Live data from Hacker News

Protecting privacy is a losing game today (2018)

brookings.edu

11–20 of 46 posts

Re: Protecting privacy is a losing game today (2018)

#11
post #2

A defeatist piece. If you're determined and have initiative you can achieve a lot. If you depend on the legislators in society, like this author, you may indeed be doomed. But you don't need to be. The good thing is that with defensive measures you can stop much of it. With retroveillance you may even be able to strike back from time to time.

> retroveillance This is the first time I have seen this term, could you explain exactly what you mean by it?

He may have meant sousveillance.

Re: Protecting privacy is a losing game today (2018)

#13
This reminds me of an observation whose name escapes my feeble attempts to Google, that roughly states government bureaucracies tend to find more things to grow into over time, rather than diminish.

Wish I could find what it was… I remember reading about it in the context that if you wanted to grow your underdeveloped country, you should do as western countries did 50-100 years ago, rather than copying current institutions, as doing the latter would likely keep you from being competitive.

Re: Protecting privacy is a losing game today (2018)

#14
post #13

This reminds me of an observation whose name escapes my feeble attempts to Google, that roughly states government bureaucracies tend to find more things to grow into over time, rather than diminish. Wish I could find what it was… I remember reading about it in the context that if you wanted to grow your underdeveloped country, you should do as western countries did 50-100 years ago, rather than copying current instit…

The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy

— Oscar Wilde

Re: Protecting privacy is a losing game today (2018)

#15
post #4

One idea would be a "Privacy Bastion" business that proxies transactions for people. Maybe I'm authenticated with several, and distribute transactions across them. When they get hacked, I'm jacked, but still.

I was thinking of starting this kind of service, but I got scared by the potential liabilities and legal issues of giving a person basically a second identity.

How would this work for hotels and stuff? Do you basically make a fake company, open a bank account in its name, and use that account to buy stuff discreetly?

What if the person you a proxying for bought something illegal with the account? Who’s liable?

Re: Protecting privacy is a losing game today (2018)

#16
post #14
post #13

This reminds me of an observation whose name escapes my feeble attempts to Google, that roughly states government bureaucracies tend to find more things to grow into over time, rather than diminish. Wish I could find what it was… I remember reading about it in the context that if you wanted to grow your underdeveloped country, you should do as western countries did 50-100 years ago, rather than copying current instit…

The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy — Oscar Wilde

There’s an “official” name to it, somebody’s law I think, in the social sciences.

Re: Protecting privacy is a losing game today (2018)

#17
post #15
post #4

One idea would be a "Privacy Bastion" business that proxies transactions for people. Maybe I'm authenticated with several, and distribute transactions across them. When they get hacked, I'm jacked, but still.

I was thinking of starting this kind of service, but I got scared by the potential liabilities and legal issues of giving a person basically a second identity. How would this work for hotels and stuff? Do you basically make a fake company, open a bank account in its name, and use that account to buy stuff discreetly? What if the person you a proxying for bought something illegal with the account? Who’s liable?

[deleted]

Re: Protecting privacy is a losing game today (2018)

#18
post #16
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy — Oscar Wilde

There’s an “official” name to it, somebody’s law I think, in the social sciences.

Parkinson’s Law comes to mind.

Re: Protecting privacy is a losing game today (2018)

#19
Why isn’t the wealth and power of the targets mentioned in debates for privacy ?

I mean, no one cares to know the private details of the powerless, and who has the power to know the private details of the powerful ?

There must be some analogue to eat or be eaten for privacy. Some people like reading tabloids.

Re: Protecting privacy is a losing game today (2018)

#20
What would be great is a legal precedent to own the metadata you generate. If companies didn't own this data it would solve many privacy problems for individuals. I would like the legal ability to opt out of harvesting under scrutiny of punishment from the Government or the ability to opt in and sell it back to the companies who harvest it.
Post reply on HN