Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

Post by landemva » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 9:13 PM UTC

globular-toast wrote: post #62

OfSanguineFire wrote: post #8

The author advocates using encryption as an ethical duty, OK. But it would not be an effective form of civil disobedience. This is unrealistic: > We should all use PGP, SSL or equivalent tools; VPNs, Tor and/or SSH tunnelling; IPFS, or other distributed file systems — and ditch proprietary OS's in favour of Linux or truly free Android distros. This is not anything the general public, for whom today their mobile phone…

Then we should make it our responsibility to ensure the general public can do these things and refuse to support companies that try to make it more difficult.

Post by landemva » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 9:16 PM UTC

gavinhoward wrote: post #58

I absolutely agree with the article. I moved my wife and I to a Matrix server that I control, with disk encryption on top of the Matrix encryption. Signal was great for us, for a long time, but it was time to move on. I've even set up a Matrix chat server for my business for "office hours." The governments of the world have no right to see my comms with my (future) customers. And as soon as I can (when I have custome…

Post by landemva » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 9:22 PM UTC

dublinben wrote: post #137

qweqwe14 wrote: post #119

Lots of comments here mention that the vast majority of people won't use PGP, Linux and other things to protect their privacy, because they don't care/are dumb/have more important things to do/whatever. The bottom line though is that people that are more tech savvy and more knowledgeable will always have better privacy no matter what, unless you literally enforce Linux and all that on everyone, which is just not gonn…

>Most people don't care. Most people aren't given the choice. When they are actually presented an equally simple decision between more privacy and less privacy, nearly everyone chooses privacy.[0] Making privacy just as easy as not-privacy is exactly what needs to happen, and that is likely to only happen through regulation. We can already see how hard companies work to avoid complying with GDPR and the cookie law. […

Post by signatureMove » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 9:30 PM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #27

I can sympathize with the general notion that more encryption is better, even if I wouldn't go to the extreme of declaring it a duty . But the author just completely lost me at: > We should all use PGP, SSL or equivalent tools; VPNs, Tor and/or SSH tunnelling; IPFS, or other distributed file systems — and ditch proprietary OS's in favour of Linux or truly free Android distros... Those tools and techniques should ceas…

Post by WarOnPrivacy » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 9:37 PM UTC

ben_w wrote: post #45

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If they outlaw encryption but everyone encrypts, they can either do nothing or arrest everyone. Whatever protection I'm getting from non-consensual surveillance, I am declining it. I'm not sure if we're mindful of this but Gov's only ethical purpose is to serve us. Past that, it has lost it's way.

> Whatever protection I'm getting from non-consensual surveillance, I am declining it. So far as I know, the only way to do that is to leave whichever country is doing this, which — trust me on this as one who has done so for slightly messier reasons — is a right PITA even when going somewhere else that has a functioning society. I don't think there's any other way to make yourself an "outlaw" in the old-fashioned se…