4 ms·
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
by zrm 6y 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 agoThe 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 agoSorry, 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.