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

71–80 of 162 posts

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

#71

Post by PeterisP »

gingerlime wrote: post #66
PeterisP wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your opinion, what are the practical risks to them? What actual interference in their daily lives has the FB leak caused or is likely to cause, which would justify e.g. the effort and inconvenience of switching their phone number? Has anyone abused the data leak against them in some way? If not, how likely is that someone would actually do so?

I guess identity theft is the most likely risk? but who knows? and humans are pretty bad at calculating such risks. Changing your phone number is a pretty concrete hassle though, and I guess none of them estimated it worth the hassle… It’s just some anecdata to support the parent’s point.

If your threat model is mostly about identity theft, then switching your phone number and going off whatsapp won't help at all; going off facebook might limit it a bit but not really, as data in FB leaks isn't that relevant to identity theft, that's usually done based on leaks of your data from e.g. Experian which you can't prevent. There are a bunch of somewhat reasonable precautions against identity theft (credit freezes, filing taxes early to prevent tax refund fraud, etc), but those don't include switching your phone number and abandoning FB/Whatsapp.

So from looking at that risk it seems quite clear that no, it's not worth the hassle, because the hassle is real but the benefits are not. It may be different for other risks, of course - e.g. if OP was worried about a specific abusive ex stalking one of their family, that would be a very different story.

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

#72

Post by andrepd »

roenxi wrote: post #67
deregulateMed wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>towards anarchy Yet every democracy seems to tend toward dictatorships according to history. But I agree the idea behind liberalism is individuals, which anarchy makes sense. Given I have 3 to 5 government layers, Federal, State, city, HOA, and international law, I'd certainly prefer to get rid of a few of these layers due to corruption.

> Yet every democracy seems to tend toward dictatorships according to history. How could a democracy end if not dictatorship? I suppose sinking beneath the waves is an alternative, but that is pretty rare. If you want to have some fun reading up on Wikipedia's list of Empires [0], take some time to appreciate that the Republic of Venice being the longest-lived Western European empire. And I'm no expert in Venetian hi…

Venice wasn't a democracy in any meaningful way, either in the style of Greek democracy that preceded it or western liberal democracies that succeeded them. It was an oligarchy with limited democratic elements.

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

#73

Post by alfiedotwtf »

yesenadam wrote: post #69
alfiedotwtf wrote: post #58

@dang: my comment has been deleted. Did the mods do this or is it some kind of shadow ban?

Email hn@ycombinator.com to get answers to questions like these. I suspect the answer is that it wasn't posted in the first place, or something weird like that. Mods don't delete comments.

My mistake... looking at the wrong thread :headslap:

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

#74

Post by andrepd »

labster wrote: post #6
Santosh83 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Nah, we are biologically built to function in bands of no more than 300 people. Hierarchies are just the basic level of abstraction allowing bands to collectively form tribes, nations, and empires.

That's a pretty strong claim with little evidence :)

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

#75

Post by roenxi »

andrepd wrote: post #72
roenxi wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yet every democracy seems to tend toward dictatorships according to history. How could a democracy end if not dictatorship? I suppose sinking beneath the waves is an alternative, but that is pretty rare. If you want to have some fun reading up on Wikipedia's list of Empires [0], take some time to appreciate that the Republic of Venice being the longest-lived Western European empire. And I'm no expert in Venetian hi…

Venice wasn't a democracy in any meaningful way, either in the style of Greek democracy that preceded it or western liberal democracies that succeeded them. It was an oligarchy with limited democratic elements.

Well, sure. But the Athenian-style Greek democracies were such an outrageous success that they're still a part of the common political discourse after 2,500 years and we still have things to learn from the stories they left us. I mean, not every democracy is going to achieve that level of success or quite that place in the public imagination.

What Venice had was pretty good compared to dictatorship.

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

#77

Post by melomal »

theelous3 wrote: post #26
melomal wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, literally every time I see these articles I just think of the UK. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance_in_the_Unite... I remember being questioned on terrorism charges outside St. Pauls Cathedral, alongside my friends by about 20 police with 4 vans. They told us that we need to leave London (lived outside of it) and they will watch us to ensure that we leave, if we do not then there will be furthe…

1. How can you say this without giving more context? 2. Presuming you aren't a terrorist or doing something so almost terroristish you were violating a public order statute - why wouldn't you just refuse?

Terrorist Police in London just hit a little different. Machine guns, 5 police to 1 person, all separated apart. Refusing to do so was just not worth the back and forth, generally speaking we would have given them a hard time.

But essentially we were out for a road trip and a friend of mine happens to be a videographer. We were around St. Paul's later at night with 2 cars a few guys and a couple of ladies. My friend was filming the Cathedral and a patrol drove passed and turnaround. They asked to see what was on video, they saw it, a couple of friends turned into deer in headlights with their responses and that's when they called backup.

I tried to keep the producer which they gave me with all the details etc but haven't been able to find it. Odd experience. I couldn't be any lesson 'terrorist' looking if I tried.

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

#78

Post by Comevius »

krapp wrote: post #56
fighterpilot wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of these are anonymous platforms where people are unafraid to speak their mind due to that anonymity. Also the existence of loud people on these platforms isn't evidence that the number of people self-censoring hasn't increased. A small, loud group of people is enough to create the effect that you see. Polling suggests that the number of people self-censoring has increased. It's especially common among college e…

It is circumstantial evidence, but I wouldn't expect an increase in radical activity on social media to occur in a society in which most people are afraid to express their views due to fear of omnipresent surveillance. Some people are self-suppressing, a lot of people aren't. And what is it that people are afraid to say? That they only believe in two genders, or innate gender roles? That the US should return to the g…

The danger of surveillance is that it changes the power dynamics, which creates a risk of discrimination, blackmail and persuasion. It also interferes with our intellectial freedom. It hinders us at experimenting with new or controversial ideas. It can cause us to not exercise our civil liberties.

Not exactly a wonder that autocratic regimes are among the worst offenders of state surveillance. The recurrent purpose of surveillance is to control behavior.

Intellectual privacy is an important part of intellectual diversity and individuality. Basically it allows culture and values to be generated from the bottom up, rather than from the top down. The fear of being watched causes people to act and think differently from the way they might otherwise. Surveillance fails to respect the line between public and private actors as well.

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

#79

Post by alexilliamson »

fighterpilot wrote: post #68
krapp wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is circumstantial evidence, but I wouldn't expect an increase in radical activity on social media to occur in a society in which most people are afraid to express their views due to fear of omnipresent surveillance. Some people are self-suppressing, a lot of people aren't. And what is it that people are afraid to say? That they only believe in two genders, or innate gender roles? That the US should return to the g…

This[1] is a survey of college students. About 25-30% are self-censoring on campus, and rates are higher among conservatives. This is a pretty well established finding across multiple polls of both college-age and working-age people. > I'm not aware of any mainstream Conservative beliefs that are suppressed in general discourse Not in "general discourse" (if by that you mean anonymous social media), but if you work f…

If you care that much, speak up and fight. If you don't, don't.

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

#80

Post by adolph »

I've Got Nothing to Hide' and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy San Diego Law Review, Vol. 44, p. 745, 2007 GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 289 28 Pages Posted: 12 Jul 2007 Last revised: 27 Feb 2014

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565

Ham Sandwich Nation: Due Process When Everything is a Crime

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2203713

Post reply on HN