[HN Gopher] Why Privacy Matters
___________________________________________________________________
Why Privacy Matters
Author : Clo_S
Score : 223 points
Date : 2020-09-01 12:31 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (thistooshallgrow.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (thistooshallgrow.com)
| erikerikson wrote:
| These discussions never seem to recognize the role of privacy for
| empowering oppressors. Shining light into the darkness is the
| metaphor used by journalists. What if there was no or drastically
| less darkness?
|
| How would the Uyghur example be different if the Chinese
| governments discussions, plans, and actions were public
| knowledge? More implementable, if every citizen concerned that
| they were at risk ran a self monitoring system that could be
| purchased or issued by NGOs or reporters which created a public
| document of their treatment.
|
| What if the German population had been shown the images of
| torture and abuse so that they could know what the politics were
| doing? What if married soldier's philandering and rape were
| shared with their partners?
|
| What if today in the U.S. the smaller scale oppressions of
| domestic violence were thoroughly documented for courts and
| automatically detected to provide systemic support? What if "he
| said, she said" was a problem of the past?
|
| What if every government official's behavior was publicly
| documented so that any bad actors could be proactively and
| clearly identified and their good actions could be commended?
|
| What if your argument with your partner(s) or friends were
| reviewable so that you never had to argue about what you said,
| you could check it and apologize for what you said (or be
| apologized to) and get back on track to building understanding
| instead of entrenching in conflict?
|
| There are obvious challenges that would need to be thought
| through but it might be worth considering.
| mindfulhack wrote:
| I like this article because it reminds us of the relationship
| between privacy and freedom. Important freedom. Freedoms that go
| far beyond our computer code. In fact, survival.
| oshea64bit wrote:
| Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like the foreword has
| little to do with the rest of the article. I was hooked after
| reading the beginning anecdote, but the transition to a general
| overview of security concepts felt a bit abrupt. I agree with the
| general sentiment of the article though. I'm glad that there's
| been an increasing amount of attention placed on privacy lately.
| [deleted]
| XCSme wrote:
| So, why does it matter? The article talks about random security
| things, that have nothing to do with the title.
| yboris wrote:
| Somewhat related: _Privacy is Power_ - Why and How You Should
| Take Back Control of Your Data by Carissa Veliz
|
| https://www.amazon.com/Privacy-Power-Should-Take-Control-ebo...
| ryosuke wrote:
| I'm not sure who this article is meant for.
|
| If the idea is to convince non-technical people of the importance
| of privacy, the article should have just stuck to that. Parts
| like the free vs. open source discussion seem unnecessary.
| stereolambda wrote:
| I don't think that striking high chords, historical and
| political, is all that useful when talking to people about these
| things. They tend not to take it seriously or at best just file
| it mentally with other bad things in the world that they have
| little agency about. Of course, you may already get the broad
| societal ramifications if you're already in the privacy camp, but
| perhaps it's not a very effective entry point.
|
| (It's another thing if we're talking about politics, not about
| individual choices. In pure politics big picture arguments, like
| "what if there'll be a dictatorship", might be more proper).
|
| I would try to frame it, for individual people, as a question of
| quality and technical savvyness. If a supposedly hi-tech company
| behaves like a scammy phone marketing operation selling you
| garbage bundled with hidden subscriptions, we should treat is as
| such. They _should_ be able to treat you seriously, i.e. give you
| good quality, reliable products for the money, without scheming
| behind your back and siphoning all the data they can. Their
| business model should be sound without this. If they don 't, it's
| just an inferior product and you're being exploited.
|
| A related point is that I don't like products being sold solely
| on privacy. The tone should be more, we provide you an excellent
| thing (inside our capital constraints) and of course, it also
| respects your data.
|
| Currently I see a tendency among people to be more-or-less aware
| of privacy invasions and their potential, but to think that's
| ultimately a fact of life and they'd have to be some crazy nerds
| to do something about it. The thinking should be more that
| they're using low quality stuff and hurting themselves. (I'm not
| saying that you should now go and antagonize people in your
| social bubble, just that it may be a communication strategy if
| there's an opportunity.)
