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

Huge data leak shatters the lie that the innocent need not fear surveillance

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 162 posts

Re: Huge data leak shatters the lie that the innocent need not fear surveillance

#41

Post by foxpurple »

no_time wrote: post #20
trabant00 wrote: post #16

I think the fight against mass surveillance needs first to be lost in order to even start. Right now the average citizen has not witnessed an impact on his life and there's no shortage of other problems he has to deal with. I'm not saying techies should just stay passive though. Special cases - journalists, activists, politically involved - need to be protected right now, and when the problem will be generally unders…

This is an interesting take. My only concern is that people consistently trade security for freedom in modern societies. I wonder how pervasive surveillance has to be to break this trend.

I’ll happily trade some privacy for security. I live in an apartment building which has security cameras in every public space. Sure, technically they could build a record of when I leave and enter, but I can also report people who leave trash bags out and they can be held accountable.

There is a point where it goes too far, but not all surveillance is bad.

Re: Huge data leak shatters the lie that the innocent need not fear surveillance

#42

Post by [deleted] »

pattusk wrote: post #3

I don't think the problem is with the "lie" that the innocent need not fear surveillance. Most people will agree that mass-surveillance will negatively affect some people that are indispensable to healthily functioning liberal society: journalists, activists, academics, public figures... The problem is that even if most people don't subscribe to the "nothing to hide" argument in general, they do not care about themse…

[deleted]

Re: Huge data leak shatters the lie that the innocent need not fear surveillance

#43

Post by Folcon »

I do wonder whether things will change if the tools become even more accessible?

I mean do you start caring about privacy when your local script kiddy can warrentlessly tap you? In my experience people tend only to care about things that directly affect them.

Part of the lack of caring I think comes from the thought that why would "they" care about spying on me, it seems so distant and unlikely to happen. However when your personal rivals can do it and you could do it back to them, well the risk starts to feel more immediate.

Sure there will be laws against it, but that doesn't stop some people, the main way to tackle it will be either reducing attack vectors or making any surveillance more visible, which will hopefully have a more global effect.

Perhaps more people will start talking about surveillance because it suddenly got yet again easier be a thing? Though perhaps I'm being naive =)...

Re: Huge data leak shatters the lie that the innocent need not fear surveillance

#44

Post by Nextgrid »

Hokusai wrote: post #18
pattusk wrote: post #3

I don't think the problem is with the "lie" that the innocent need not fear surveillance. Most people will agree that mass-surveillance will negatively affect some people that are indispensable to healthily functioning liberal society: journalists, activists, academics, public figures... The problem is that even if most people don't subscribe to the "nothing to hide" argument in general, they do not care about themse…

> about expected value and perceived risk. Overall for most people the equation is always: (probability of data being mishandled) * damage That is the main reason. To keep privacy is too costly on purpose. In Europe, thanks to the GDPR you can get quite good privacy. But companies give you a 1-click option to be tracked, And then company that build products usually 1-click or 2-click to not be tracked. But ad-based c…

> companies give you a 1-click option to be tracked, And then company that build products usually 1-click or 2-click to not be tracked. But ad-based companies will ask you 3,4 or sometimes even dozens of clicks to not be tracked

The GDPR explicitly forbids that. If you're going to do that you may as well not ask to begin with because you'll be in breach either way.

The problem is that GDPR enforcement is delegated to incompetent idiots and very little of it is being enforced, so these breaches go unpunished. At this point it raises the question of whether the regulators actually benefit from it not being enforced.

