4 ms·

I would like to add that contrary to your impression we too value privacy in USA.

by mypov 15y ago

_delirium 15y ago
To some extent, though we've been less active in doing anything about it. In part we tend to be less keen than Europeans on having the government regulate these kinds of things, but the various private-sector and non-profit initiatives (like TRUSTe) that are supposed to fill the gap have been fairly ineffectual.
- alexqgb 15y ago
  Unlike Germans - who had the Statsi to contend with, and before that the SS - Americans have never been exposed to a genuine, law-unto-itself, every-phoneline-tapped, free-to-kidnap-torture-and-kill secret police force. One of the clearest lessons learned is that once these things take root, they are incredibly hard to dislodge. When they do go, it's only due to truly cataclysmic change. What naive Americans may regard as absurd hyper-sensitivity or a hopeless lack of technical sophistication is often an acute awareness that never letting it happen again means banning a lot of stuff that young innocents casually dismiss "as just being how the internet works". Evgeny Morozov (author of "The Net Delusion" http://amzn.to/nOOxzQ http://amzn.to/nOOxzQ) observes that casual openness is exactly how the web can be used to work against you. He makes the point that while folks safely ensconced in California should be grateful for their freedom from truly abusive government, they should also be a lot more sensitive to the concerns - and outright trauma - still found in places that haven't been so lucky. Of course, I'm over-simplifying his argument a bit. If you want a more complete (and much more entertaining) introduction, RSA did an especially good animation of a talk he gave, which you can see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk8x3V-sUgU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk8x3V-sUgU
  - hollerith 15y ago
    You mean Gestapo, not SS.
    - alexqgb 15y ago
      Correct - thank you.
beagle3 15y ago
Consider the massive usage of Facebook and Twitter, the lack of outrage over the warrantless wiretapping scandal (running for 10.5 years now), easily available voter records (see e.g. the backstory behind Latanya Sweeney's original identifiability study), and lack of public comments about requiring ISPs to store all session information for a long time - I would say that is strong evidence that USA as a nation does not actually value privacy. edit: wireless wiretapping scandal -> warrantless wiretapping scandal, silly me.
- Hawramani 15y ago
  Or the fact that all ATT (and possibly Verizon) traffic goes through the NSA.
  - beagle3 15y ago
    doh! I wrote "wireless wiretapping scandal" but I meant "warrantless wiretapping scandal", which is what you are referring to explicitly. edited to note correction; Thanks!
- JoshTriplett 15y ago
  Please don't equate a lack of change with a lack of outrage; that assumes we have the ability to fix things here just by getting outraged about them. I'd say "if only it were that easy", except that many of the broken things that need fixing exist due to supposed outrage/fear.
  - beagle3 15y ago
    I use outrage as an indicator for the degree of caring (in the sense that "value privacy" means "care about privacy"); is that not an acceptable use?
- old-gregg 15y ago
  Lack of outrage is the phenomena here, not the lack of respect for privacy. It's not that Americans don't value privacy, I think we do. Rather, it is the general attitude against outrage or, perhaps, against complaining, what differentiates the US from Europe. The country doesn't have a healthcare system for citizens outside of the military, and there's no outrage. Does this mean "there is strong evidence that USA as a nation" doesn't value not dying? "Don't seek government help, work harder, smile more and make more money" appears to be the answer/advice to those who complain/express outrage. Then you can buy yourself healthcare, privacy or anything you wish.

I would like to add that contrary to your impression we too value privacy in USA.

by mypov 15y ago

I would like to add that contrary to your impression we too value privacy in USA.

To some extent, though we've been less active in doing anything about it. In part we tend to be less keen than Europeans on having the government regulate these kinds of things, but the various private-sector and non-profit initiatives (like TRUSTe) that are supposed to fill the gap have been fairly ineffectual.

alexqgb 15y ago
Unlike Germans - who had the Statsi to contend with, and before that the SS - Americans have never been exposed to a genuine, law-unto-itself, every-phoneline-tapped, free-to-kidnap-torture-and-kill secret police force. One of the clearest lessons learned is that once these things take root, they are incredibly hard to dislodge. When they do go, it's only due to truly cataclysmic change. What naive Americans may regard as absurd hyper-sensitivity or a hopeless lack of technical sophistication is often an acute awareness that never letting it happen again means banning a lot of stuff that young innocents casually dismiss "as just being how the internet works". Evgeny Morozov (author of "The Net Delusion" http://amzn.to/nOOxzQ http://amzn.to/nOOxzQ) observes that casual openness is exactly how the web can be used to work against you. He makes the point that while folks safely ensconced in California should be grateful for their freedom from truly abusive government, they should also be a lot more sensitive to the concerns - and outright trauma - still found in places that haven't been so lucky. Of course, I'm over-simplifying his argument a bit. If you want a more complete (and much more entertaining) introduction, RSA did an especially good animation of a talk he gave, which you can see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk8x3V-sUgU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk8x3V-sUgU
- hollerith 15y ago
  You mean Gestapo, not SS.
  - alexqgb 15y ago
    Correct - thank you.

beagle3 15y ago

Consider the massive usage of Facebook and Twitter, the lack of outrage over the warrantless wiretapping scandal (running for 10.5 years now), easily available voter records (see e.g. the backstory behind Latanya Sweeney's original identifiability study), and lack of public comments about requiring ISPs to store all session information for a long time - I would say that is strong evidence that USA as a nation does not actually value privacy. edit: wireless wiretapping scandal -> warrantless wiretapping scandal, silly me.

Hawramani 15y ago
Or the fact that all ATT (and possibly Verizon) traffic goes through the NSA.
- beagle3 15y ago
  doh! I wrote "wireless wiretapping scandal" but I meant "warrantless wiretapping scandal", which is what you are referring to explicitly. edited to note correction; Thanks!
JoshTriplett 15y ago
Please don't equate a lack of change with a lack of outrage; that assumes we have the ability to fix things here just by getting outraged about them. I'd say "if only it were that easy", except that many of the broken things that need fixing exist due to supposed outrage/fear.
- beagle3 15y ago
  I use outrage as an indicator for the degree of caring (in the sense that "value privacy" means "care about privacy"); is that not an acceptable use?
old-gregg 15y ago
Lack of outrage is the phenomena here, not the lack of respect for privacy. It's not that Americans don't value privacy, I think we do. Rather, it is the general attitude against outrage or, perhaps, against complaining, what differentiates the US from Europe. The country doesn't have a healthcare system for citizens outside of the military, and there's no outrage. Does this mean "there is strong evidence that USA as a nation" doesn't value not dying? "Don't seek government help, work harder, smile more and make more money" appears to be the answer/advice to those who complain/express outrage. Then you can buy yourself healthcare, privacy or anything you wish.