3 ms·

Nah. The vast majority of people just virtue signal about privacy. They don't actually care (and when I say care, I mean feel strongly enough about it to chang

Nah. The vast majority of people just virtue signal about privacy. They don't actually care (and when I say care, I mean feel strongly enough about it to change their actions to specifically avoid surveillance). Supreme Court is def stacked, but in this case, its likely they don't wanna waste their time with something that will 100% have no actionable outcome.

possiblerobot 4y ago
Is closing the door when you poop virtue signaling? Or are people really more interested in being seen closing the door? I think when given a set of options they understand, many people will choose more privacy from companies and the government because that’s what they want. I think that’s especially true when they understand the actual scope and scale of the surveillance.
sholladay 4y ago
Privacy done correctly - especially to a degree that can meaningfully defend against the techniques used for mass surveillance - is technically complicated. The general public feels helpless on the matter. That is why you hear people argue in favor of privacy without taking much action. Improved education will make them feel empowered to act. But we also have to improve the software. Many people switched to Signal recently when they heard about it for the first time. The only ones I know who stopped using it did so because of UX flaws. Why is there no mainstream browser with an "Enable Tor" button? Probably because it's the browser makers that are virtue signaling, not the public. The browser makers all rely on tracking you to make their business model sustainable. Give the people a true, reasonable choice for privacy and they will likely take it.
- drsnow 4y ago
  >Why is there no mainstream browser with an "Enable Tor" button? Because using anything other than the Tor Browser Bundle is a good way to differentiate your usage from that of the vast majority of Tor users and render yourself more easily identifiable than otherwise.
  - sholladay 4y ago
    I agree generally, it is an inferior approach for the user, but it is more approachable. Also, I would say it depends on the implementation. Even if there is no solution to that, surely it's better to have the capability than to not have it. For many people, this could simply be the beginning of the funnel, a gentle introduction to Tor, which could be accompanied by a message instructing them how to download and use the Tor Browser Bundle. I doubt that will happen any time soon because of the existing business models, but it would be a major step if it did.
- yucky 4y ago
  > Why is there no mainstream browser with an "Enable Tor" button? Brave has it. I know you said mainstream, but just wanted rep them since it's the best browser on the market.
  - lern_too_spel 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - yucky 4y ago
      I appreciate you comparing me to one of the foremost tech experts in the world, but the compliment is undeserved.
LatteLazy 4y ago
I agree most people don't care. Whether that's because they don't know or wouldn't care anyway I am not sure. That's sort of irrelevant though, if you don't mind me saying: the entire purpose of scotus is to take cases that the mainstream don't care about but which have significant implications either for individuals, small groups or society as a whole. That's why it was the supreme court that created gay and interracial marriage. Neither minority could get fair treatment via the ballot box. If the majority cared, in theory at least, they need only vote to get what they want. The Senate, the House and POTUS all serve them (to greater or lesser or degrees). SCOTUS is for the little guy. That's why it's members are NOT elected or otherwise subject to public opinion.
sc68cal 4y ago
> they don't wanna waste their time with something that will 100% have no actionable outcome. It is _their job_ to consider these issues. They have their entire lives dedicated to this task.

possiblerobot 4y ago

Is closing the door when you poop virtue signaling? Or are people really more interested in being seen closing the door? I think when given a set of options they understand, many people will choose more privacy from companies and the government because that’s what they want. I think that’s especially true when they understand the actual scope and scale of the surveillance.

sholladay 4y ago

Privacy done correctly - especially to a degree that can meaningfully defend against the techniques used for mass surveillance - is technically complicated. The general public feels helpless on the matter. That is why you hear people argue in favor of privacy without taking much action. Improved education will make them feel empowered to act. But we also have to improve the software. Many people switched to Signal recently when they heard about it for the first time. The only ones I know who stopped using it did so because of UX flaws. Why is there no mainstream browser with an "Enable Tor" button? Probably because it's the browser makers that are virtue signaling, not the public. The browser makers all rely on tracking you to make their business model sustainable. Give the people a true, reasonable choice for privacy and they will likely take it.

drsnow 4y ago
>Why is there no mainstream browser with an "Enable Tor" button? Because using anything other than the Tor Browser Bundle is a good way to differentiate your usage from that of the vast majority of Tor users and render yourself more easily identifiable than otherwise.
- sholladay 4y ago
  I agree generally, it is an inferior approach for the user, but it is more approachable. Also, I would say it depends on the implementation. Even if there is no solution to that, surely it's better to have the capability than to not have it. For many people, this could simply be the beginning of the funnel, a gentle introduction to Tor, which could be accompanied by a message instructing them how to download and use the Tor Browser Bundle. I doubt that will happen any time soon because of the existing business models, but it would be a major step if it did.
yucky 4y ago
> Why is there no mainstream browser with an "Enable Tor" button? Brave has it. I know you said mainstream, but just wanted rep them since it's the best browser on the market.
- lern_too_spel 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - yucky 4y ago
    I appreciate you comparing me to one of the foremost tech experts in the world, but the compliment is undeserved.

LatteLazy 4y ago

I agree most people don't care. Whether that's because they don't know or wouldn't care anyway I am not sure. That's sort of irrelevant though, if you don't mind me saying: the entire purpose of scotus is to take cases that the mainstream don't care about but which have significant implications either for individuals, small groups or society as a whole. That's why it was the supreme court that created gay and interracial marriage. Neither minority could get fair treatment via the ballot box. If the majority cared, in theory at least, they need only vote to get what they want. The Senate, the House and POTUS all serve them (to greater or lesser or degrees). SCOTUS is for the little guy. That's why it's members are NOT elected or otherwise subject to public opinion.

sc68cal 4y ago

> they don't wanna waste their time with something that will 100% have no actionable outcome. It is _their job_ to consider these issues. They have their entire lives dedicated to this task.