4 ms·

> starting point to see what exists for your own research, the bigger issue is that it claims to be curated when it's more like a wiki. Problem is they also se

by dngray 4y ago

> starting point to see what exists for your own research, the bigger issue is that it claims to be curated when it's more like a wiki. Problem is they also serve to repeat bad/out of date practices. I always feel people who put together these lists are in a competition to list as many products and cover as many areas as possible, without evaluation.

Elyra 4y ago
I want to revise my claim of "nothing inherently wrong with a having lists like that". This is not just a simple list of software with summaries, and after looking at it more it's worse than I thought. And you're right about propagating bad/out of date advice being a problem. > I always feel people who put together these lists are in a competition to list as many products and cover as many areas as possible, without evaluation. Unfortunately this seems to be the quickest and easiest way to get the most attention. Proper curation takes lots of effort, and is hard to get noticed by people who don't know any better.
- dngray 4y ago
  > This is not just a simple list of software with summaries, and after looking at it more it's worse than I thought. And you're right about propagating bad/out of date advice being a problem. Where we notice this effect is in our subreddit /r/privacyguides and /r/privacy, particularly in regard to browser extensions. Fortunately through re-nforcement from the Arkenfox, Librewolf and our project we're starting to turn the tide away from "install 100 privacy browser extensions", so I think that's a positive benefit. > Unfortunately this seems to be the quickest and easiest way to get the most attention. Proper curation takes lots of effort, and is hard to get noticed by people who don't know any better. Pretty much why we're about quality over quantity with privacyguides.org. People have often asked "why don't we have a section for "this" or "that". Each section requires research, and not just parroting what someone else says.

by dngray 4y ago

Elyra 4y ago

I want to revise my claim of "nothing inherently wrong with a having lists like that". This is not just a simple list of software with summaries, and after looking at it more it's worse than I thought. And you're right about propagating bad/out of date advice being a problem. > I always feel people who put together these lists are in a competition to list as many products and cover as many areas as possible, without evaluation. Unfortunately this seems to be the quickest and easiest way to get the most attention. Proper curation takes lots of effort, and is hard to get noticed by people who don't know any better.

dngray 4y ago
> This is not just a simple list of software with summaries, and after looking at it more it's worse than I thought. And you're right about propagating bad/out of date advice being a problem. Where we notice this effect is in our subreddit /r/privacyguides and /r/privacy, particularly in regard to browser extensions. Fortunately through re-nforcement from the Arkenfox, Librewolf and our project we're starting to turn the tide away from "install 100 privacy browser extensions", so I think that's a positive benefit. > Unfortunately this seems to be the quickest and easiest way to get the most attention. Proper curation takes lots of effort, and is hard to get noticed by people who don't know any better. Pretty much why we're about quality over quantity with privacyguides.org. People have often asked "why don't we have a section for "this" or "that". Each section requires research, and not just parroting what someone else says.