10 ms·

Young people in 13 EU countries refuse surveillance of online communication

mc32 4y ago
I have to Laugh out loud. What a question. Who in their right minds would say, "Yes, please! I want to have my communications surveilled like a nosy parent would but also have the force of the law behind it to punish me." What's the next question? Would you like to pay more in taxes and you have no say on how it gets spent?
- dtx1 4y ago
  I know that in britain many people want for example more CCTV Cameras.
  - pmontra 4y ago
    I guess that they don't want police operated CCTV cameras inside their homes.
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      that's Google's or Alexa's job.
      - visarga 4y ago
        Surveillance inside, outside the house, and online. Surveillance in your car. Great! It looks like privacy has become nearly impossible. Then we need to get control over our data and how it is being used. My ray of hope: an air-gapped beefy desktop that runs generative text and image models, plus a large disk filled with cached content. You can do anything in total privacy as long as it doesn't connect outside.
- jjulius 4y ago
  >What a question. Who in their right minds would say, "Yes, please! I want to have my communications surveilled like a nosy parent would but also have the force of the law behind it to punish me." I mean, if we take your question seriously, perhaps up to 34% of those surveyed... >66% of respondents don’t approve of internet providers monitoring their digital communication for suspicious content
  - soperj 4y ago
    34%
    - jjulius 4y ago
      D'oh, thanks.
- skrebbel 4y ago
  Yet, a large % of EU lawmakers appears to think that the people want this, and are supporting a law that makes it reality. Sure, some of them are authoritarians who simply want unchecked power, but it’s too cynical to assume that this holds for most. Many more are old, well-meaning people who are at least slightly afraid of computers and want to help Protect The Children. Showing them that, in fact, The Children themselves aren’t on board with this seems like a decent play to me.
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    > Yet, a large % of EU lawmakers appears to think that the people want this, and are supporting a law that makes it reality. They do. > Many more are old, well-meaning people who are at least slightly afraid of computers They are literally of the generation that invented computing and the internet. > The Children themselves aren’t on board with this seems like a decent play to me. Children are children, they don't know what they want and what they are doing. They are giving away tons of their personal data, pictures (including very private ones), messages (including very private ones), personal preferences (including very private ones, like political preferences, sexual preferences etc.) to TikTok, Instagram, Twitter and most of all Google and Apple, but yeah, the problem is the people elected to vote on some legislation that might create mild annoyances to the richest corporations history has ever seen.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- dfxm12 4y ago
  Some of these teens will be allowed to vote soon. Of course they say this in a survey response about a single issue. But, how will the person they eventually vote for feel about this issue? Will any current politicians take into account the will of their young constiuents? It's always fascinating to me how what people say is important to them doesn't necessarily inform who they vote for, or how politicians may simply ignore the will of the people. Unfortunately, for too many people it seems like politics is based purely on vibes.
betaby 4y ago
Populace consent is not required history teaches us.
- giuliomagnifico 4y ago
  True. But also population revolutions tell something.
  - 31337Logic 4y ago
    Exactly this. Never forget your intrinsic ability to revolt and rebel. Where possible, find like-minded individuals. It's amazing how much of the world you live in today arose not only from passive obedience but also active opposition.
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      Like what? Fight the government on the Chinese TikTok or the American Instagram? You know what it is really unbelievable right now, in this era? People renouncing to convenience and attentions in exchange for their independence. In my country so called anarchists are posting pictures of the revolts in the streets where you can literally see their faces on Facebook and Instagram. Call me an old fart, but no pictures, no names was rule #1 when I went to protests in my teen age.
- JohnFen 4y ago
  I think history teaches us the opposite. Oppressive regimes (of whatever sort) can only persist with the consent of the populace. "Consent" here doesn't mean overt agreement or being happy with the situation. It means the populace is doing nothing to change things. Find the amount of oppression that people are willing to put up with, and you've found the amount of oppression they are subjected to.
  - mistrial9 4y ago
    you forgot - "say one thing, do another" .. it works very well for the despot especially when there are no clear times of reset.
fatnoah 4y ago
