3 ms·
Both this article and the non-tech companion article [1] skip over talking about why the author wants privacy. The failure to outline her objections makes the c
by advisedwang 4y ago
Both this article and the non-tech companion article [1] skip over talking about why the author wants privacy. The failure to outline her objections makes the countermeasures seem untethered from any motivation; I think that is why so many comments here react negatively to the valuable anti-surveillance work she's doing here.
This could be a issue by issue analysis. For example: "I don't want targeted ads -> prevent collecting targeting data -> use a privacy credit card". This is the easiest way to argue for privacy and can cover a lot of ground, however I worry it's too limited. This gives us the world of the "opt out" button which can fix a specific issue but somehow still leaves a really nasty taste about the surveillance world we are in.
I'd love to see more writers make on-the-principle arguments for privacy. This author clearly has that depth of feeling so it's a real missed chance.
[1] https://www.publicbooks.org/data-free-disney/ https://www.publicbooks.org/data-free-disney/
- cyberlyra 4y agoOriginal author here. I'm also in favor of more writing about privacy motivation, even if editors don't always want that all in the text they publish. I'm writing more about it at The Opt Out Project in addition to other places: for instance, the famous Pregnancy Experiment, where I kept my data about my (unborn) children away from digital detection: https://time.com/83200/privacy-internet-big-data-opt-out/ https://time.com/83200/privacy-internet-big-data-opt-out/