5 ms·

There has been an unspoken freedom of privacy for thousands of years. We could go in our caves or homes and protect them via a fist, rock, spear, or gun such th

There has been an unspoken freedom of privacy for thousands of years. We could go in our caves or homes and protect them via a fist, rock, spear, or gun such that we could live alone outside of prying eyes. Now when we go online or go shop in a store, we are partially losing the ability to live privately. Eventually, our government could put cameras everywhere in our home to ensure that we behave, and some could abuse that. To prevent that, we need to solidify that freedom of privacy, rather than continue to consider it a privilege. I also think that we should allow the government some amount of freedom to protect us. However, there needs to be a line drawn that shouldn't be crossed whether it's Target, the F.B.I., or an individual, and I think we should all be aware of data collection.

wallace_f 10y ago
>we need to solidify that freedom of privacy, rather than continue to consider it a privilege. When I posted that, I actually saw it the other way around: privacy as a principle, and riches as privilege. >I also think that we should allow the government some amount of freedom to protect us I agree. I'm lean a little bit libertarian, but even a staunch libertarian holds this belief. Actually that's kind of the point, that government's main purpose is to protect the people and enforce the rule of law. There's some argument right now that government in America is not upholding that obligation (for example, laws are applied unequally depending on race and income, police overstepping their authority and police brutality, etc.).
benevol 10y ago
> Eventually, our government could put cameras everywhere in our home I actually don't think that the government will have to do this, because as consumers we do it already for them: Have a notebook in your house? Nice, your camera may already be watching you and the mic listening to you. Have a mobile phone? Nice, you are now under surveillance 24 hours a day. The 2 cameras can see, the mic (and now apparently even the speaker) can listen, your location is 100% tracked, the gyro can let hackers know via your current vibration profile if you're in a bus, train or car, etc. All this could be partially prevented by hardware switches for each sensor. Are we consumers out on the street fighting against this and/or voting with our $$$ to prevent the loss of privacy?
- wallace_f 10y ago
  >All this could be partially prevented by hardware switches for each sensor. Do you know of anyone besides Bunnie Huang who is working on a project like this or something similar? Bunnie's concept is kind of similar with a hardware intercept on the device.
  - benevol 10y ago
    > Bunnie Huang who is working on a project like this I don't know of this or any other such projects. Any such project needs to be on HN on a regular basis.
- gkafkg8y8 10y ago
  > All this could be partially prevented by hardware switches for each sensor. A few easy hacks for best-effort protection without destroying your hardware are a piece of tape over the camera and setting your sound input to something quiet, like Soundflower in macOS or one of these for Windows or Linux: http://alternativeto.net/software/soundflower/ http://alternativeto.net/software/soundflower/

wallace_f 10y ago

>we need to solidify that freedom of privacy, rather than continue to consider it a privilege. When I posted that, I actually saw it the other way around: privacy as a principle, and riches as privilege. >I also think that we should allow the government some amount of freedom to protect us I agree. I'm lean a little bit libertarian, but even a staunch libertarian holds this belief. Actually that's kind of the point, that government's main purpose is to protect the people and enforce the rule of law. There's some argument right now that government in America is not upholding that obligation (for example, laws are applied unequally depending on race and income, police overstepping their authority and police brutality, etc.).

benevol 10y ago

> Eventually, our government could put cameras everywhere in our home I actually don't think that the government will have to do this, because as consumers we do it already for them: Have a notebook in your house? Nice, your camera may already be watching you and the mic listening to you. Have a mobile phone? Nice, you are now under surveillance 24 hours a day. The 2 cameras can see, the mic (and now apparently even the speaker) can listen, your location is 100% tracked, the gyro can let hackers know via your current vibration profile if you're in a bus, train or car, etc. All this could be partially prevented by hardware switches for each sensor. Are we consumers out on the street fighting against this and/or voting with our $$$ to prevent the loss of privacy?

wallace_f 10y ago
>All this could be partially prevented by hardware switches for each sensor. Do you know of anyone besides Bunnie Huang who is working on a project like this or something similar? Bunnie's concept is kind of similar with a hardware intercept on the device.
- benevol 10y ago
  > Bunnie Huang who is working on a project like this I don't know of this or any other such projects. Any such project needs to be on HN on a regular basis.
gkafkg8y8 10y ago
> All this could be partially prevented by hardware switches for each sensor. A few easy hacks for best-effort protection without destroying your hardware are a piece of tape over the camera and setting your sound input to something quiet, like Soundflower in macOS or one of these for Windows or Linux: http://alternativeto.net/software/soundflower/ http://alternativeto.net/software/soundflower/