Misleading title on the site. The real result is: "According to the results of the survey, 80% of young people aged 13 to 17 years old from 13 EU Member States would not feel comfortable being politically active or exploring their sexuality if authorities were able to monitor their digital communication, in order to look for child sexual abuse."
- tester756 4y ago
  Why is it misleading then?
  - Shish2k 4y ago
    Being surveiled for advertising purposes is fine
    - moremetadata 4y ago
      Not when adverts are used to psychologically torture you. For example you might be a heterosexual with public views, espousing the virtues of heterosexuallity, without condemning or maligning non heterosexual people. How would you feel if all the adverts you saw were for non heterosexual people, wuld you feel trolled, harassed, intimidated? Now take those same algorithms that were used to target adverts at you for psychological purposes, and apply them to websites displaying news stories and social media like reddit, and search engine results. Would that amplify the feelings of intimidation and harrassment? Because that is exactly what is going on right now perpetrated by the US tech giants with the collusion of the of various states. The mere mention of this activity, could also make you aware or more aware of this so that you can start to spot it being done to you and others around you.
      - slackdog 4y ago
        Even without tracking, virtually all advertising is a form of psychological warfare. Here's a common sort of ad: an image depicting young popular people having fun in the park, with cans of cola next to them. The message? If you drink our cola, you can have this lifestyle. This sort of advertising is designed to exploit insecurities people feel about themselves and their social life. This is psychological warfare for commercial gain, and it's standard operating practice for the advertising industry.
superkuh 4y ago
And yet most people, young and old, pick proprietary communication platforms that enable exactly that with more steps. Discord, etc.
- frostiness 4y ago
  You can have both. People can intentionally choose platforms that make them feel less free in exchange for convenience. It just means that the convenience (and network effects) that they get out of using a more convenient platform are more valuable to them than the ability to communicate freely. When most people are using these platforms non-anonymously (i.e. to talk with their friends) they probably also get less out of privacy than people talking to others they've never met in person. It's worthwhile to consider a balance between convenience, plausible deniability (people don't really want to be that guy in the coffee shop on Tor), and privacy. Privacy platforms nowadays consider privacy above all else because most people heavily into privacy are purists that don't want to sacrifice any privacy in exchange for having more people to talk with. It's one of the reasons I still respect Telegram with all of its shortcomings, because even though it's relatively insecure in comparison to its competitors, it takes convenience into account and as such has more users than most all privacy-centric messengers while still providing end-to-end encryption for the people that desire it (at least in theory, the cryptography's a bit shaky).
- Laaas 4y ago
  The obvious reason being that the decentralised alternatives have an obviously worse UX. Matrix is great, but it's not quite there yet.
  - anaganisk 4y ago
    Decentralized alternatives are primarily built by developers, Im not sure if Matrix employs specialized UI/UX teams. But at least a lot of attention is definitely paid in designing UI/UX for apps like Whatsapp, Discord, etc. They have cash to employ designers. Developers gain a good amount of knowledge, popularity, and skill, maintaining open source code, but for UI/UX, there is not much to gain for designers unless paid for.
- 4y ago
rvz 4y ago
Perhaps it is too late since data miners, AI corpuses, breaches and LLMs already mined your pro-nouns, personal information and political associations in your social media bios. At this point with the introduction or mass adoption of eSIMs and iSIMs going to be embedded in IoT devices and phones in the coming years, the surveillance is going to only get much worse.
seydor 4y ago
Good thing that they don't vote (/s)
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
kypro 4y ago
Am I being thick or is this not the explicit intention? I mean "exploring your sexuality" via picture messaging, or physically with another person would be a crime in most European countries if you're a child. Similarly, many political opinions are illegal to hold in Europe. Part of the justification of this law is that it will give the state extra powers to keep us safe from harmful opinions people hold in private. Currently they can only police harmful opinions expressed in public. So yeah, this doesn't surprise me at all. The whole point is that kids are less free to explore their sexuality and that we are less able to discuss ideas the state disapproves of. The right question to be asking here is whether the state is correct to impose these limitations on us?
- seydor 4y ago
  Political opinions are not illegal to hold. Expressing them, maybe
  - johngladtj 4y ago
    Only because without expression there is not yet a way to prove it
  - kypro 4y ago
