3 ms·
> I feel like that is just a fear-based response to the world, maybe we all need to be more open about who we are both for ourselves and for other people in the
by danso 7y ago
> I feel like that is just a fear-based response to the world, maybe we all need to be more open about who we are both for ourselves and for other people in the world.
This is a textbook presumption — you insinuate that someone’s desire to not publicly transmit their sexual/politics must be irrational, and/or everyone (or even most people) is actually in a situation where they don’t have to fear that.
What is this “extreme privacy movement” that you speak of? Data-collecting tech companies are global titans, and the public’s status quo acceptance/complacency of this is a major reason for these companies’ success. And this is even the case in America, in which the 4th Amendment is a significant bar for government to clear for any kind of search and seizure, even though citizen compliance with authority is another type of “symbiotic” relationship.
- bwb 7y agoYes, it is a presumption, that doesn't mean it might not be something to think about and consider? I don't think I need to explain the extreme privacy view, it is alive and well in this community.
- mattmanser 7y agoIt's not extreme, it's what most people have had for millennia. New technology is deanonymizing public space, invasions of privacy previously required great effort and expense, now they can be done trivially by accessing data on your phone, or now your car. The ramifications of this haven't become clear to you because no-one important's decided to fuck your life over yet or you live as a conformist, but for many of the rest of us the potential downsides are glaringly obvious. People are getting screwed by this right now in China and N.Korea. It is a real and present danger that may have ramifications for you or people you love in the future, and may even get them killed. McCarthyism was only 50 years ago, the Stasi 30, the Nazis 70. The Dutch inadvertently caused the deaths of thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of Jews by having a religious question on their census before the Nazis took over. It happened before, it will happen again, and just because you don't know high school history, or simply didn't learn the lesson of it, doesn't make us extreme. It just makes you extremely naive.
- bwb 7y agoI think I am done :), you don't need to degrade the other person's intelligence to have a discussion. Or insult them. It is rude and unbecoming a member of this community.
- danso 7y agoWhen you continue to question whether people who are fearful are being rational, as if being fearful necessarily precludes that they have attempted rational assessment, you are the one being rude and dismissive of people’s intelligence. I won’t even go into your absurd whining of the “extreme privacy movement” in the HN community, as if a huge part of HN’s audience aren’t daily optimists about the positive role and accomplishment of tech and data companies.
- brokenmachine 7y agoWow, amazingly well put. claps