3 ms·

On the contrary, everyone's willingness to accept this kind of behavior as normal indicates how far the Overton window has moved when it comes to the trustworth

On the contrary, everyone's willingness to accept this kind of behavior as normal indicates how far the Overton window has moved when it comes to the trustworthiness of our digital services. We need a collective effort to shift things back where they belong.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
jerkstate 8y ago
I disagree, privacy-conscious people have been warning that Facebook has been doing these things since forever, so people (especially here on HN) can't claim that they didn't know these things were going on. This is just the same old story: people being upset about the consequences of what they were warned about many many times.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > privacy-conscious people have been warning Saying. And what was said was obviously not heard. Tangibility helps any pitch. We shouldn’t fault people for agreeing later versus sooner; at the end of the day, agreement trumps the alternative.
- _jal 8y ago
  I, too, wish for a better quality of collective decision-making on the part of humanity, but this seems to be how "we" do these things. "What, me worry?" is probably the central recurring theme of history, if you're inclined to look at things a certain way.
  - flukus 8y ago
    We also used to accept that negative reinforcement was part of this learning process, but now it's called victim blaming.
- donkeyd 8y ago
  I feel like you're both right though. We can't claim we didn't know, but the fact that we accept this en masse is concerning.
- CodeMage 8y ago
  Either Overton window does not mean what I think it means, or you misunderstood me. Sure, privacy-conscious people have been warning others about a whole bunch of things, but the general discourse has shifted, so those people were frequently treated almost like conspiracy theorists. Besides, I'm not only talking about privacy, I'm talking about general loss of trustworthiness that comes from moving away from the "confederate Internet" towards the "feudal Internet". Back in the POP3 days, if the message got delivered to your mail client, the only way it got deleted would be because of something that you did (even if it's "fail to have backups when your machine caught fire"). Nowadays you have people acting like Facebook deleting a message from your "inbox" (not an e-mail inbox, but same terminology is being used) is not a big deal. The rationale is: "Well of course they can do that, it's their server and their service." And that's precisely my point.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

jerkstate 8y ago

I disagree, privacy-conscious people have been warning that Facebook has been doing these things since forever, so people (especially here on HN) can't claim that they didn't know these things were going on. This is just the same old story: people being upset about the consequences of what they were warned about many many times.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> privacy-conscious people have been warning Saying. And what was said was obviously not heard. Tangibility helps any pitch. We shouldn’t fault people for agreeing later versus sooner; at the end of the day, agreement trumps the alternative.
_jal 8y ago
I, too, wish for a better quality of collective decision-making on the part of humanity, but this seems to be how "we" do these things. "What, me worry?" is probably the central recurring theme of history, if you're inclined to look at things a certain way.
- flukus 8y ago
  We also used to accept that negative reinforcement was part of this learning process, but now it's called victim blaming.
donkeyd 8y ago
I feel like you're both right though. We can't claim we didn't know, but the fact that we accept this en masse is concerning.
CodeMage 8y ago
Either Overton window does not mean what I think it means, or you misunderstood me. Sure, privacy-conscious people have been warning others about a whole bunch of things, but the general discourse has shifted, so those people were frequently treated almost like conspiracy theorists. Besides, I'm not only talking about privacy, I'm talking about general loss of trustworthiness that comes from moving away from the "confederate Internet" towards the "feudal Internet". Back in the POP3 days, if the message got delivered to your mail client, the only way it got deleted would be because of something that you did (even if it's "fail to have backups when your machine caught fire"). Nowadays you have people acting like Facebook deleting a message from your "inbox" (not an e-mail inbox, but same terminology is being used) is not a big deal. The rationale is: "Well of course they can do that, it's their server and their service." And that's precisely my point.