3 ms·
No. The reason people don't have anonymity is that people don't want anonymity (or, rather, want the benefits of non-anonymity). It's easy to point fingers at
by jd115 5y ago
No. The reason people don't have anonymity is that people don't want anonymity (or, rather, want the benefits of non-anonymity).
It's easy to point fingers at large-scale evil-doers, but none of those exist in a vacuum, do they?
Do we perhaps want stricter laws to protect people's anonymity? Cause I thought we wanted less laws, in order to allow for greater freedom.
Ah, I got it, we want balance. But just a little tilted this way, if that's okay.
Hard to please.
- mam3 5y agoIts so true. People dont have ideas they want to fight for anymore. If its doing ok for them its cool. Thats also the large majority of chinese citizen is "cool" with their government
- willis936 5y ago>Cause I thought we wanted less laws, in order to allow for greater freedom. Needless strawman. No one calling for more privacy is calling for smaller government.
- jd115 5y agoOh so you want privacy AND bigger government? Do you even hear yourself?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- willis936 5y agoI want a government that is big enough to have laws. You know, the things that society operates on top of. Laws that protect the people from rogue government behavior. How are laws related to privacy anything at all like a large DoD budget?
- jd115 5y agoYou seem to have some romantic notions about laws and government that are utterly divorced from reality. Not because reality is flawed, but because those ideals are flawed at their core.
- dangerface 5y ago> It's easy to point fingers at large-scale evil-doers, but none of those exist in a vacuum, do they? Thats the point potamic made the focus is on the evil large-scale doers do not the potential evil of their tech outside of their control, an argument large scale doers tend to hand wave as not going to happen. Now that it has happened there is no point debating laws as evil doers are not controlled by laws. This is the argument privacy advocates have made for years and now it has happened it's too late to protect people by changing laws. Seeing a problem before it happens and presenting a solution to prevent that problem is not being hard to please, it's the exact opposite. Wanting to weaken privacy so you can invade peoples privacy but not have other invade that persons privacy is being hard to please and its the attitude politicians take and its the root cause of this problem.
- ViViDboarder 5y agoPrivacy is not necessarily anonymity and privacy and non-anonymity aren’t at odds. I can be perfectly happy to publish public thoughts under my real name but take objection to large scale tracking, collection of data from private conversations, and back doors to my personal devices.