3 ms·

The other side of the question is too often left out: a vast majority of people are empowering surveilling entities. They're giving a trove of information to e

The other side of the question is too often left out: a vast majority of people are empowering surveilling entities. They're giving a trove of information to establish a baseline that will impact anyone diverging from there, while also helping further manipulation as the feedback loop between what they're pushed and how they react to it is transparent. So IMHO, privacy should be enforced by default if we look at it from the group's perspective.

Zetice 3y ago
Except that's not happening. Could my DNA be used to scan for racial anomalies in newborns? Yes. Is that actually happening? Hell no. Doomsday screeching is not a productive activity, and privacy is not the issue here. It's how people are using their collected data. Besides, caring about other people's treatment of privacy is, if you actually believe what you're saying, none of your business.
- makeitdouble 3y ago
  > that actually happening? Hell no. I'm kinda tired of blanket dismissal of anything that could be mildly tinfoil hat looking. Not falling into a panic every thursday about random corporate action is a thing, being ultra confident that no one is ever doing anything harmful on a specific subject is unwarranted. Eugenism was a thing baked into laws not that long time ago and is still in the books depending on where you live. Patients are still suing govs for reparation because their claims were memoryholed. You can't just throw around "Is that actually happening? Hell no." rhetoric as if you were due a demonstration served on a plate before accepting that the world is 't as skweeky clean as you seem to assume it is.
  - Zetice 3y ago
    And I'm kinda tired of blanket chicken littling over privacy from folks who refuse to accept the general situation of the vast majority of people. Eugenics is not a thing modern humans in Western society need to realistically worry about, and the main reason you're not getting the traction you think you should be getting is because you keep pretending like it is. People tune this attitude out, because of how patently absurd it is. The average person operates in their own best interest. The reality is that caring deeply about privacy is not in their best interest, no matter how many boogeymen you try to pull out. It just doesn't come up nearly as often or as severely as you apparently wish.
    - defrost 3y ago
      > Eugenics is not a thing modern humans in Western society need to realistically worry about, Hard disagree, the facts are against you. My father was born in 1935 and is still alive and very healthy, during his lifetime here in Australia, a modern Western Society, a Eugenics based carding and restricted movement system was in force. https://culture.wa.gov.au/feature/perths-prohibited-area https://culture.wa.gov.au/feature/perths-prohibited-area Looking about the world there are still many examples of divided rules for colonists and indigenous peoples, if you're in North America ask your nearest Indigenous American whether any significant issues still hang on bloodlines, you'll hear a range of answers some of which might suprise you. All that aside .. never forget that what has happened in the past can happen in the future and perhaps faster than many expect. With a rise in far right policy and the US still somewhat shocked by the overturning of Roe V Wade with womens search data wrt reproductive health now a hot topic in security and law enforcement it's not at all outlandish to posit that it wouldn't take much to see the emergance of policy to seperate those that are different in some manner .. the intersex, arabs and chinese and have all been recent and current tarets of the US right.
      - Zetice 3y ago
        What you’re describing isn’t eugenics, and what you’re fear mongering for isn’t realistic or relevant to 99% of people. You really want to make privacy everyone’s problem, but it simply isn’t.
        makeitdouble 3y ago
        It looks like you need it spelled out very clearly, so here a whole piece on Autralia and eugenics: https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/rearvision/australias-eugenic-heritage/3244372 https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/rearvision/aus...
        Zetice 3y ago
        I don’t think you understand how damaging it is to your argument that you need to refer to events that took place before the invention of the microchip in order to make this point.

Zetice 3y ago

Except that's not happening. Could my DNA be used to scan for racial anomalies in newborns? Yes. Is that actually happening? Hell no. Doomsday screeching is not a productive activity, and privacy is not the issue here. It's how people are using their collected data. Besides, caring about other people's treatment of privacy is, if you actually believe what you're saying, none of your business.

makeitdouble 3y ago
> that actually happening? Hell no. I'm kinda tired of blanket dismissal of anything that could be mildly tinfoil hat looking. Not falling into a panic every thursday about random corporate action is a thing, being ultra confident that no one is ever doing anything harmful on a specific subject is unwarranted. Eugenism was a thing baked into laws not that long time ago and is still in the books depending on where you live. Patients are still suing govs for reparation because their claims were memoryholed. You can't just throw around "Is that actually happening? Hell no." rhetoric as if you were due a demonstration served on a plate before accepting that the world is 't as skweeky clean as you seem to assume it is.
- Zetice 3y ago
  And I'm kinda tired of blanket chicken littling over privacy from folks who refuse to accept the general situation of the vast majority of people. Eugenics is not a thing modern humans in Western society need to realistically worry about, and the main reason you're not getting the traction you think you should be getting is because you keep pretending like it is. People tune this attitude out, because of how patently absurd it is. The average person operates in their own best interest. The reality is that caring deeply about privacy is not in their best interest, no matter how many boogeymen you try to pull out. It just doesn't come up nearly as often or as severely as you apparently wish.
  - defrost 3y ago
    > Eugenics is not a thing modern humans in Western society need to realistically worry about, Hard disagree, the facts are against you. My father was born in 1935 and is still alive and very healthy, during his lifetime here in Australia, a modern Western Society, a Eugenics based carding and restricted movement system was in force. https://culture.wa.gov.au/feature/perths-prohibited-area https://culture.wa.gov.au/feature/perths-prohibited-area Looking about the world there are still many examples of divided rules for colonists and indigenous peoples, if you're in North America ask your nearest Indigenous American whether any significant issues still hang on bloodlines, you'll hear a range of answers some of which might suprise you. All that aside .. never forget that what has happened in the past can happen in the future and perhaps faster than many expect. With a rise in far right policy and the US still somewhat shocked by the overturning of Roe V Wade with womens search data wrt reproductive health now a hot topic in security and law enforcement it's not at all outlandish to posit that it wouldn't take much to see the emergance of policy to seperate those that are different in some manner .. the intersex, arabs and chinese and have all been recent and current tarets of the US right.
    - Zetice 3y ago
      What you’re describing isn’t eugenics, and what you’re fear mongering for isn’t realistic or relevant to 99% of people. You really want to make privacy everyone’s problem, but it simply isn’t.
      - makeitdouble 3y ago
        It looks like you need it spelled out very clearly, so here a whole piece on Autralia and eugenics: https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/rearvision/australias-eugenic-heritage/3244372 https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/rearvision/aus...
        Zetice 3y ago
        I don’t think you understand how damaging it is to your argument that you need to refer to events that took place before the invention of the microchip in order to make this point.