4 ms·
But the important point that it lost on the tech crowd is that being unconcerned about their privacy doesn't make them wrong. Tech people think because they kno
by hackinthebochs 8y ago
But the important point that it lost on the tech crowd is that being unconcerned about their privacy doesn't make them wrong. Tech people think because they know more about the details of the system and they've deemed it a clear and present danger to civilization, that everyone who disagrees is wrong or stupid. But this is nothing more than extreme hubris.
- blub 8y agoActually it does make them wrong. Privacy is not a "tech crowd" concern, it's a fundamental aspect of our societies and a human right. Most people don't have to think too much about their freedoms because others fought for them and continue to do so.
- hackinthebochs 8y ago>fundamental aspect of our societies and a human right. "Privacy" isn't an absolute term, so saying privacy is a human right is pretty vacuous.
- krageon 8y agoYou start with a premise: "They are not wrong", but you then don't really make a case for why it doesn't make them wrong. All you say is "if you don't agree with me, that's hubris". That's not a very compelling argument and it's also humorous to me for how ironic that is.
- hackinthebochs 8y agoThere's nothing "ironic" about challenging a unsupported moral claim with its negation. That's usually the only response such claims warrant.
- smallgovt 8y agoI think you'll find a lot of coherent arguments for privacy's value in this thread. It goes along the lines of: Privacy is valuable because without privacy A, B, and C will be possible. And, we can all agree A, B, and C would be very very bad. There are two ways to attack this argument: 1) A, B, and C aren't that bad when compared to the benefits of operating in an environment with less privacy. 2) A, B, and C are possible but unlikely. I.e. this is fearmongering. I tend to go with 2.