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

81–90 of 162 posts

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

#81

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#82

Post by flareback »

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…

I think part of it is an "I don't care" attitude but another part is that people think that the government won't bother them. Another part of it is that there is nothing they can do even if they did care.

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

#83

Post by skybrian »

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…

The problem isn’t just that the average person hasn’t experienced harm. It’s that privacy advocates often don’t have good examples of average people experiencing harm. Theoretical arguments aren’t going to do it. If you want people to listen, you need stories to tell.

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

#84

Post by naasking »

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…

> Spend an hour on Twitter or Facebook and tell me anyone is suppressing any of their radical hot takes on anything.

Just because the street corner is still populated by the crazies shouting about the end times, doesn't meant ordinary people aren't suppressing their own opinions around the water cooler.

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

#86

Post by jnsie »

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…

^ This

I am going to make a weird, but IMHO apt, comparison to Type 1 Diabetes. T1D is an attritional disease caused by the pancreas's inability to produce enough/any insulin and the list of complications is long and deadly. As someone who has lived with the disease for decades what makes the disease particularly insidious is immediate effort versus delayed impact. The disease affects everything...every single part of every single day. Eating, sleeping, exercising, traveling, finances...everything. And to be on top of everything is extremely effortful. However the impact of not taking enough insulin, of not checking blood sugars frequently enough, or living with high blood sugars, is delayed. Today's transgressions may not be punished for decades. It is no shock to read about poor therapy adherence when the effort is immediate (and constant) and the effect is delayed (and therefore hypothetical). I see the same issue - immediate and constant effort coupled with long term hypothetical effect - with protecting one's privacy. Obviously one should do the right thing. But many won't.

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

#88

Post by radarsat1 »

jnsie wrote: post #86
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…

^ This I am going to make a weird, but IMHO apt, comparison to Type 1 Diabetes. T1D is an attritional disease caused by the pancreas's inability to produce enough/any insulin and the list of complications is long and deadly. As someone who has lived with the disease for decades what makes the disease particularly insidious is immediate effort versus delayed impact. The disease affects everything ...every single part…

This is an incredibly insightful point of view for understanding people around me on this topic. And maybe a useful analogy for talking about it. Thank you.

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

#89

Post by quenix »

msravi wrote: post #29

Is there a link to the technical details of this whole Pegasus thing? I see a lot of results of the investigation but can't seem to find technical details of what was accessed and how the investigators came to the conclusions in the reports?

Here you go: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/research/2021/07/forensic-...

Sleep tight.

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

#90

Post by oscardssmith »

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.

It's worth noting that the popular conception of "Greek democracy" tends to ignore the massive caste of slaves that Greek city states had.
Post reply on HN