4 ms·

>So I have currently zero empathy for the "victims" of this leak. Quite the contrary, I feel a little angry. Because I have to leave in a world that could be mu

>So I have currently zero empathy for the "victims" of this leak. Quite the contrary, I feel a little angry. Because I have to leave in a world that could be much more beautiful if only people, sometimes, just sometimes, though about the consequences of their life instead of just going with the motion. And this affects much more than privacy. And it's unfair. And the very fact that you insist on blaming the individuals for a collective problem is why problems like this are so hard to solve. If so many people don't care about this issue, despite its importance, maybe you should stop blaming them and expecting them to magically start caring, and start thinking about how our society leads them to believe it's not an issue?

wool_gather 9y ago
I don't know that their belief is a cultural problem, or at least one that's changeable. The book "The Design of Everyday Things" has this idea that users of things fall into one of two broad groups: a) users that want fine control and expertise, and are willing to sacrifice simplicity to get it b) users that want simplicity, and are willing to sacrifice control to get it I think that most issues of privacy and security boil down to the simple fact that most people are in group b (really, I think that's true of any issue you care to choose). They don't care, and they won't. The cultural change that could make a difference is when the more secure, more privacy-positive options are also the easier and simpler choices.
throwaway413 9y ago
Chalking everything up to “society” is a great way to never get anything solved. Change starts with oneself. Connecting on an individual level, making changes on an individual level, understanding and valuing even minute consequences on the individual level - that’s what going to bring about permanent change. Not more groupthink. We have brains and decision-making abilities for a reason. Yes, I understand society has a very influential role in how we go about our lives. But that is not some catch-all excuse for not taking any responsibility for our individual behaviors. There are two sides to the coin that both need to be addressed.
- aninhumer 9y ago
  So how do you suggest we solve the problem without collective actions? What "changes on an individual level" do you think need to occur, and how do you expect them to come about? Because to me, it seems like the individualist's prescription is just to judge people for making bad choices and hope they make better ones in future.
  - throwaway413 9y ago
    I hear you - but hopefully the individualists prescription is really one they are taking themselves and not forcing onto others, but leading by example. Collective action is just a bunch of individual actions. Yes there is power in syncing up, regardless, it still stems from an individuals decision to take action, with or without others.
  - mygo 9y ago
    The individual is the functional unit of society. When you choose to address society, what you’re really doing, if it’s going to work, is addressing the individuals of that society. Address a bunch of individuals. Or address one individual and have him address 2 people he knows. Etc. More than one way to skin a cat... TLDR; to skin a society of cats, one way or another, each individual cat needs to get skinned.
    - aninhumer 8y ago
      Saying "society is just individuals" is reductive to the point of uselessness though. People exist within a system of social and economic realities, and the choices they make, indeed the choices they can make, are shaped by that system. And therefore, many choices which would improve society only make sense as collective choices. An individual deciding whether to delete their facebook account is deciding between privacy violation or social isolation. In that context, the privacy violation might actually be the better choice for the individual. When people criticise that choice, they're noticing that collectively it would be better if everyone made a different choice. But it's pointless to blame individuals for not making a collective choice. If we actually want people to make that choice, we need to act collectively, and transition away from facebook in a coordinated way.

wool_gather 9y ago

I don't know that their belief is a cultural problem, or at least one that's changeable. The book "The Design of Everyday Things" has this idea that users of things fall into one of two broad groups: a) users that want fine control and expertise, and are willing to sacrifice simplicity to get it b) users that want simplicity, and are willing to sacrifice control to get it I think that most issues of privacy and security boil down to the simple fact that most people are in group b (really, I think that's true of any issue you care to choose). They don't care, and they won't. The cultural change that could make a difference is when the more secure, more privacy-positive options are also the easier and simpler choices.

throwaway413 9y ago

Chalking everything up to “society” is a great way to never get anything solved. Change starts with oneself. Connecting on an individual level, making changes on an individual level, understanding and valuing even minute consequences on the individual level - that’s what going to bring about permanent change. Not more groupthink. We have brains and decision-making abilities for a reason. Yes, I understand society has a very influential role in how we go about our lives. But that is not some catch-all excuse for not taking any responsibility for our individual behaviors. There are two sides to the coin that both need to be addressed.

aninhumer 9y ago
So how do you suggest we solve the problem without collective actions? What "changes on an individual level" do you think need to occur, and how do you expect them to come about? Because to me, it seems like the individualist's prescription is just to judge people for making bad choices and hope they make better ones in future.
- throwaway413 9y ago
  I hear you - but hopefully the individualists prescription is really one they are taking themselves and not forcing onto others, but leading by example. Collective action is just a bunch of individual actions. Yes there is power in syncing up, regardless, it still stems from an individuals decision to take action, with or without others.
- mygo 9y ago
  The individual is the functional unit of society. When you choose to address society, what you’re really doing, if it’s going to work, is addressing the individuals of that society. Address a bunch of individuals. Or address one individual and have him address 2 people he knows. Etc. More than one way to skin a cat... TLDR; to skin a society of cats, one way or another, each individual cat needs to get skinned.
  - aninhumer 8y ago
    Saying "society is just individuals" is reductive to the point of uselessness though. People exist within a system of social and economic realities, and the choices they make, indeed the choices they can make, are shaped by that system. And therefore, many choices which would improve society only make sense as collective choices. An individual deciding whether to delete their facebook account is deciding between privacy violation or social isolation. In that context, the privacy violation might actually be the better choice for the individual. When people criticise that choice, they're noticing that collectively it would be better if everyone made a different choice. But it's pointless to blame individuals for not making a collective choice. If we actually want people to make that choice, we need to act collectively, and transition away from facebook in a coordinated way.