    This is incorrect. As an example simply reading ISIS content online can be enough to charge you with a terror offence (at least in the UK). https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41479620 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41479620 Edit: Although, I suppose you could define reading ISIS content as an expression of ISIS beliefs, so maybe I'm misunderstanding your point.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - kurthr 4y ago
      Wow, the judge and prosecutor are terrorists, or do they have a "legitimate excuse" too?! To be fair, they're probably not brown so can't be the "bad" kind of terrorist. Still OMG, thought crime.
steponlego 4y ago
How can they refuse it? This is an imposition from on high. EU is just going to do it anyway.
college_physics 4y ago
On other news, 80% of young people aged 13 to 17 years old from the same 13 EU Member States floked to tiktok, before that to instagram and youtube and before that to facebook. All along they were actively encouraged by authorities who are also there to "engage", endorsing and encouraging the new era of privacy is dead. Can we please stop beating about the bush? Surveillance, whether with commercial or political motives is a critical issue. Society is malfunctioning "at scale" while a sort of sheepish stalemate has taken hold. People are uninformed. Vested interests would rather keep it this way. These are grave risks and they must be taken seriously / discussed with the outmost transparency, objectivity and urgency.
- Tijdreiziger 4y ago
  Even if you are informed, it's hard to take action. Running solely FLOSS software is an option, but this is very impractical for many use cases, so your options are essentially 'make your life harder to preserve privacy' or 'privacy is dead'.
  - seabird 4y ago
    You don't have to solely run FLOSS software. There's a lot of middle ground between between walking into the TikTok/Meta/Alphabet brain grinder for convenience's sake and Stallman-level fanaticism.
    - Tijdreiziger 4y ago
      Well, do you have any suggestions? (earnest question) I have been thinking/reading about this a lot in the past months (to the detriment of my mental health, unfortunately), and it seems like even non-FLOSS operating systems are somewhat invasive when it comes to privacy, let alone the software you run on them.
  - college_physics 4y ago
    FOSS is not a guarantee of privacy by any means. For example there is the confusion about mastodon / fediverse type social media and what sort of firewalls its creates, for posts, for direct messages etc. I think FOSS means there is more transparency about what is going on, which is very important but not the whole story.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nikanj 4y ago
Old people in said countries implemented said surveillance anyway.
- seydor 4y ago
  I wouldn't really blame old people for this. They seemed to be much more conscious of individual freedom. Younger generations are much more likely to seek safety in the arms of some ruling class, be it tech giants or the government.
alexklarjr 4y ago
Too bad, zoomers, nobody asking you a permission. In fact, you are the first digital surveillance generation that delivering steady stream of data from your birth to your death. It will greatly help to fine tune digital gulag your children (if any) will live in 30 years.
Animats 4y ago
This is preparing people for the roundup of gays and political dissidents. Happening now in Russia and China. Soon, Florida.
- troad 4y ago
  Please don't use my identity for political scaremongering. There is no comparison between Russia and Florida for gays (or political dissidents).
- tryauuum 4y ago
  there's a saying in russia, "laws are harsh but luckily they aren't mandatory"
olivermarks 4y ago
Scott McNealy, co-founder and former CEO of Sun Microsystems, famously told a group of reporters, “You have zero privacy anyway… Get over it!” The year was 1999. The Internet as we know it was barely five years old. Here we are in 2023 with huge commercial global data mills ingesting everything about everyone, with many people actually filing details of their private lives on Meta, tiktok etc every day...and yet edri is using a peashooter versus the EU and earnestly acting like it is still 1999.. EDRi are located in Brussels Belgium along with the EU HQ (the 'Tower of Babel' EU 'parliament' is in Strasbourg). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Digital_Rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Digital_Rights
chaosbolt 4y ago
>according to the survey Privacy is like money, it's something everyone wants, the keywords is wants, if you ask people in a survey they'll say they want their privacy, if you wait until they're tired and mindlessly scrolling some newsfeed and block the next video until they click some "I agree" thing, they will click it and pay for the access to whatever entertainement you're selling with whataver privacy they still have. Come again when you find some data about people who took action to keep their privacy, not said yes in a survey.
jscipione 4y ago
There is no freedom of speech in 18 European countries and thus there is no democracy in Europe. Skepticism of authority is warranted including undo surveillance because European governments are deeply authoritarian.
villgax 4y ago
Wonder if all this Android & iOS surveillance in general using ISPs is just going to push people towards even more custom devices/software stack

