3 ms·

If we go back through history phones were first popular amongst the rich, powerful, and well connected. And politicians. None of whom wanted to be recorded. Eve

If we go back through history phones were first popular amongst the rich, powerful, and well connected. And politicians. None of whom wanted to be recorded. Even my dad explained to me how they didn't have a home phone line growing up. So as a result, we see lots of legal protections around phone calls. The story of the computer, the internet, and by extension all work on the computer is the opposite. It's seen as an element of the common people or the nouveau rich. The people least likely to be using a computer are the rich, powerful and well connected. Thus, no legal protections exist.

userbinator 2y ago
Before phones, there was mail. Laws around the handling of mail are also extremely strict.
- consteval 2y ago
  Right, I think it's just a case of following the technologies throughout the ages in alignment with the political/cultural climate. Computers are "newcomers", and by that point there was big political push for mass surveillance and anti-privacy propaganda was picking up. People have gotten less privacy conscious as time goes on so our laws regarding technology reflect that. Also the nature of the tech matters, I think. Post is fairly simple to ensure privacy with, same with phone. You have to go out of your way to open things up or record them. Phones calls, by their nature, exist on the wire while they're happening. But computers store things and that's a huge part of their usefulness. If you're already saving stuff to disk, which you probably are, there's no friction really with using that for nefarious uses. For example, request logging in a corporate environment. Although this doesn't explain things like recording screens.
  - sidewndr46 2y ago
    You can basically extend your argument and replace computers with social media. It turns out all modern social media is done on a computer today, but even if it wasn't your argument still holds.
tbrownaw 2y ago
The telephone was invented in 1876. The FBI was created in 1908. The CIA was created in 1947. The Internet was invented in 1983. . The government was a heck of a lot less overpowered and nosy back when phones were new than when the Internet was new.
- vineyardmike 2y ago
  Except wiretapping was made illegal in like 1968, so the gov was powerful and nosy then. I'm guessing its not "weak government" but actually "good government"
  - washadjeffmad 2y ago
    You forgot about the Federal Communications Act (1934). And that was just federal. The Tenth Amendment meant wiretapping laws were on the books in states from the mid-1800s, securing the natural privacy of use of the telegraph as a protected medium of communication almost immediately following its inception.
eschaton 2y ago
There’s a further wrinkle: Neither of the major parties at the time pushed the lie that government can do no good for society, and lobbyists weren’t the force they are today, so there was much more tendency for legislators to effectively legislate. It’s not that there wasn’t corruption, of course, but legislators didn’t quite so often go against exactly what their constituents wanted when acting corruptly.
- gruez 2y ago
  >Neither of the major parties at the time pushed the lie that government can do no good for society As opposed to now when bipartisan support for industrial policy and tariffs, or that we need to crack down on big tech? The decade before there was bipartisan support for the war on terror.
  - autoexec 2y ago
    > As opposed to now when bipartisan support for industrial policy That's what bribes will get you > The decade before there was bipartisan support for the war on terror. Of course generally both parties supported giving themselves more power. There were a few holdouts with integrity though.
    - gruez 2y ago
      >That's what bribes will get you So when the government does nothing, it's "the major parties at the time pushed the lie that government can do no good for society" but when it does something it's "That's what bribes will get you"?

userbinator 2y ago

Before phones, there was mail. Laws around the handling of mail are also extremely strict.

consteval 2y ago
Right, I think it's just a case of following the technologies throughout the ages in alignment with the political/cultural climate. Computers are "newcomers", and by that point there was big political push for mass surveillance and anti-privacy propaganda was picking up. People have gotten less privacy conscious as time goes on so our laws regarding technology reflect that. Also the nature of the tech matters, I think. Post is fairly simple to ensure privacy with, same with phone. You have to go out of your way to open things up or record them. Phones calls, by their nature, exist on the wire while they're happening. But computers store things and that's a huge part of their usefulness. If you're already saving stuff to disk, which you probably are, there's no friction really with using that for nefarious uses. For example, request logging in a corporate environment. Although this doesn't explain things like recording screens.
- sidewndr46 2y ago
  You can basically extend your argument and replace computers with social media. It turns out all modern social media is done on a computer today, but even if it wasn't your argument still holds.

tbrownaw 2y ago

The telephone was invented in 1876. The FBI was created in 1908. The CIA was created in 1947. The Internet was invented in 1983. . The government was a heck of a lot less overpowered and nosy back when phones were new than when the Internet was new.

vineyardmike 2y ago
Except wiretapping was made illegal in like 1968, so the gov was powerful and nosy then. I'm guessing its not "weak government" but actually "good government"
- washadjeffmad 2y ago
  You forgot about the Federal Communications Act (1934). And that was just federal. The Tenth Amendment meant wiretapping laws were on the books in states from the mid-1800s, securing the natural privacy of use of the telegraph as a protected medium of communication almost immediately following its inception.

eschaton 2y ago

There’s a further wrinkle: Neither of the major parties at the time pushed the lie that government can do no good for society, and lobbyists weren’t the force they are today, so there was much more tendency for legislators to effectively legislate. It’s not that there wasn’t corruption, of course, but legislators didn’t quite so often go against exactly what their constituents wanted when acting corruptly.

gruez 2y ago
>Neither of the major parties at the time pushed the lie that government can do no good for society As opposed to now when bipartisan support for industrial policy and tariffs, or that we need to crack down on big tech? The decade before there was bipartisan support for the war on terror.
- autoexec 2y ago
  > As opposed to now when bipartisan support for industrial policy That's what bribes will get you > The decade before there was bipartisan support for the war on terror. Of course generally both parties supported giving themselves more power. There were a few holdouts with integrity though.
  - gruez 2y ago
    >That's what bribes will get you So when the government does nothing, it's "the major parties at the time pushed the lie that government can do no good for society" but when it does something it's "That's what bribes will get you"?