3 ms·

> but instead to be more mindful of how they engage with it. This is like the recycling debate all over again. Fundamentally we agree with you; littering is ba

> but instead to be more mindful of how they engage with it. This is like the recycling debate all over again. Fundamentally we agree with you; littering is bad, the diminishing of privacy is bad, and none of us should feel hopeless about a situation we are capable of changing. But consider the average person, not me or you or the hackers. Someone who opts for convenience, not "mindful engagement" for the slightest of interactions with the world. They do not care. Fundamentally they cannot be made to care, even if we show them posters of the Earth burning or make them hear about the Snowden leaks. They consider themselves to be powerless, and will not consider an alternative unless it is as convenient as what they're addicted to now. They're not going to buy respectful TVs because they're not the cheap ones. They're not going to buy respectful phones because it doesn't have the little Apple logo on the back that their friends love so much. The average person literally cannot be made to care unless we make privacy-respecting software easier to use than spyware.

throwway120385 2y ago
And because of how markets work, that person who doesn't care is dictating what is available to us.
shadowgovt 2y ago
> unless we make privacy-respecting software easier to use than spyware This point is key. I don't use an Android instead of a Pinephone because I don't care. I use an Android because Pinephone sucks right now, and I can't be hacking on the device I need to rely on to schedule my bank payments and call the emergency services if I fall in a ravine. That device has to be five-nines trustworthy. The solution is going to have to be make Pinephone suck less. That's the only way to mass adoption and actually changing the landscape. Music piracy didn't get its back broken by a sudden global attack of conscience. It got its back broken by iTunes making it more convenient to get music-to-portable-device than running a torrent server.
- thaumasiotes 2y ago
  > Music piracy didn't get its back broken by a sudden global attack of conscience. It got its back broken by iTunes making it more convenient to get music-to-portable-device than running a torrent server. Huh? Music piracy is easier and better now than it ever has been. Every music label releases all their music, officially and for free, on YouTube. You can just download it directly from the official source. It's like Napster, if every music publisher had maintained an official account offering every song they owned, and paid commercial services to ensure that their Napster presence was up to date.
  - ghaff 2y ago
    Most people just subscribe to a music streaming service because... convenience. An analyst friend of mine argued that Napster succeeded because convenience rather than free. I disagreed at the time. I think I was mostly wrong.
    - thaumasiotes 2y ago
      The streaming service still doesn't have a convenience advantage. It has a discovery advantage. Listening to your own local music can never show you a song you weren't previously familiar with.
      - ghaff 2y ago
        Mostly it does for me. I can put on some playlist that is generally satisfying enough. If I cared to put the effort into curating more playlists and spending the money on songs that I like that I'm missing I'd probably actually save money. I'm mostly not looking to discover hot new artists. Honestly, I wouldn't miss the lack of streaming much if it went away.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ryandv 2y ago
> But consider the average person, not me or you or the hackers. Forget the average person - even as a technically adept person who has tried to "mindfully engage" with technology and minimize his use of it as much as is reasonably possible, the way our societies in the west are structured are making it increasingly difficult to participate in the world without plugging yourself into the surveillance borg. Examples abound even in this thread - QR codes to order food; needing to ask concierge to call you a Lyft because taxis are nonexistent in the neighbourhood and you aren't carrying a smartphone. There is so much friction involved in living life with minimal technology that you are placing yourself at a significant disadvantage and living your life less efficiently than others by needing to make compromises or forego certain amenities entirely. While it is possible to live life like this and eschew such creature comforts, it becomes exhausting after several years of doing so, and there is no indication that the tides will turn or the winds will begin blowing in the other direction. You can continue swimming upstream for naught and at great disadvantage to yourself, but it will not change the direction of the current. If anything, the pandemic and work-from-home has only accelerated the trend, with the invasion of Internet-connected surveillance devices into one's private quarters now made mandatory in order to participate in the workforce.
- thaumasiotes 2y ago
  > the way our societies in the west are structured are making it increasingly difficult to participate in the world without plugging yourself into the surveillance borg. Examples abound even in this thread - > needing to ask concierge to call you a Lyft Considering this was also necessary before smartphones existed, I'm not sure why it's supposed to be a problem now.
  - ghaff 2y ago
    Because there often isn't a concierge any longer and there may not be a reliable local taxi company. Without disagreeing that you can work around the lack of a smartphone, it's increasingly difficult in a lot of circumstances.

