The claim to have "nothing to hide" was not just born our of ignorance, but also out of comfort - to not having to do anything about it.
Now that even the last one accepted that they do indeed have something to hide, but in order to justify their own inaction, it's labeled as inevitable: privacy is not real.
They are lying to themselves, because doing otherwise would mean they have to admit being wrong.
Exactly. Now to click the “copy text” button and keep your fine words handy for my next convo with a friend who thinks life with Facebook and Google is grand.
Depending on what people do, the government already has their fingerprints.
Personally, I work around schools so I had to get a background check and fingerprinted for that. I also am licensed to handle explosives, both federally and at the state level. I been fingerprinted for that. I've gone through TSA for hazmat endorsement on a commercial driver's license. That needed fingerprints and a background check.
Getting fingerprinted to get through airport security is the least of my privacy concerns.
But my threat model isn't the TSA. They aren't a concern of mine, although I do opt out of their facial recognition.
I am concerned with internet surveillance, corporate surveillance, and communication surveillance.
Sorry for devil's advocate here because I agree with you but hypothetically the answer would be verification. ie., Google already has your password, so why would they need to ask you for it when you log in?
Elon Musk popularised this cope argument a few years ago. It sounds intelligent to people who are incapable of any level of critical thinking or nuance and believe everything in the world is either 100% A or 100% B with no in-between. Sadly, this is a large percentage of the population.
I was pretty sure he said something to the effect of "privacy doesn't matter/doesn't exist" a few years ago but I can't find the interview I'm thinking of. All I can find is this video on the topic from The Hated One, which isn't referencing the interview I'm thinking of.
A similar argument I hear is "If they want me, they will find and arrest me no matter my precautions".
Kinda yes... But why are you talking about threat models that include someone deliberately hunting you down? We are not high-ranking dissidents or criminals that they would put effort and money into finding. Our concern is passive surveillance - maybe the collected info doing us a disservice (like being leaked for scammers or sold to an evil ex), maybe even something mundane getting flagged and us being arrested just to serve as an example.
Yes. There are a lot of reasons why any one of us could turn into a high value target at the drop off a hat. If not to a government, then to an organisation or a lone lunatic.
Gen Alpha doesn't care about privacy online. They need to be guided by their parents to care, e.g. when they buy a laptop, they install some Linux distribution on it before they give it to the child.
they most likely want to game on their laptop as well. Linux is capable, but usually requires good configuration and troubleshooting, that a gen alpha kid can't do, and parents are busy. This is why it is not a widely practiced thing
If everyone started using encrypted messaging software, using devices that are resilient to all but the highest levels of forensics, and stuck to social spaces which prevent bots and alt accounts, hosted on servers in countries their own nation's law enforcement doesn't have access to, it would massively increase the costs of surveillance. Every layer of that increases the price.
When you let surveilling you become profitable and easy, expect it to get worse. More obtrusive. After all, you've displayed compliance up to that point.
Yes, that’s it. As I’ve told friends on several occasions, you know why I encrypt my online life and guard my privacy as if, you know, freedom depended on privacy? Because fuck them, that’s why.
It takes my time and effort, but I just can’t let the bastards win just that little bit more easily. All cops and corps are bastards (ACAB).
I mean, yeah, privacy isn't really a thing in our digital surveillance age. Doesn't mean I'm not gonna make it as hard as possible for them. Make em work for it.
"chrome was hogging up my ram" is the dumbest part of all of this lmao, this person's decisionmaking is completely driven by placebo and it's hilarious
Why? It's because they never arrived at their current behavior by a systematic progression of logical steps. Most of the behaviors we exhibit aren't that way. We just offer a post-hoc explanation/justification. They use edge, so they defend their action with any argument assertion they can think of.
It's also (sort of) because they want to tip the proverbial scale towards their current use. Change takes effort and can be irritating. They have their list of positives about edge (faster, easier, etc.), and they downplay the negatives such as privacy.
I did not realize "spezit" was "spez" and "reddit" until I reread your commnt lol. I thought was some reddit privacy frontend with the German pronunciation of "z".
Off-topic, but I do agree in general that Edge is a solid browser. I use it when I'm at work and really love the vertical tabs and tab groups. I use firefox for personal use and am patiently waiting for the vertical tabs on the stable release (and not just in about:config).
then you can forget any compatibility, but you know. I think privacy needs to be sensible, and it should not go in such ranges that highly limits usablity
I do fall into that way of thinking sometimes and in discussions and such, but even then, i still take steps to maintain a level of privacy. It's for stupid reasons, I'm admittedly not knowledgeable whatsoever on data privacy. (As in, why is it necessary since we already carry a lot of data collection devices with us as we go around that I know most people dont even think about.) But it makes me just feel better, I guess.
Most of my friends have actually moved away from Firefox to more tailored browsers like opera, which i think is much worse in terms of data protection. (again, uninformed. It's just something I've seen thrown around, feel free to correct me if that's wrong.) At times, it really is quite easy to start thinking like the people highlighted in the post. I'm 22, and have a degree in computer science. There was a module on data security, but it was mostly focussed on data leaks and encryption methods rather than the 'philosophy' on why data protection is important. Even in the final year of uni, people were being quite flippant with it.
It's probably just a cultural shift, as more and more companies collect mass amounts of user data, people gradually get more comfortable with the idea I guess. Especially with gen alpha, who are born into a world where it's just a fact that all companies are actively farming your data. To them, it's not something to be concerned about whatsoever. There was never a time in which they had privacy, especially since they are introduced to technology before they can even speak, write, or remember.
What I've put above is mostly just waffle honestly, but I hope it provides something to someone LMAO.
Edit to add stuff: I guess to make the point more obvious, for younger generations it's because privacy just isn't real for them.
Hopefully the Trump presidency is a wake up call in the importance of privacy. As we slowly move towards fascism, privacy becomes more important than ever.