The New York Times must think we're all illiterate ADHD idiots. The subject is interesting and the NYT seem very proud of their flashy graphics, but the signal/noise ratio here is quite low.
It's Time to Panic About Privacy
71–80 of 91 posts
Re: It's Time to Panic About Privacy
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's not. I use w3m, so there was no annoyance other than a very lightweight argument and a call for panic. Panic does not make for good public policy. Don't panic. Text follows: Privacy is a thing we all say we want. You get mad when it’s invaded or mishandled. Say, when Equifax leaks your credit info, when your nudes show up on 4chan or when your health data is held ransom. But privacy is also something a lot of…
This is soft paywalled (you get few articles a month) so you are sharing text that is not freely available
Did not realize that. I suppose I've never hit my limit. That or NYT can't be bothered to implement their paywall for a browser that doesn't load javascript or images. Usually (WSJ, WaPo, Bloomberg, many others) the content doesn't load at all.
Re: It's Time to Panic About Privacy
#73claps hands okay folks, it's time to panic. let's get this train rolling. (as if "panic" was that sort of phenomenon, like a protest or something)
That's literally correct, though I imagine you meant this as sarcasm. Crowd panic is a phenomenon that is in the same category as spontaneous protests.
It's quite nice to see NYT telling the non-hackers to worry, because I've been trying to explain that to them ever since Google bought Dejanews and with the help of NYT and others they're finally starting to understand.
Re: It's Time to Panic About Privacy
#74This was surprisingly weak. Security cameras? Who cares? Here's what we really should be worried about: Google. They know everything . Our browsing history. Probably which porn sites we visit. Our emails. Which services we use. Our passwords (if stored in Chrome). Our schedule. Where we are and where we're going (Maps). Security cameras? Laughable. Google (and to some extent FB, Microsoft and Amazon) is where the dan…
So switch off them. Fastmail is better than Gmail, Firefox is better than Chrome, DuckDuckGo is pretty good, etc. Even switching some stuff is better than not switching any of it.
I can do all those things. But what about the 99.9% of internet users who are not tech-savvy enough?
Re: It's Time to Panic About Privacy
#75I wonder if there's an interesting essay behind that interface. I'll never know.
There's not. I use w3m, so there was no annoyance other than a very lightweight argument and a call for panic. Panic does not make for good public policy. Don't panic. Text follows: Privacy is a thing we all say we want. You get mad when it’s invaded or mishandled. Say, when Equifax leaks your credit info, when your nudes show up on 4chan or when your health data is held ransom. But privacy is also something a lot of…
Just want to point out how appropriate this reply was on many levels. The core article was about privacy and using w3m overcomes most intrusions. The presentation on the site is apparently awful, but w3m removes all that and distills the page to text. As a developer I use w3m (and previously lynx) for all these reasons, but also as a first-pass proxy for more exhaustive accessibility checks. I guess what this makes me think about, is, for the moment, while we still have access to general purpose computers, we do still have a choice in how we consume what we are forcefed. Maybe if we exercise it enough, we'll get to keep that choice. Maybe not. Worth a try.
Re: It's Time to Panic About Privacy
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
So switch off them. Fastmail is better than Gmail, Firefox is better than Chrome, DuckDuckGo is pretty good, etc. Even switching some stuff is better than not switching any of it.
I can do all those things. But what about the 99.9% of internet users who are not tech-savvy enough?
Are you suggesting that Firefox is harder to download than Chrome, Fastmail is harder to sign up for than Gmail, and DDG is harder to visit than Google?
Re: It's Time to Panic About Privacy
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's not. I use w3m, so there was no annoyance other than a very lightweight argument and a call for panic. Panic does not make for good public policy. Don't panic. Text follows: Privacy is a thing we all say we want. You get mad when it’s invaded or mishandled. Say, when Equifax leaks your credit info, when your nudes show up on 4chan or when your health data is held ransom. But privacy is also something a lot of…
Just want to point out how appropriate this reply was on many levels. The core article was about privacy and using w3m overcomes most intrusions. The presentation on the site is apparently awful, but w3m removes all that and distills the page to text. As a developer I use w3m (and previously lynx) for all these reasons, but also as a first-pass proxy for more exhaustive accessibility checks. I guess what this makes m…
Thanks! I like w3m because the web in general is insanely overstimulating. w3m lets me engage with the text without having to see all manner of distractions. I'm willing to accept being locked out of some sites to preserve my sanity. I also use firefox, but only as an application client for things I've already opted in to, like webmail, banking, and work-related stuff. Like you say, this is the freedom afforded to us by general purpose computers, and it's worth exercising.
Re: It's Time to Panic About Privacy
#78This kinda feels like worrying about how the telephone would allow people to spread rumors and damaging information about each faster and further. Or perhaps discriminate against a potential job applicant based on their voice, instead only getting to see a letter. This feels like a non-tech person has realized what tech people realized 20 years ago. Technology makes everything we do faster and more efficient even if…
>This feels like a non-tech person has realized what tech people realized 20 years ago.
It's almost like most of the tech people realized Stallman was right then went right out to build the opposite.
Then they chided the luddites, not themeselves, for the problems created as a result. THEN they put the burden on the luddites to fix the issue they created.
Oh boy.
Re: It's Time to Panic About Privacy
#79I wonder if there's an interesting essay behind that interface. I'll never know.
There's not. I use w3m, so there was no annoyance other than a very lightweight argument and a call for panic. Panic does not make for good public policy. Don't panic. Text follows: Privacy is a thing we all say we want. You get mad when it’s invaded or mishandled. Say, when Equifax leaks your credit info, when your nudes show up on 4chan or when your health data is held ransom. But privacy is also something a lot of…
Thank you for the actually useful reply to my flip comment.
Re: It's Time to Panic About Privacy
#80This was surprisingly weak. Security cameras? Who cares? Here's what we really should be worried about: Google. They know everything . Our browsing history. Probably which porn sites we visit. Our emails. Which services we use. Our passwords (if stored in Chrome). Our schedule. Where we are and where we're going (Maps). Security cameras? Laughable. Google (and to some extent FB, Microsoft and Amazon) is where the dan…
> Google (and to some extent FB, Microsoft and Amazon) is where the danger lies. You can't point to any single company and blame them for this mess, because the problem is in the interactions /between/ companies. There are hundreds of companies you've never heard of whose entire business is the gathering and merging of data, then trading it with others. This isn't a surveillance state, it's a surveillance market, and…
You can't blame a business for doing what they're meant to, making money, as long as something is legal and profitable they will do it, the problem is the lack of regulations and the failure of government to keep pace with technology.