Re: Huge data leak shatters the lie that the innocent need not fear surveillance

#45

Post by hoseja »

Santosh83 wrote: post #4
pattusk wrote: post #3

I don't think the problem is with the "lie" that the innocent need not fear surveillance. Most people will agree that mass-surveillance will negatively affect some people that are indispensable to healthily functioning liberal society: journalists, activists, academics, public figures... The problem is that even if most people don't subscribe to the "nothing to hide" argument in general, they do not care about themse…

Because the 'time and effort required to maintain my privacy' part requires immediate and sustained and rigorous action and sacrifice of various comforts, all for a nebulously perceived, personally theoretical risk. The ultimate trajectory of liberal democracy is towards anarchism. But humans are anything but evolutionarily suited for that. We are biologically built to function in a hierarchy, even if the top of that…

It's the culture since the agricultural revolution that's evolved to be inherently tyrannical.

Re: Huge data leak shatters the lie that the innocent need not fear surveillance

#46

Post by smichel17 »

krapp wrote: post #40
Comevius wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already live in a world where surveillance changed the way people think and act, causing us to suppress non-conformist opinions. It is why mass surveillance exist in the first place, to foster collective conformity. Unfortunately we are prone to accept authoritarianism these days. The more economical and ecological uncertainties there are the more we desire order and stability, no matter the cost. For many having…

> We already live in a world where surveillance changed the way people think and act, causing us to suppress non-conformist opinions. I don't see many people suppressing non-conformist opinions anywhere. Rather, I see people defiantly shouting their non-conformist opinions from the rooftops at every opportunity. Spend an hour on Twitter or Facebook and tell me anyone is suppressing any of their radical hot takes on a…

I do.

Re: Huge data leak shatters the lie that the innocent need not fear surveillance

#47

Post by hoseja »

tommit wrote: post #22
re-al wrote: post #17

"Few pause to think that their phones can be transformed into surveillance devices, with someone thousands of miles away silently extracting their messages, photos and location, activating their microphone to record them in real time." They were designed to be surveillance devices! Remember when you could replace your phone battery? They corrected that 'design flaw'. Smart phones, smart meters, smart cities, 5g... th…

This seems a bit over the top to me. I don't think I agree with your overall sentiment, even though I share some of the fear. Our phones were certainly not designed to be surveillance devices, that's just a side effect of having one central device that includes pretty much all of your life's data. As convenient as it is to have everything that matters to you on one device, it simply makes spying that much easier. I'm…

Education, especially history education is very thinly veiled nationalist-and-obedient-worker indoctrination.

Re: Huge data leak shatters the lie that the innocent need not fear surveillance

#48

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

pattusk wrote: post #3

I don't think the problem is with the "lie" that the innocent need not fear surveillance. Most people will agree that mass-surveillance will negatively affect some people that are indispensable to healthily functioning liberal society: journalists, activists, academics, public figures... The problem is that even if most people don't subscribe to the "nothing to hide" argument in general, they do not care about themse…

"Having unsuccessfully tried to make family and acquaintances more aware of privacy issue, I can confidently sat that "nothing to hide" argument is nothing next to the "I don't care" attitude."

You can express as much "confidence" as you like in saying that but as it stands, this is nothing more than another personal anecdote.

If you were sure about your anecdotally-based conclusion, then what would be the purpose of a Tverskyan study.

People are not being given a meaningful choice. No one is "choosing" to sacrafice privacy in exchange for using the internet.

Rather, others are choosing to violate previously established notions of privacy in order to make money. Why. 1. Because whatever these others have in the way of computer skills they lack in moral character 2. Because they can; it's technically easier with the internet and generally there are no legal protections against it.

What happened when Apple asked iPhone users if they want to be tracked by Facebook. What did users choose.

Re: Huge data leak shatters the lie that the innocent need not fear surveillance

#50

Post by chaosite »

trabant00 wrote: post #16

I think the fight against mass surveillance needs first to be lost in order to even start. Right now the average citizen has not witnessed an impact on his life and there's no shortage of other problems he has to deal with. I'm not saying techies should just stay passive though. Special cases - journalists, activists, politically involved - need to be protected right now, and when the problem will be generally unders…

This is called accelerationism. It doesn't really work, making something worse just to make it better isn't effective, changing things for the sake of "getting away from the status quo" is silly.
Post reply on HN