6 ms·

Wow. Such hypocrisy. By that logic you should never use SSL. Imperfect security is a hell of a lot better than no security.

mercurial 12y ago
Hypocrisy does not mean what you think it means. An example of hypocrisy is EU governments talking about protecting privacy while tapping transatlantic cables. What you could accuse me of is cynicism, if the collaboration between the main EU intelligence services and the NSA was not so well documented.
- teamhappy 12y ago
  According to Google: > hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral > standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior > does not conform; > cynicism: an inclination to believe that people > are motivated purely by self-interest; You comment (kind of) implies that there's no point in doing anything because we've lost anyway. That's hypocrisy, not cynicism (because we're all doing something to protect our privacy). Anyway, I figure your original comment wasn't entirely serious which is why I'm not actually accusing you of anything. It's just that I've heard these kind of comments way too often.
  - mercurial 12y ago
    > You comment (kind of) implies that there's no point in doing anything because we've lost anyway. That's hypocrisy, not cynicism (because we're all doing something to protect our privacy). You're over-generalizing. What helps against, say, East European gangs (SSL) is not necessarily useful against state-level actors influencing crypto standards. And a rule supposed to protect our privacy against a specific state-level actor (the US government) is obviously pointless if the same data is handed to the US under the table.
    - teamhappy 12y ago
      Whether it's "obviously pointless" or not depends on what you care about. The result is the same but the way you got there changed. Feel free to disagree with me though; I'd rather not turn this into a philosophical debate.

mercurial 12y ago

Hypocrisy does not mean what you think it means. An example of hypocrisy is EU governments talking about protecting privacy while tapping transatlantic cables. What you could accuse me of is cynicism, if the collaboration between the main EU intelligence services and the NSA was not so well documented.

teamhappy 12y ago
According to Google: > hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral > standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior > does not conform; > cynicism: an inclination to believe that people > are motivated purely by self-interest; You comment (kind of) implies that there's no point in doing anything because we've lost anyway. That's hypocrisy, not cynicism (because we're all doing something to protect our privacy). Anyway, I figure your original comment wasn't entirely serious which is why I'm not actually accusing you of anything. It's just that I've heard these kind of comments way too often.
- mercurial 12y ago
  > You comment (kind of) implies that there's no point in doing anything because we've lost anyway. That's hypocrisy, not cynicism (because we're all doing something to protect our privacy). You're over-generalizing. What helps against, say, East European gangs (SSL) is not necessarily useful against state-level actors influencing crypto standards. And a rule supposed to protect our privacy against a specific state-level actor (the US government) is obviously pointless if the same data is handed to the US under the table.
  - teamhappy 12y ago
    Whether it's "obviously pointless" or not depends on what you care about. The result is the same but the way you got there changed. Feel free to disagree with me though; I'd rather not turn this into a philosophical debate.