3 ms·
> privacy is going to die sooner or later. The politicians need only win once. If privacy dies, it ends creativity, civil society and funding for politicians.
by walterbell 2y ago
> privacy is going to die sooner or later. The politicians need only win once.
If privacy dies, it ends creativity, civil society and funding for politicians. That scenario would be painful, but self-correcting. On the other side, something new can be born.
Note: "privacy" is not a car that can be stolen once. Like freedom, it is infinitely divisible, and even those who have lost 99% will keep fighting for what little remains. There are countless examples in history, independent of temporal technology minutiae.
- ADeerAppeared 2y ago> Note: "privacy" is not a car that can be stolen once. I'm not talking about "all of privacy" being lost in one go, I had assumed this would be obvious to all readers. I'm talking about the specific matter at hand; Message scanning, with the point of how this failure mode poses a threat for further and further infringements of privacy down the line. > If privacy dies, it ends creativity, civil society and funding for politicians. Cute poetry, but the aftermath of 9/11 clearly shows otherwise. Consider for a moment how even these "anti-terrorism" measures are seeing shockingly little pushback. Despite al-Qaeda being an ocean and continent away. You're a fool if you think any politician would risk their career to revoke message scanning once implemented. The attack-ads write themselves, "[POLITICIAN] wants to let pedophiles sextort your children".