3 ms·

The privacy violation is Bob being careless and losing the message to Eve. That isn't caused by the internet, it's caused by Bob. When Eve has the message, pri

by zrm 5y ago

The privacy violation is Bob being careless and losing the message to Eve. That isn't caused by the internet, it's caused by Bob. When Eve has the message, privacy is already lost. Preventing Eve from spreading it around is technologically equivalent to censorship at that point so then you're just proving the original formulation. It doesn't mean you can insert just anything. "The net interprets beef as damage and routes around it." If you're an animal activist you might like for that to be true, but that's not really how it works.

klyrs 5y ago
Bob isn't careless. Bob is trying to offer a service free of charge, and Daryl is paying for metadata. So Bob makes a deal in order to provide the service. Daryl's offer is open to anybody, so even if Alice doesn't trust Bob, everybody from Edith through Zach is also selling metadata to Daryl too.
- zrm 5y ago
  Bob isn't a service provider, Bob is the other party Alice wants to communicate with. The entity you're referring to is called Facebook, not Bob. Nothing about the internet requires there to be an intermediary with the plaintext. Compare e.g. Signal. And if the internet is free-as-in-beer then Comcast owes me a big refund.
  - rossdavidh 5y ago
    The definition of "the internet" that you are using, is sort of like defining "the U.S. government" by the constitution. Yet, it is more useful in most cases, when referring to "the U.S. government", to include the way in which it actually, typically works. If your point is that it is possible to make an internet which did not violate privacy, sure, it is possible. But, that's not the internet we have, and this is not just a coincidence or a bit of bad luck, but rather an intrinsic feature of the very ease of networking and communicating on a vast scale which is also what's good about it. Making an internet which respected privacy might be possible, but it's much, much harder than before the internet.
  - klyrs 5y ago
    Sorry, mixed up the actors in all the silly metaphors. Comcast would probably tell you that they get you cheaper prices or nebulously better service via their data sharing agreements, but you know as well as me that it's as bullshit as it is ubiquitous. I'd say vote with your dollars, but that doesn't seem to work anymore either. Gotta vote in stronger legislation protecting privacy, but that seems insurmountable too.
type0 5y ago
The trouble is that Eve incentivizes and tricks Bob into sharing data with her, in this case Bob is also a victim, knowingly or not.
- rossdavidh 5y ago
  Relevant point, although Eve could be tricky and Bob careless, both. But I suppose the bad part is that either Eve being tricky or Bob being careless is enough, in most cases, unless Bob is a security professional (and even then only maybe).
bashinator 5y ago
The internet is what enables Eve to spread the formerly private message to literally anyone on Earth in a matter of seconds. That’s a qualitative difference from pre-Internet times.

by zrm 5y ago

klyrs 5y ago

Bob isn't careless. Bob is trying to offer a service free of charge, and Daryl is paying for metadata. So Bob makes a deal in order to provide the service. Daryl's offer is open to anybody, so even if Alice doesn't trust Bob, everybody from Edith through Zach is also selling metadata to Daryl too.

zrm 5y ago
Bob isn't a service provider, Bob is the other party Alice wants to communicate with. The entity you're referring to is called Facebook, not Bob. Nothing about the internet requires there to be an intermediary with the plaintext. Compare e.g. Signal. And if the internet is free-as-in-beer then Comcast owes me a big refund.
- rossdavidh 5y ago
  The definition of "the internet" that you are using, is sort of like defining "the U.S. government" by the constitution. Yet, it is more useful in most cases, when referring to "the U.S. government", to include the way in which it actually, typically works. If your point is that it is possible to make an internet which did not violate privacy, sure, it is possible. But, that's not the internet we have, and this is not just a coincidence or a bit of bad luck, but rather an intrinsic feature of the very ease of networking and communicating on a vast scale which is also what's good about it. Making an internet which respected privacy might be possible, but it's much, much harder than before the internet.
- klyrs 5y ago
  Sorry, mixed up the actors in all the silly metaphors. Comcast would probably tell you that they get you cheaper prices or nebulously better service via their data sharing agreements, but you know as well as me that it's as bullshit as it is ubiquitous. I'd say vote with your dollars, but that doesn't seem to work anymore either. Gotta vote in stronger legislation protecting privacy, but that seems insurmountable too.

type0 5y ago

The trouble is that Eve incentivizes and tricks Bob into sharing data with her, in this case Bob is also a victim, knowingly or not.

rossdavidh 5y ago
Relevant point, although Eve could be tricky and Bob careless, both. But I suppose the bad part is that either Eve being tricky or Bob being careless is enough, in most cases, unless Bob is a security professional (and even then only maybe).

bashinator 5y ago

The internet is what enables Eve to spread the formerly private message to literally anyone on Earth in a matter of seconds. That’s a qualitative difference from pre-Internet times.