mc32 4y ago

I have to Laugh out loud. What a question. Who in their right minds would say, "Yes, please! I want to have my communications surveilled like a nosy parent would but also have the force of the law behind it to punish me." What's the next question? Would you like to pay more in taxes and you have no say on how it gets spent?

dtx1 4y ago
I know that in britain many people want for example more CCTV Cameras.
- pmontra 4y ago
  I guess that they don't want police operated CCTV cameras inside their homes.
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    that's Google's or Alexa's job.
    - visarga 4y ago
      Surveillance inside, outside the house, and online. Surveillance in your car. Great! It looks like privacy has become nearly impossible. Then we need to get control over our data and how it is being used. My ray of hope: an air-gapped beefy desktop that runs generative text and image models, plus a large disk filled with cached content. You can do anything in total privacy as long as it doesn't connect outside.
jjulius 4y ago
>What a question. Who in their right minds would say, "Yes, please! I want to have my communications surveilled like a nosy parent would but also have the force of the law behind it to punish me." I mean, if we take your question seriously, perhaps up to 34% of those surveyed... >66% of respondents don’t approve of internet providers monitoring their digital communication for suspicious content
- soperj 4y ago
  34%
  - jjulius 4y ago
    D'oh, thanks.
skrebbel 4y ago
Yet, a large % of EU lawmakers appears to think that the people want this, and are supporting a law that makes it reality. Sure, some of them are authoritarians who simply want unchecked power, but it’s too cynical to assume that this holds for most. Many more are old, well-meaning people who are at least slightly afraid of computers and want to help Protect The Children. Showing them that, in fact, The Children themselves aren’t on board with this seems like a decent play to me.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  > Yet, a large % of EU lawmakers appears to think that the people want this, and are supporting a law that makes it reality. They do. > Many more are old, well-meaning people who are at least slightly afraid of computers They are literally of the generation that invented computing and the internet. > The Children themselves aren’t on board with this seems like a decent play to me. Children are children, they don't know what they want and what they are doing. They are giving away tons of their personal data, pictures (including very private ones), messages (including very private ones), personal preferences (including very private ones, like political preferences, sexual preferences etc.) to TikTok, Instagram, Twitter and most of all Google and Apple, but yeah, the problem is the people elected to vote on some legislation that might create mild annoyances to the richest corporations history has ever seen.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
dfxm12 4y ago
Some of these teens will be allowed to vote soon. Of course they say this in a survey response about a single issue. But, how will the person they eventually vote for feel about this issue? Will any current politicians take into account the will of their young constiuents? It's always fascinating to me how what people say is important to them doesn't necessarily inform who they vote for, or how politicians may simply ignore the will of the people. Unfortunately, for too many people it seems like politics is based purely on vibes.

betaby 4y ago

Populace consent is not required history teaches us.

giuliomagnifico 4y ago
True. But also population revolutions tell something.
- 31337Logic 4y ago
  Exactly this. Never forget your intrinsic ability to revolt and rebel. Where possible, find like-minded individuals. It's amazing how much of the world you live in today arose not only from passive obedience but also active opposition.
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    Like what? Fight the government on the Chinese TikTok or the American Instagram? You know what it is really unbelievable right now, in this era? People renouncing to convenience and attentions in exchange for their independence. In my country so called anarchists are posting pictures of the revolts in the streets where you can literally see their faces on Facebook and Instagram. Call me an old fart, but no pictures, no names was rule #1 when I went to protests in my teen age.
JohnFen 4y ago
I think history teaches us the opposite. Oppressive regimes (of whatever sort) can only persist with the consent of the populace. "Consent" here doesn't mean overt agreement or being happy with the situation. It means the populace is doing nothing to change things. Find the amount of oppression that people are willing to put up with, and you've found the amount of oppression they are subjected to.
- mistrial9 4y ago
  you forgot - "say one thing, do another" .. it works very well for the despot especially when there are no clear times of reset.

fatnoah 4y ago

Misleading title on the site. The real result is: "According to the results of the survey, 80% of young people aged 13 to 17 years old from 13 EU Member States would not feel comfortable being politically active or exploring their sexuality if authorities were able to monitor their digital communication, in order to look for child sexual abuse."

