6 ms·

I can't decide if it would be easier to convince people of the benefit of extra steps/slow internet/privacy protections, or to reflexively engage their skeptici

I can't decide if it would be easier to convince people of the benefit of extra steps/slow internet/privacy protections, or to reflexively engage their skepticism/critical thinking muscles upon hearing Save-The-Children-and-Stop-The-Terrorists rhetoric. As it stands, it seems most people (of a certain race and class, anyway) feel more threatened by vague stories of child abductors in white vans at WalMart[1,2] or terrorists (c. 2000's generally) than being randomly victimized by our j̶u̶s̶t̶i̶c̶e̶ legal system. Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, as they say. Abstract thought and generalization are hard, I guess. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/04/tech/facebook-white-vans/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/04/tech/facebook-white-vans/inde... [2] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/white-van-facebook-hoax/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/white-van-facebook-hoax/

comfypotato 3y ago
I got out of academic fingerprinting research when I realized I was on the wrong side of the discussion. I’ve just never seen or heard of privacy violations that particularly bothered me.
- maxbond 3y ago
  I too have never experienced a violation of privacy which had a significant observable impact on my life. You and I have been fortunate in this respect. Some people are literally targeted for harassment and murder because of some aspect of their identity, journalism, or activism. This isn't a hypothetical. Here's one example from the top of my head: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/khashoggi-murder-citizen-lab-surveillance-internet-watchdog-experts-spies-toronto-a8747886.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/khashog... Tl;Dr the dissident Khashoggi was infected with NSO malware before he was murdered by the Saudi government. That's a pretty clear violation of privacy in service of something I would guess you disagree with. This story isn't an anomaly, I think if you looked into this further you would find innumerable privacy violations which bother you.
  - sebzim4500 3y ago
    To be fair, it is entirely possible that GP doesn't care about anyone but himself.
    - comfypotato 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - maxbond 3y ago
        No one is obliged to change your mind (indeed, you are the only person who can possibly do that [the comment was later edited from 'change' to 'open', which I think is more reasonable]), and seeing as you more or less did argue for this position, I don't think you should complain.
      - sebzim4500 3y ago
        I do not consider my comment snarky. I thought that maxbond disregarded a perfectly plausible explanation for the claim you made. EDIT: Just saw your other reply. I think its fair to say I called it.
    - maxbond 3y ago
      Sure, I considered similar notions, but I edited them out because they didn't seem compatible with assuming good faith (and made it a lot easier to not include swipes).
    - dang 3y ago
      Please don't cross into personal attack, no matter how wrong someone is or you feel they are. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - comfypotato 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - 3y ago
alvarezbjm-hn 3y ago
"reflexively engage their skepticism/critical thinking muscles upon hearing Save-The-Children-and-Stop-The-Terrorists rhetoric" Not part of human nature. Save the children/Rethoric is embedded. Reflexive thinking has variying energy requirements and for most requires external kickstart, when possible at all Forcing tor in all new network adapters is more feasible, which is saying much.
- pessimizer 3y ago
  > Not part of human nature. Save the children/Rethoric is embedded. This is ahistorical. Childrens' rights are a late-19th Century creation. We have become child worshipers, we are not naturally child worshipers. There's a quasi-Christian doctrine that states that children are born virtually unstained, and that being unstained makes you more deserving of life. As you grow older, you are stained by the demands of the world, which makes you less deserving of life. However, the idea that a child's life is more important than an adult's life would seem moronic to people much before the 20th Century. It just takes 6 years to make a 5 year-old. It takes 51 years to make a 50 year-old. 5 year olds know almost nothing, and need to be taken care of. Every 50 year-old has a bunch of knowledge that can't be recovered, and generally can take care of themselves. You know we used to send them into the mines... and we used to value them because of how deeply they could get their little hands into factory machinery.
Spooky23 3y ago
Tor doesn’t deliver any of those things. It’s a tool developed for spies that is mostly used to facilitate grifts and move contraband. I’m not worried about clowns in white vans or terrorists. If you want protection from the government, you need to advocate for protection under the law. Journalists, NGO workers, etc have to figure out how to manage risk and may need to self-censor to avoid those risks. Tor won’t protect you if you irritate MBS.
- bratgpttamer 3y ago
  I'm not sure what deliverables you're referring to, but if it's not useful for shielding one's identity from prosecutors/persecutors, why would spies, grifters, traffickers, terrorists, child abusers, and puppy-kickers make such extensive use of it?
  - bombcar 3y ago
    Tor can protect your identity if nobody knows who you are. But if a government is already crawling up your ass, it won't help much. E.g, once you're not anonymous, anonymization tools don't help much.
    - Spooky23 3y ago
      If the actual police and not counter-intelligence agencies were actually intercepting all traffic, use of tor would automatically attract attention to you.
      - bratgpttamer 3y ago
        I think this is the point the OP is making - one that's been made for years: if "everyone" used Tor, simply using Tor wouldn't be a useful indicator.
- r3trohack3r 3y ago
  This isn’t true, you’re conflating risk profiles. There is active targeted surveillance by a nation state. Tor is not going to help you. No crypto or tech alone will help you, you’ll need to develop extreme opsec practices to stand even a remote chance against a well funded and well equipped adversary focusing on targeting you. Then there is passive mass surveillance, i.e. the presidential surveillance program, which Tor/VPNs/HTTPS etc will absolutely help with.
r3trohack3r 3y ago
Similarly my social group has recently become more concerned with hate speech and foreign influence on elections too. The story’s walls are closing in on cracking down on cryptographic guarantees of privacy, network access, and information sharing.

