations with out privacy. Sadly, it seems many of us are not learning it.

by Esau 10y ago

The lesson from this is to not trust corporations with out privacy. Sadly, it seems many of us are not learning it.

zzzcpan 10y ago

Would it even be possible to make similar, but privacy centered products without corporations?

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
dredmorbius 10y ago
That's what Free Software is about. And it does. The problems are of establishing protocols and standards, and seeing that others adopt them, and of creating self-contained systems that are bulletproof to set up and operate. There are projects working on this, but the hurdle for having Joe Random User operate their own server is fairly high. I'd much rather see a highly, but not entirely distributed system, with pervasive security, and very strong legal protections. I don't know if that can happen.

mason240 10y ago

Yes, it's totally the fault of tech companies that the US Federal government forces them to give up access to any information they want, and a non-profit email org would immune US intelligence agencies. /s

mirimir 10y ago
Well, Sigaint is rather immune to this, no? The US government arguably doesn't know where its servers are located, or who operates them.
lkbm 10y ago
Non-profit is not the opposite of corporation. In fact, most non-profits are corporations. The message is obviously to control your own security to the maximum extent practicable. Esau didn't assign fault in their comment. You might disagree with their assertion, but your comment is attacking a straw man, rather than the claim posted.
- mason240 10y ago
  That's the problem with responding to people who don't actually make complete arguments.

CamperBob2 10y ago

So who do we trust? Governments? Whatever you can say about Yahoo, they're not the one holding the gun.

lkbm 10y ago
> So who do we trust? Governments? Yourself? The idea that you have to either trust governments or corporations is very much a false dichotomy. GPG, running your own mail server, etc. may not be for you (they aren't for me), but let's not pretend cloud-hosted mail is the only option, or that encryption is impossible.

mindcrime 10y ago

The lesson from this is to not trust corporations with out privacy. I'm as upset about this as anybody, but realistically speaking... they had a gun to their heads. The real problem here isn't Yahoo! (or the other corporations), it's the government.

lkbm 10y ago
The thing you quoted doesn't assign blame. It simple says you can't trust that corporations will/can protect your privacy.
- bduerst 10y ago
  It's referring to cause of the symptom. Paraphrased differently: If the government can hold a gun to any organization or individuals' head for information, then the privacy distrust doesn't stop with just corporations.
  - lkbm 10y ago
    True, the government can compel me to turn over all my data, but if I'm managing it myself, I'll know this has happened[0]. Additionally, if I'm managing the data myself, they'll only get access because they thought I was a worthwhile target. If I'm using Yahoo!, I get caught in a dragnet. In general, the larger the service, the better a position they are to fight these orders, but also the more likely the government is to bother dragneting it. I'm not worth my own NSL, but this one's a freebie: the marginal effort the government has to put into spying on my Yahoo! account is zero, because they've already got access. [0] Well, I might know. They can also do it surreptitiously unless I'm very competent and very diligent, but if I receive an NSL, I'll know.

lrem 10y ago

Do you think a small start-up will be in a better position to stand up against its government?

codedokode 10y ago

Maybe not to trust the government? Yahoo is not your personal lawyer to defend you from NSA.