tester756 4y ago
Why is it misleading then?
- Shish2k 4y ago
  Being surveiled for advertising purposes is fine
  - moremetadata 4y ago
    Not when adverts are used to psychologically torture you. For example you might be a heterosexual with public views, espousing the virtues of heterosexuallity, without condemning or maligning non heterosexual people. How would you feel if all the adverts you saw were for non heterosexual people, wuld you feel trolled, harassed, intimidated? Now take those same algorithms that were used to target adverts at you for psychological purposes, and apply them to websites displaying news stories and social media like reddit, and search engine results. Would that amplify the feelings of intimidation and harrassment? Because that is exactly what is going on right now perpetrated by the US tech giants with the collusion of the of various states. The mere mention of this activity, could also make you aware or more aware of this so that you can start to spot it being done to you and others around you.
    - slackdog 4y ago
      Even without tracking, virtually all advertising is a form of psychological warfare. Here's a common sort of ad: an image depicting young popular people having fun in the park, with cans of cola next to them. The message? If you drink our cola, you can have this lifestyle. This sort of advertising is designed to exploit insecurities people feel about themselves and their social life. This is psychological warfare for commercial gain, and it's standard operating practice for the advertising industry.

superkuh 4y ago

And yet most people, young and old, pick proprietary communication platforms that enable exactly that with more steps. Discord, etc.

frostiness 4y ago
You can have both. People can intentionally choose platforms that make them feel less free in exchange for convenience. It just means that the convenience (and network effects) that they get out of using a more convenient platform are more valuable to them than the ability to communicate freely. When most people are using these platforms non-anonymously (i.e. to talk with their friends) they probably also get less out of privacy than people talking to others they've never met in person. It's worthwhile to consider a balance between convenience, plausible deniability (people don't really want to be that guy in the coffee shop on Tor), and privacy. Privacy platforms nowadays consider privacy above all else because most people heavily into privacy are purists that don't want to sacrifice any privacy in exchange for having more people to talk with. It's one of the reasons I still respect Telegram with all of its shortcomings, because even though it's relatively insecure in comparison to its competitors, it takes convenience into account and as such has more users than most all privacy-centric messengers while still providing end-to-end encryption for the people that desire it (at least in theory, the cryptography's a bit shaky).
Laaas 4y ago
The obvious reason being that the decentralised alternatives have an obviously worse UX. Matrix is great, but it's not quite there yet.
- anaganisk 4y ago
  Decentralized alternatives are primarily built by developers, Im not sure if Matrix employs specialized UI/UX teams. But at least a lot of attention is definitely paid in designing UI/UX for apps like Whatsapp, Discord, etc. They have cash to employ designers. Developers gain a good amount of knowledge, popularity, and skill, maintaining open source code, but for UI/UX, there is not much to gain for designers unless paid for.
4y ago

rvz 4y ago

Perhaps it is too late since data miners, AI corpuses, breaches and LLMs already mined your pro-nouns, personal information and political associations in your social media bios. At this point with the introduction or mass adoption of eSIMs and iSIMs going to be embedded in IoT devices and phones in the coming years, the surveillance is going to only get much worse.

seydor 4y ago

Good thing that they don't vote (/s)

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

kypro 4y ago

Am I being thick or is this not the explicit intention? I mean "exploring your sexuality" via picture messaging, or physically with another person would be a crime in most European countries if you're a child. Similarly, many political opinions are illegal to hold in Europe. Part of the justification of this law is that it will give the state extra powers to keep us safe from harmful opinions people hold in private. Currently they can only police harmful opinions expressed in public. So yeah, this doesn't surprise me at all. The whole point is that kids are less free to explore their sexuality and that we are less able to discuss ideas the state disapproves of. The right question to be asking here is whether the state is correct to impose these limitations on us?

seydor 4y ago
Political opinions are not illegal to hold. Expressing them, maybe
- johngladtj 4y ago
  Only because without expression there is not yet a way to prove it
- kypro 4y ago
  This is incorrect. As an example simply reading ISIS content online can be enough to charge you with a terror offence (at least in the UK). https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41479620 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-41479620 Edit: Although, I suppose you could define reading ISIS content as an expression of ISIS beliefs, so maybe I'm misunderstanding your point.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - kurthr 4y ago
    Wow, the judge and prosecutor are terrorists, or do they have a "legitimate excuse" too?! To be fair, they're probably not brown so can't be the "bad" kind of terrorist. Still OMG, thought crime.