throwway120385 2y ago

And because of how markets work, that person who doesn't care is dictating what is available to us.

shadowgovt 2y ago

> unless we make privacy-respecting software easier to use than spyware This point is key. I don't use an Android instead of a Pinephone because I don't care. I use an Android because Pinephone sucks right now, and I can't be hacking on the device I need to rely on to schedule my bank payments and call the emergency services if I fall in a ravine. That device has to be five-nines trustworthy. The solution is going to have to be make Pinephone suck less. That's the only way to mass adoption and actually changing the landscape. Music piracy didn't get its back broken by a sudden global attack of conscience. It got its back broken by iTunes making it more convenient to get music-to-portable-device than running a torrent server.

thaumasiotes 2y ago
> Music piracy didn't get its back broken by a sudden global attack of conscience. It got its back broken by iTunes making it more convenient to get music-to-portable-device than running a torrent server. Huh? Music piracy is easier and better now than it ever has been. Every music label releases all their music, officially and for free, on YouTube. You can just download it directly from the official source. It's like Napster, if every music publisher had maintained an official account offering every song they owned, and paid commercial services to ensure that their Napster presence was up to date.
- ghaff 2y ago
  Most people just subscribe to a music streaming service because... convenience. An analyst friend of mine argued that Napster succeeded because convenience rather than free. I disagreed at the time. I think I was mostly wrong.
  - thaumasiotes 2y ago
    The streaming service still doesn't have a convenience advantage. It has a discovery advantage. Listening to your own local music can never show you a song you weren't previously familiar with.
    - ghaff 2y ago
      Mostly it does for me. I can put on some playlist that is generally satisfying enough. If I cared to put the effort into curating more playlists and spending the money on songs that I like that I'm missing I'd probably actually save money. I'm mostly not looking to discover hot new artists. Honestly, I wouldn't miss the lack of streaming much if it went away.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

ryandv 2y ago

> But consider the average person, not me or you or the hackers. Forget the average person - even as a technically adept person who has tried to "mindfully engage" with technology and minimize his use of it as much as is reasonably possible, the way our societies in the west are structured are making it increasingly difficult to participate in the world without plugging yourself into the surveillance borg. Examples abound even in this thread - QR codes to order food; needing to ask concierge to call you a Lyft because taxis are nonexistent in the neighbourhood and you aren't carrying a smartphone. There is so much friction involved in living life with minimal technology that you are placing yourself at a significant disadvantage and living your life less efficiently than others by needing to make compromises or forego certain amenities entirely. While it is possible to live life like this and eschew such creature comforts, it becomes exhausting after several years of doing so, and there is no indication that the tides will turn or the winds will begin blowing in the other direction. You can continue swimming upstream for naught and at great disadvantage to yourself, but it will not change the direction of the current. If anything, the pandemic and work-from-home has only accelerated the trend, with the invasion of Internet-connected surveillance devices into one's private quarters now made mandatory in order to participate in the workforce.

thaumasiotes 2y ago
> the way our societies in the west are structured are making it increasingly difficult to participate in the world without plugging yourself into the surveillance borg. Examples abound even in this thread - > needing to ask concierge to call you a Lyft Considering this was also necessary before smartphones existed, I'm not sure why it's supposed to be a problem now.
- ghaff 2y ago
  Because there often isn't a concierge any longer and there may not be a reliable local taxi company. Without disagreeing that you can work around the lack of a smartphone, it's increasingly difficult in a lot of circumstances.