4 ms·

The easiest way to get freedom from facebook and google is to simply not use them yourself. It's the best solution too. It doesn't hurt anyone. Compare this to

The easiest way to get freedom from facebook and google is to simply not use them yourself. It's the best solution too. It doesn't hurt anyone. Compare this to the FFFG people advocating for using using government force to control others' behavior. This may solve the problems FFFG perceives but the "solution" does more damage (in terms of actually hurting people) than the problem.

pmoriarty 6y ago
Even if you don't use them they'll collect data on you in many different ways: - "like" and "share" buttons on completely unrelated web sites that track your IP when your web browser downloads the images for these buttons or runs the associated javascript - people you know tagging you in photos they upload of you to these sites - recaptchas on unralated sites that collect data about your IP, browser fingerprint, and site you're visiting There are doubtlessly many, many, many other techniques they (and sites and companies you probably have no idea are owned by them and that feed data back in to them) use that don't require you to be on their sites to cyberstalk and spy on you.
- junga 6y ago
  And without having a google or facebook account you can‘t just check/modify/delete the data they collected.
- superkuh 6y ago
  >Even if you don't use them they'll collect data on you in many different ways They don't because I don't leave javascript execution on like grandma opening every email attachment she receives. Other people's behaviors are their business but it's pretty easy to ask people not to upload photos of you. And if it happens, well, it's actually not a big deal. Google recaptchas are super annoying and require whitelisting google javascript so I don't go to sites that block me with them. So you see how taking responsibility for my own behavior works here and I don't need people with guns to coerce other people and cause far more damage than the original "problem".
  - pmoriarty 6y ago
    This is like someone who thinks the video cameras that are now ubiquitous in public places and stores are not a problem because he never leaves his home. Or that web tracking is not a problem because he always uses Tor. Or that emails sent and stored in plain text are not a problem because he always encrypts them with gpg. Well, you have to realize that the vast majority of people don't, and there's a massive societal impact of such widespread surveillance. The security-conscious technical elite who are willing to live a digitally monastic lifestyle (as Stallman does when he refuses to browse the web except through email) might be able to avoid some of that surveillance (though even then most of them admit they would be unable to stop surveillance by a well financed and determined adversary), but most everyone else either can't, won't, or don't realize there's a problem. The result is a digital dystopia that we're already in, but that's growing worse by the day. The consequences of it have already been felt by dissidents, victims of harassment, stalking and identity fraud, and increasingly by kids who grow up thinking a world without privacy is natural. It's only bound to get worse from here.
    - superkuh 6y ago
      No, it's not. It's like someone who thinks removing video cameras on private property does not in any way justify bringing over people with guns to coerce the owner. It's like the guy knows the people with the cameras are jerks and doesn't go to their house for BBQ.
      - pmoriarty 6y ago
        I'm not even talking about people with cameras in their homes. Take a look at the ubiquity of cameras in London for an example. Cameras are everywhere, and you'll be on hundreds if not thousands of them on a typical day walking around London. They're on street corners, in shops, restaurants, apartment building hallways, schools, playgrounds, tennis courts, parks, and pretty much everywhere else you go to. As an individual, you only option for not being videotaped is to stay home. All your finger wagging about these people being jerks isn't going to change a thing. I also really don't get why you're fixated on guns as being the only solution. You could simply make laws against it, and if they don't comply you could fine people/companies, or take away their business licenses. No guns necessary.

pmoriarty 6y ago

Even if you don't use them they'll collect data on you in many different ways: - "like" and "share" buttons on completely unrelated web sites that track your IP when your web browser downloads the images for these buttons or runs the associated javascript - people you know tagging you in photos they upload of you to these sites - recaptchas on unralated sites that collect data about your IP, browser fingerprint, and site you're visiting There are doubtlessly many, many, many other techniques they (and sites and companies you probably have no idea are owned by them and that feed data back in to them) use that don't require you to be on their sites to cyberstalk and spy on you.

junga 6y ago
And without having a google or facebook account you can‘t just check/modify/delete the data they collected.
superkuh 6y ago
>Even if you don't use them they'll collect data on you in many different ways They don't because I don't leave javascript execution on like grandma opening every email attachment she receives. Other people's behaviors are their business but it's pretty easy to ask people not to upload photos of you. And if it happens, well, it's actually not a big deal. Google recaptchas are super annoying and require whitelisting google javascript so I don't go to sites that block me with them. So you see how taking responsibility for my own behavior works here and I don't need people with guns to coerce other people and cause far more damage than the original "problem".
- pmoriarty 6y ago
  This is like someone who thinks the video cameras that are now ubiquitous in public places and stores are not a problem because he never leaves his home. Or that web tracking is not a problem because he always uses Tor. Or that emails sent and stored in plain text are not a problem because he always encrypts them with gpg. Well, you have to realize that the vast majority of people don't, and there's a massive societal impact of such widespread surveillance. The security-conscious technical elite who are willing to live a digitally monastic lifestyle (as Stallman does when he refuses to browse the web except through email) might be able to avoid some of that surveillance (though even then most of them admit they would be unable to stop surveillance by a well financed and determined adversary), but most everyone else either can't, won't, or don't realize there's a problem. The result is a digital dystopia that we're already in, but that's growing worse by the day. The consequences of it have already been felt by dissidents, victims of harassment, stalking and identity fraud, and increasingly by kids who grow up thinking a world without privacy is natural. It's only bound to get worse from here.
  - superkuh 6y ago
    No, it's not. It's like someone who thinks removing video cameras on private property does not in any way justify bringing over people with guns to coerce the owner. It's like the guy knows the people with the cameras are jerks and doesn't go to their house for BBQ.
    - pmoriarty 6y ago
      I'm not even talking about people with cameras in their homes. Take a look at the ubiquity of cameras in London for an example. Cameras are everywhere, and you'll be on hundreds if not thousands of them on a typical day walking around London. They're on street corners, in shops, restaurants, apartment building hallways, schools, playgrounds, tennis courts, parks, and pretty much everywhere else you go to. As an individual, you only option for not being videotaped is to stay home. All your finger wagging about these people being jerks isn't going to change a thing. I also really don't get why you're fixated on guns as being the only solution. You could simply make laws against it, and if they don't comply you could fine people/companies, or take away their business licenses. No guns necessary.