Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google's Chief Internet Evangelist: 'privacy may be an anomaly' (2013)

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 58 posts

Re: Google's Chief Internet Evangelist: 'privacy may be an anomaly' (2013)

#21

Post by coldtea »

jonny_eh wrote: post #16

This is Vint Cerf, co-creator of TCP/IP (aka the internet protocol). He's better known by his actual name, isn't he?

By technical audiences maybe. By the general public, Verge readers, etc, not so much. Half of the population doesn't know who the vice president is, much less Vint Cerf.

Re: Google's Chief Internet Evangelist: 'privacy may be an anomaly' (2013)

#23

Post by sarah180 »

It's a reasonable hypothesis, but I think it overlooks the scope of information that is now shared electronically and the ability to collate it. Noticing the people from whom somebody get mail is very different from having access to a huge amount of private communication in a queryable database.

As people have said before, a modern smartphone is like a diary times a thousand.

Re: Google's Chief Internet Evangelist: 'privacy may be an anomaly' (2013)

#24

Post by ashton314 »

> Elaborating, he explained that privacy wasn't even guaranteed a few decades ago: he used to live in a small town without home phones where the postmaster saw who everyone was getting mail from. "In a town of 3,000 people there is no privacy. Everybody knows what everybody is doing."

Terrible, stupid analogy. If I wanted to have a private conversation with someone, I could just close my door or make sure no one was eavesdropping in the bushes. Perfect secrecy. In the digital realm, there's always a danger that my message will be recorded, decrypted, or analyzed and I have no idea how long that message will live. Internet communications are insecure, but that is not the default in real life person-to-person interactions.

It does work in some sense: everyone in town will know you bought that fancy new thing, etc.—there's less privacy there—but as far as communication has been concerned, the default was private: no one other than the participants hears the message.

Re: Google's Chief Internet Evangelist: 'privacy may be an anomaly' (2013)

#25

Post by close04 »

sixstringtheory wrote: post #18
wayoutthere wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, in the modern world privacy is a luxury. It's actually pretty damn hard to find information about many technology executives outside of their LinkedIn profile; but many lower-income jobs practically require an active social media presence.

I’m interested in which jobs you speak of. Surely nobody cares whether or not you have aFB profile when deciding to hire you as a grocery stocker or cashier...

> according to a study by CareerBuilder, nearly 70% of employers screen their candidates using social media and what’s more surprising is 57% of employers are less likely to even contact applicants who lack an online presence [0]

[0] https://www.lawdepot.com/blog/should-employers-look-at-socia...

Re: Google's Chief Internet Evangelist: 'privacy may be an anomaly' (2013)

#26

Post by sarah180 »

nashashmi wrote: post #2

Maybe there should be three terms acknowledged in the study of privacy: Public Obscure Private For the longest time we have interpreted obscurity as privacy. Such as what your house looks like. Or how many people know of your legal immigration status. There are very few pieces of information that are truly private, like social security number, health records (known only by Healthcare providers), and the actions you d…

> the writings of your journal

…unless that journal is electronic

Re: Google's Chief Internet Evangelist: 'privacy may be an anomaly' (2013)

#27

Post by buran77 »

wayoutthere wrote: post #7
close04 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not having to eat your own dog food helps a lot too... You lose your privacy for his benefit, not the other way around.

Yeah, in the modern world privacy is a luxury. It's actually pretty damn hard to find information about many technology executives outside of their LinkedIn profile; but many lower-income jobs practically require an active social media presence.

I wouldn't say my job is low level (it's on the higher end of the spectrum) and in the past few interviews the recruiters/HR/interviewer/(whatever their exact role in the company may have been) added me on social media to explore my profile before the interview.

Actually for my current job they added me right after I won the recruitment, around the time I was starting the job, "validated" my timeline on different platforms, and then quietly removed themselves from my lists. So they did some due diligence but wanted to show this had no bearing on the recruitment process.

Re: Google's Chief Internet Evangelist: 'privacy may be an anomaly' (2013)

#28

Post by gundmc »

It's odd to describe Vint Cerf as Google's Chief Internet Evangelist, a largely honorary and emeritus position, as opposed to co-creator of TCP/IP for which is is famous. It makes the headline and framing feel very click-baity.

The referenced FTC announcement was titled "Internet Innovator Vinton G. Cerf to Keynote FTC's Internet of Things Workshop".

Re: Google's Chief Internet Evangelist: 'privacy may be an anomaly' (2013)

#30

Post by a_c »

ashton314 wrote: post #24

> Elaborating, he explained that privacy wasn't even guaranteed a few decades ago: he used to live in a small town without home phones where the postmaster saw who everyone was getting mail from. "In a town of 3,000 people there is no privacy. Everybody knows what everybody is doing." Terrible, stupid analogy. If I wanted to have a private conversation with someone, I could just close my door or make sure no one was…

And I think scale matters. We are living in an eavesdropping-on-steroid era
Post reply on HN