3 ms·

EFF has been nowhere on these issues for the past two decades, and it is disingenuous to pretend they oppose it. EFF have done good work vis-a-vis government s

EFF has been nowhere on these issues for the past two decades, and it is disingenuous to pretend they oppose it. EFF have done good work vis-a-vis government surveillance, but EFF has always been a libertarian project to promote and protect tech power by weakening government oversight of the net.

dredmorbius 2y ago
There are multiple falsehoods in your comment. EFF have been putting some significant distance between themselves and their (admittedly, true) Libertarian origins. Cory Doctorow (long-time public-face, current special advisor) has distinctly non-Libertarian leanings. <https://www.eff.org/about/special-counsel#main-content https://www.eff.org/about/special-counsel#main-content> The more-libertarian John Gilmore and Brad Templeton are both emeriti: <https://www.eff.org/about/emeritus#main-content https://www.eff.org/about/emeritus#main-content> I've raised the question with Cory previously, response was, effectively, that there's a considerable overlap between viewpoints, regardless of ideology. And I'd personally heard Templeton express concerns over Google over two decades ago (Q&A at a Stanford event). My read is that viewpoints at EFF are diverse, and that concerns over commercial surviellance are also longstanding. E.g., Privacy Badger, aimed directly at same, was released over a decade ago, 14 July 2014: <https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000*/https://www.eff.org/press/releases/stop-sneaky-online-tracking-effs-privacy-badger https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000*/https://www.eff....>
- griomnib 2y ago
  Cory is a nominal figurehead who isn’t in charge of anything. Many EFF staffers have been unhappy with the direction for a long time. Cindy’s leadership is wildly out of touch with the state of the world. Privacy Badger is at best an also-ran privacy tool that’s had little impact in general, and no impact on big tech bottom line. It’s a joke in the grand scheme of things. Also, “concern over Google” is utterly immaterial to the fact that EFF takes millions from Google. They’re not too “concerned” to cash the checks. Neither was Mozilla.
  - ghostwords 2y ago
    >EFF takes millions from Google ???
    - griomnib 2y ago
      “Over the past years, EFF has taken millions in funds from Google and Facebook via straight donations and controversial court payouts that many see as under-the-radar contributions. Hell, Google co-founder Sergey Brin’s foundation gave EFF at least $1.2 million.” https://thebaffler.com/salvos/all-effd-up-levine https://thebaffler.com/salvos/all-effd-up-levine It seems to hurt a lot of people’s feelings in SV, but no, you wearing an EFF tshirt and making yearly corporate-matches donations doesn’t remove your culpability for working for big tech. Likewise, the EFF knows how many of the “small” donation come from SV tech employees. It’s a sham organization that was premised on a faulty understanding of regulatory frameworks that does very, very little of value in the past 15 years.
      - ghostwords 2y ago
        This article is a manipulative hit piece from 2018. Employee donations with employer match are still individual donations. "Controversial" court payouts? Come on.

dredmorbius 2y ago

There are multiple falsehoods in your comment. EFF have been putting some significant distance between themselves and their (admittedly, true) Libertarian origins. Cory Doctorow (long-time public-face, current special advisor) has distinctly non-Libertarian leanings. <https://www.eff.org/about/special-counsel#main-content https://www.eff.org/about/special-counsel#main-content> The more-libertarian John Gilmore and Brad Templeton are both emeriti: <https://www.eff.org/about/emeritus#main-content https://www.eff.org/about/emeritus#main-content> I've raised the question with Cory previously, response was, effectively, that there's a considerable overlap between viewpoints, regardless of ideology. And I'd personally heard Templeton express concerns over Google over two decades ago (Q&A at a Stanford event). My read is that viewpoints at EFF are diverse, and that concerns over commercial surviellance are also longstanding. E.g., Privacy Badger, aimed directly at same, was released over a decade ago, 14 July 2014: <https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000*/https://www.eff.org/press/releases/stop-sneaky-online-tracking-effs-privacy-badger https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000*/https://www.eff....>

griomnib 2y ago
Cory is a nominal figurehead who isn’t in charge of anything. Many EFF staffers have been unhappy with the direction for a long time. Cindy’s leadership is wildly out of touch with the state of the world. Privacy Badger is at best an also-ran privacy tool that’s had little impact in general, and no impact on big tech bottom line. It’s a joke in the grand scheme of things. Also, “concern over Google” is utterly immaterial to the fact that EFF takes millions from Google. They’re not too “concerned” to cash the checks. Neither was Mozilla.
- ghostwords 2y ago
  >EFF takes millions from Google ???
  - griomnib 2y ago
    “Over the past years, EFF has taken millions in funds from Google and Facebook via straight donations and controversial court payouts that many see as under-the-radar contributions. Hell, Google co-founder Sergey Brin’s foundation gave EFF at least $1.2 million.” https://thebaffler.com/salvos/all-effd-up-levine https://thebaffler.com/salvos/all-effd-up-levine It seems to hurt a lot of people’s feelings in SV, but no, you wearing an EFF tshirt and making yearly corporate-matches donations doesn’t remove your culpability for working for big tech. Likewise, the EFF knows how many of the “small” donation come from SV tech employees. It’s a sham organization that was premised on a faulty understanding of regulatory frameworks that does very, very little of value in the past 15 years.
    - ghostwords 2y ago
      This article is a manipulative hit piece from 2018. Employee donations with employer match are still individual donations. "Controversial" court payouts? Come on.