3 ms·
Ok so now we're proposing that financial regulations that hamper funneling resources to terrorist organizations and make money laundering and tax evasion a mass
by forgetfreeman 3y ago
Ok so now we're proposing that financial regulations that hamper funneling resources to terrorist organizations and make money laundering and tax evasion a massive pain in the ass are "time wasted"? Weird take but ok.
And miss me with that "consent" fig leaf. You damn well know ToS (what would the plural be there?) that notionally establish consent are intentionally designed to be impenetrable walls of legal verbiage designed specifically to provoke end users to click through without reading a damn thing. Furthermore, to truly opt out of all forms of digital tracking, which I think we agree most people would do if given the option, would require completely disengaging from the economy as brokerable electronic records are produced every time you use a cellphone, view anything on the internet, or perform a financial transaction with anything besides cash.
- ETH_start 3y agoThere is zero evidence that financial mass-surveillance, in the form of KYC/AML mandates, hampers the flow of funds to terrorist and criminal groups. There has been no demonstrable reduction of criminal and terrorist activity since the G7 embarked on widespread financial surveillance in 1989. As for the ToS, they provide some level of accountability, which can, for example, take the form of a mass exodus of users when a company changes its ToS to make them more invasive. And people can ultimately choose what data they share with web services, whereas mandates like the ones being promoted by the Commerce Department eliminate that choice altogether. There is undoubtedly a lot of space for improvement in the privacy realm but clearly we're not going to go in that direction if we institute overt mass surveillance programs that criminalize privacy.