comfypotato 3y ago

I got out of academic fingerprinting research when I realized I was on the wrong side of the discussion. I’ve just never seen or heard of privacy violations that particularly bothered me.

maxbond 3y ago
I too have never experienced a violation of privacy which had a significant observable impact on my life. You and I have been fortunate in this respect. Some people are literally targeted for harassment and murder because of some aspect of their identity, journalism, or activism. This isn't a hypothetical. Here's one example from the top of my head: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/khashoggi-murder-citizen-lab-surveillance-internet-watchdog-experts-spies-toronto-a8747886.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/khashog... Tl;Dr the dissident Khashoggi was infected with NSO malware before he was murdered by the Saudi government. That's a pretty clear violation of privacy in service of something I would guess you disagree with. This story isn't an anomaly, I think if you looked into this further you would find innumerable privacy violations which bother you.
- sebzim4500 3y ago
  To be fair, it is entirely possible that GP doesn't care about anyone but himself.
  - comfypotato 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - maxbond 3y ago
      No one is obliged to change your mind (indeed, you are the only person who can possibly do that [the comment was later edited from 'change' to 'open', which I think is more reasonable]), and seeing as you more or less did argue for this position, I don't think you should complain.
    - sebzim4500 3y ago
      I do not consider my comment snarky. I thought that maxbond disregarded a perfectly plausible explanation for the claim you made. EDIT: Just saw your other reply. I think its fair to say I called it.
  - maxbond 3y ago
    Sure, I considered similar notions, but I edited them out because they didn't seem compatible with assuming good faith (and made it a lot easier to not include swipes).
  - dang 3y ago
    Please don't cross into personal attack, no matter how wrong someone is or you feel they are. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- comfypotato 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - 3y ago

alvarezbjm-hn 3y ago

"reflexively engage their skepticism/critical thinking muscles upon hearing Save-The-Children-and-Stop-The-Terrorists rhetoric" Not part of human nature. Save the children/Rethoric is embedded. Reflexive thinking has variying energy requirements and for most requires external kickstart, when possible at all Forcing tor in all new network adapters is more feasible, which is saying much.

pessimizer 3y ago
> Not part of human nature. Save the children/Rethoric is embedded. This is ahistorical. Childrens' rights are a late-19th Century creation. We have become child worshipers, we are not naturally child worshipers. There's a quasi-Christian doctrine that states that children are born virtually unstained, and that being unstained makes you more deserving of life. As you grow older, you are stained by the demands of the world, which makes you less deserving of life. However, the idea that a child's life is more important than an adult's life would seem moronic to people much before the 20th Century. It just takes 6 years to make a 5 year-old. It takes 51 years to make a 50 year-old. 5 year olds know almost nothing, and need to be taken care of. Every 50 year-old has a bunch of knowledge that can't be recovered, and generally can take care of themselves. You know we used to send them into the mines... and we used to value them because of how deeply they could get their little hands into factory machinery.

Spooky23 3y ago

Tor doesn’t deliver any of those things. It’s a tool developed for spies that is mostly used to facilitate grifts and move contraband. I’m not worried about clowns in white vans or terrorists. If you want protection from the government, you need to advocate for protection under the law. Journalists, NGO workers, etc have to figure out how to manage risk and may need to self-censor to avoid those risks. Tor won’t protect you if you irritate MBS.

bratgpttamer 3y ago
I'm not sure what deliverables you're referring to, but if it's not useful for shielding one's identity from prosecutors/persecutors, why would spies, grifters, traffickers, terrorists, child abusers, and puppy-kickers make such extensive use of it?
- bombcar 3y ago
  Tor can protect your identity if nobody knows who you are. But if a government is already crawling up your ass, it won't help much. E.g, once you're not anonymous, anonymization tools don't help much.
  - Spooky23 3y ago
    If the actual police and not counter-intelligence agencies were actually intercepting all traffic, use of tor would automatically attract attention to you.
    - bratgpttamer 3y ago
      I think this is the point the OP is making - one that's been made for years: if "everyone" used Tor, simply using Tor wouldn't be a useful indicator.
r3trohack3r 3y ago
This isn’t true, you’re conflating risk profiles. There is active targeted surveillance by a nation state. Tor is not going to help you. No crypto or tech alone will help you, you’ll need to develop extreme opsec practices to stand even a remote chance against a well funded and well equipped adversary focusing on targeting you. Then there is passive mass surveillance, i.e. the presidential surveillance program, which Tor/VPNs/HTTPS etc will absolutely help with.

r3trohack3r 3y ago

Similarly my social group has recently become more concerned with hate speech and foreign influence on elections too. The story’s walls are closing in on cracking down on cryptographic guarantees of privacy, network access, and information sharing.