Google's Chief Internet Evangelist: 'privacy may be an anomaly' (2013) • Hacker News Board

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

#51

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Apr 08, 2020, 7:05 PM UTC

[deleted]

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

#52

Post by PopeDotNinja » Wed, Apr 08, 2020, 7:19 PM UTC

lallysingh wrote: post #40

coldtea wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

We're on Hacker News. I think we can assume audience here is fairly technical.

I'm smart enough and I didn't know he was the cocreater of tcp/ip. I also get him confused with Tim Berners Lee, as they are both referred to as the father of .

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

#53

Post by choward » Wed, Apr 08, 2020, 8:00 PM UTC

pmezard wrote: post #31

NegativeLatency wrote: post #4

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

Is there a Firefox extension to fold threads containing that kind of recurring generalities? Sinclair's quote (not even quoted here), "If you are not paying for it, you are the product", "Government are bad", etc. ?

I prefer "Even if you are paying for it, you are the product"

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

#54

Post by contingencies » Wed, Apr 08, 2020, 9:05 PM UTC

gundmc wrote: post #41

tantalor wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More people know what Google is than TCP/IP.

And more people know what the internet is than Google.

In some developing countries many people believe that Facebook is the internet.

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

#55

Post by 0xff00ffee » Wed, Apr 08, 2020, 9:42 PM UTC

astrobe_ wrote: post #49

sixstringtheory wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is one kind of medium for socially interacting.

Well, if you insist, sure, but social networks are focused on people while forums are focused on topics (news article etc.). The difference is significant enough that some people may post on various forums all day long but never on Twitter or FB.

/r/selfawarewolves

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

#56

Post by icedchai » Wed, Apr 08, 2020, 11:34 PM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #19

0xff00ffee wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not on social media at all. What's HN then?

Social media like the rest of them, except you can be pseudonymous here.

You can be pseudonymous on almost all of them. For the ones that "require" real names, your name just has to look real.

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

#57

Post by ggeorgovassilis » Thu, Apr 09, 2020, 10:43 AM UTC

reidjs wrote: post #43

gundmc wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And more people know what the internet is than Google.

I think, in a weird way, this is actually debatable.

I read the comment as "more people know what the internet is than google knows what the internet is".

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

#58

Post by specialist » Thu, Apr 09, 2020, 1:22 PM UTC

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…

Agreed.

Clay Shirky in Here Comes Everyone compared kids online convos to real life, from memory:

Kids hanging out in a food court, gossiping about this and that, are talking to each other. Not to outsiders. And adults eavesdropping are creepy. They treat their online chatting the same way.

What I take away from Shirky's (many) observations is that social conventions haven't adapted to the new reality and that our new communication technology was implemented irrespective of social norms.

I haven't used Snap, so this is speculation: I think it's tech of short-lived messages tried to implement social norms. Which would be exceptional in the tech world.