4 ms·

I would rather be the subject of behavioral advertising and keep privately encrypted comms than the other way around, but apparently the EU has other ideas.

by hnhg 3y ago

sealeck 3y ago
Why not both??
kvdveer 3y ago
That means that we're living in your ideal world then... :) Right now, behavioral ads are on their last legs, and privately encrypted comms are still around. Proposals to limit encryption are being thrown around, but they are met with serious resistance, and none of them are currently close to implementation.
- OfSanguineFire 3y ago
  I have no doubt that Signal is now compromised, since its board was overhauled recently and now includes people with a US government background. Yes, the encryption model theoretically remains secure, but 1) Signal now uploads your contact list to their servers and claims it is secured by Intel’s secure enclave, but multiple vulnerabilities have been found in that, and 2) if targeted, most users are defenseless against a malicious update. Meanwhile, WhatsApp, which is heavily used by EU citizens, claims end-to-end encryption, but it leaks metadata and also chat content is leaked through the automated backups that most users don’t disable. The only question is to what extent Five Eyes members besides the US get access to all that. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be any initiative inside the EU to protect users better, while also letting us enjoy an internet without behavioral advertising.
dzikimarian 3y ago
End to end encryption can be implemented in open source protocols. More than that - you can be sure it's actually there instead trusting marketing.
riversflow 3y ago
Yeah. Having thought about this long and hard, lucrative behavioral advertising seems like a fair price to pay for an open, free (as in beer), internet. I fear this type of regulation will only serve to make the internet become much less equitable.
- MauranKilom 3y ago
  Without trying to dismiss your opinion: Was the internet before Google/ad-tech not "open, free (as in beer)"?
  - riversflow 3y ago
    Well it certainly wasn’t equitable, connected computers were the realm of the rich. The problem with free services is scaling them to significant portions of the entire population.
    - phatfish 3y ago
      My family wasn't rich and we had a "connected computer" in 97/98 before ad-tech really took over. Getting online was far less costly than the computer itself.
      - mcmoor 3y ago
        Damn an in my country (Indonesia) even in 2010 it's still the other way around. Even to this day I can't see my fellow countrymen paid for anything online partly because everything used to be so expensive we always have to find cheaper (pirated) version. By comparison privacy is worthless (for us).
      - Cyph0n 3y ago
        Did you also have access to free email (beyond a measly few MBs), maps, video hosting, and private data storage? Because that's what ad-tech enabled. Getting online wasn't the hard part. Not saying that ad-tech is purely good, of course.
Cyph0n 3y ago
EU legislators are experts at coming up with a bunch of good regulations but then cancelling it all out with a hefty dash of blanket, pro-surveillance legislation.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

I would rather be the subject of behavioral advertising and keep privately encrypted comms than the other way around, but apparently the EU has other ideas.

by hnhg 3y ago

I would rather be the subject of behavioral advertising and keep privately encrypted comms than the other way around, but apparently the EU has other ideas.

sealeck 3y ago

Why not both??

kvdveer 3y ago

That means that we're living in your ideal world then... :) Right now, behavioral ads are on their last legs, and privately encrypted comms are still around. Proposals to limit encryption are being thrown around, but they are met with serious resistance, and none of them are currently close to implementation.

OfSanguineFire 3y ago
I have no doubt that Signal is now compromised, since its board was overhauled recently and now includes people with a US government background. Yes, the encryption model theoretically remains secure, but 1) Signal now uploads your contact list to their servers and claims it is secured by Intel’s secure enclave, but multiple vulnerabilities have been found in that, and 2) if targeted, most users are defenseless against a malicious update. Meanwhile, WhatsApp, which is heavily used by EU citizens, claims end-to-end encryption, but it leaks metadata and also chat content is leaked through the automated backups that most users don’t disable. The only question is to what extent Five Eyes members besides the US get access to all that. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be any initiative inside the EU to protect users better, while also letting us enjoy an internet without behavioral advertising.

dzikimarian 3y ago

End to end encryption can be implemented in open source protocols. More than that - you can be sure it's actually there instead trusting marketing.

riversflow 3y ago

Yeah. Having thought about this long and hard, lucrative behavioral advertising seems like a fair price to pay for an open, free (as in beer), internet. I fear this type of regulation will only serve to make the internet become much less equitable.

MauranKilom 3y ago
Without trying to dismiss your opinion: Was the internet before Google/ad-tech not "open, free (as in beer)"?
- riversflow 3y ago
  Well it certainly wasn’t equitable, connected computers were the realm of the rich. The problem with free services is scaling them to significant portions of the entire population.
  - phatfish 3y ago
    My family wasn't rich and we had a "connected computer" in 97/98 before ad-tech really took over. Getting online was far less costly than the computer itself.
    - mcmoor 3y ago
      Damn an in my country (Indonesia) even in 2010 it's still the other way around. Even to this day I can't see my fellow countrymen paid for anything online partly because everything used to be so expensive we always have to find cheaper (pirated) version. By comparison privacy is worthless (for us).
    - Cyph0n 3y ago
      Did you also have access to free email (beyond a measly few MBs), maps, video hosting, and private data storage? Because that's what ad-tech enabled. Getting online wasn't the hard part. Not saying that ad-tech is purely good, of course.

Cyph0n 3y ago

EU legislators are experts at coming up with a bunch of good regulations but then cancelling it all out with a hefty dash of blanket, pro-surveillance legislation.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]