steponlego 4y ago

How can they refuse it? This is an imposition from on high. EU is just going to do it anyway.

college_physics 4y ago

On other news, 80% of young people aged 13 to 17 years old from the same 13 EU Member States floked to tiktok, before that to instagram and youtube and before that to facebook. All along they were actively encouraged by authorities who are also there to "engage", endorsing and encouraging the new era of privacy is dead. Can we please stop beating about the bush? Surveillance, whether with commercial or political motives is a critical issue. Society is malfunctioning "at scale" while a sort of sheepish stalemate has taken hold. People are uninformed. Vested interests would rather keep it this way. These are grave risks and they must be taken seriously / discussed with the outmost transparency, objectivity and urgency.

Tijdreiziger 4y ago
Even if you are informed, it's hard to take action. Running solely FLOSS software is an option, but this is very impractical for many use cases, so your options are essentially 'make your life harder to preserve privacy' or 'privacy is dead'.
- seabird 4y ago
  You don't have to solely run FLOSS software. There's a lot of middle ground between between walking into the TikTok/Meta/Alphabet brain grinder for convenience's sake and Stallman-level fanaticism.
  - Tijdreiziger 4y ago
    Well, do you have any suggestions? (earnest question) I have been thinking/reading about this a lot in the past months (to the detriment of my mental health, unfortunately), and it seems like even non-FLOSS operating systems are somewhat invasive when it comes to privacy, let alone the software you run on them.
- college_physics 4y ago
  FOSS is not a guarantee of privacy by any means. For example there is the confusion about mastodon / fediverse type social media and what sort of firewalls its creates, for posts, for direct messages etc. I think FOSS means there is more transparency about what is going on, which is very important but not the whole story.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

nikanj 4y ago

Old people in said countries implemented said surveillance anyway.

seydor 4y ago
I wouldn't really blame old people for this. They seemed to be much more conscious of individual freedom. Younger generations are much more likely to seek safety in the arms of some ruling class, be it tech giants or the government.

alexklarjr 4y ago

Too bad, zoomers, nobody asking you a permission. In fact, you are the first digital surveillance generation that delivering steady stream of data from your birth to your death. It will greatly help to fine tune digital gulag your children (if any) will live in 30 years.

Animats 4y ago

This is preparing people for the roundup of gays and political dissidents. Happening now in Russia and China. Soon, Florida.

troad 4y ago
Please don't use my identity for political scaremongering. There is no comparison between Russia and Florida for gays (or political dissidents).
tryauuum 4y ago
there's a saying in russia, "laws are harsh but luckily they aren't mandatory"

olivermarks 4y ago

Scott McNealy, co-founder and former CEO of Sun Microsystems, famously told a group of reporters, “You have zero privacy anyway… Get over it!” The year was 1999. The Internet as we know it was barely five years old. Here we are in 2023 with huge commercial global data mills ingesting everything about everyone, with many people actually filing details of their private lives on Meta, tiktok etc every day...and yet edri is using a peashooter versus the EU and earnestly acting like it is still 1999.. EDRi are located in Brussels Belgium along with the EU HQ (the 'Tower of Babel' EU 'parliament' is in Strasbourg). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Digital_Rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Digital_Rights

chaosbolt 4y ago

>according to the survey Privacy is like money, it's something everyone wants, the keywords is wants, if you ask people in a survey they'll say they want their privacy, if you wait until they're tired and mindlessly scrolling some newsfeed and block the next video until they click some "I agree" thing, they will click it and pay for the access to whatever entertainement you're selling with whataver privacy they still have. Come again when you find some data about people who took action to keep their privacy, not said yes in a survey.

jscipione 4y ago

There is no freedom of speech in 18 European countries and thus there is no democracy in Europe. Skepticism of authority is warranted including undo surveillance because European governments are deeply authoritarian.

villgax 4y ago

Wonder if all this Android & iOS surveillance in general using ISPs is just going to push people towards even more custom devices/software stack