3 ms·

Oh yes, they're very different. It's just not necessarily the case that one is to be preferred over the other. I don't expect in a US structure my Obama texts

Oh yes, they're very different. It's just not necessarily the case that one is to be preferred over the other. I don't expect in a US structure my Obama texts would be hidden or deleted. I think they'd be put on blast by multiple competing systems that are semi-automated to seek out and publicize "undesirable" behavior, and I'd end up receiving death threats from anonymous sources, sanctions from my employer, etc. The outcomes are different, and I think the jury's out on which one is better. In fact, it's probably a personal preference.

sonnyblarney 8y ago
"I think they'd be put on blast by multiple competing systems that are semi-automated to seek out and publicize "undesirable" behavior, and I'd end up receiving death threats from anonymous sources, sanctions from my employer, etc." I disagree. I don't see any future where your gmails or SMSs are going to be sold to arbitrary 3rd parties so your 'future employers' can read them.
- avmich 8y ago
  > I don't see any future where your gmails or SMSs are going to be sold to arbitrary 3rd parties so your 'future employers' can read them. Doesn't Google read gmails? Doesn't Google have agreements with 3rd parties related to using information from those gmails? Is it hard to imagine that, as with Facebook, Google making that information directly available?
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    Yes, it is hard to imagine, because it would be a direct violation of their privacy policy and they would be sued into oblivion. What FB et. al. do with your content is right in the fine print.
- mAEStro-paNDa 8y ago
  It's different yes, but let's not pretend like this is a conversation around an "open-society" vs a "closed" one. They are not the same, but there is overlap. For example, the employment of academics in the US being in jeopardy if they choose to criticize Israel.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    They are completely different. "the employment of academics in the US being in jeopardy if they choose to criticize Israel." This has nothing to do with state powers monitoring arbitrary communications. This has to do with specific enterprises practices of hiring discrimination - which is a complex, but totally separate problem.

sonnyblarney 8y ago

"I think they'd be put on blast by multiple competing systems that are semi-automated to seek out and publicize "undesirable" behavior, and I'd end up receiving death threats from anonymous sources, sanctions from my employer, etc." I disagree. I don't see any future where your gmails or SMSs are going to be sold to arbitrary 3rd parties so your 'future employers' can read them.

avmich 8y ago
> I don't see any future where your gmails or SMSs are going to be sold to arbitrary 3rd parties so your 'future employers' can read them. Doesn't Google read gmails? Doesn't Google have agreements with 3rd parties related to using information from those gmails? Is it hard to imagine that, as with Facebook, Google making that information directly available?
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  Yes, it is hard to imagine, because it would be a direct violation of their privacy policy and they would be sued into oblivion. What FB et. al. do with your content is right in the fine print.
mAEStro-paNDa 8y ago
It's different yes, but let's not pretend like this is a conversation around an "open-society" vs a "closed" one. They are not the same, but there is overlap. For example, the employment of academics in the US being in jeopardy if they choose to criticize Israel.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  They are completely different. "the employment of academics in the US being in jeopardy if they choose to criticize Israel." This has nothing to do with state powers monitoring arbitrary communications. This has to do with specific enterprises practices of hiring discrimination - which is a complex, but totally separate problem.