|
| Besides, trying to defend ourselves from the future state will be
| probably always perceived as kooky. Better do something about
| politics directly if you're in a moderately free country. It's
| more about rogue actors inside the companies and in the broad
| underworld. There was a time when people installed the damn
| antivirus.
| css wrote:
| I do not understand what this article is trying to communicate.
| It starts with a rambling anecdote and ends with a list of some
| unrelated terms barely tangential to privacy.
| levosmetalo wrote:
| uBlock orogin is blocking 88% of requests for me. Still, I'm
| able to read the actual content.
|
| I don't want to know how does surfing looks like without
| uBlock.
| II2II wrote:
| This is one of the few times that I found the rambling anecdote
| relevant, perhaps because it dealt with a significant
| historical period.
|
| Two things struck me: the Jewish census and the human
| smugglers. I would have to look up the origin and intent of the
| census, but the moral is that the existence of such records put
| people in peril. As for the smugglers, the lesson is that
| trusted people can use that information to betray you.
|
| How this relates to the modern world is an open question, but
| the author goes on to suggest parallels: governments
| persecuting entire peoples, trusted parties collecting data;
| and solutions: being able to inspect what our software does.
| rigel_kentaurus wrote:
| I loved the anecdote on the Jewish census. Because I am always
| struggling to find examples about why sharing information might
| not be dangerous now, but it can be later, and you never really
| now.
|
| I wish the article were about that, about what kind of
| information we are sharing in the present time, that may come
| to bite us back.
|
| Here is my spin: Information can be used to your advantage
| (Relevant ads are good when they work), but it can also be
| weaponized (Oh, you search a lot for medical conditions?, maybe
| your insurance provider is interested. Or worse like we saw
| with Cambridge Analytica, "you seem to be democrat, let me see
| if I can bias you a little by hitting you where it hurts")
|
| Here is my personal take on the situation from my experience:
| We are in a data collection period. Google, Facebook, Amazon,
| even Apple. Apple might be the worst actually. Silently
| amassing and hoarding data, researching the proper databases
| that can hold the data. We have seen things coming up in the
| last years like NoSQL, like Spark, massive analytical tools and
| real time databases. This is the equivalent of building a
| weapon.
|
| Then the time of using that weapon comes. How? I wish I knew. I
| remind myself that we are just one CEO away of things being
| really bad. We are now under the shadow of people that grew in
| a different time, with a different set of ethics. Google still
| has the original founders on the board, Tim Cook is of the
| Steve Jobs school, Amazon is on its first CEO run. A few
| decades down the board, a new CEO gets appointed, and new CEO
| finds that he/she just inherited a massive data repository that
| can be used whatever he pleased. "Oh, we will never do that"?
| Sure, wait for the next guy to change their mind very fast, in
| the name of profits, or protecting a stock going down, or less
| strict ethics because they didn't live in the time where lack
| of privacy can kill you personally.
|
| Sometimes I hold from sharing my thoughts, because people might
| label me as a conspiracy theorist :) But it is indeed on the
| back on my mind.
| unabst wrote:
| The implications were not that bad until companies were able
| to obtain enough information to change our minds and change
| our votes. Cambridge Analytica weaponized information. Russia
| weaponized information. Bots and fake accounts are rampant.
| Facebook is a warzone, in the most literal sense of the word.
| Their current implementation is a national security threat
| and a threat to democracy. And Mark Zuckerberg is that CEO
| that let it happen.
|
| It doesn't matter what information you share. Facebook buys
| information from everywhere. They aleady know if your
| relationship status even if you leave it blank. That's the
| trap. Then their paying customers are given access to you,
| based on who they want to convince.
| rsync wrote:
| "I loved the anecdote on the Jewish census. Because I am
| always struggling to find examples about why sharing
| information might not be dangerous now, but it can be later,
| and you never really now."
|
| The best example of this is the handwritten notes of the
| Tsars Russian imperial intel/police services in the very late
| 19th and early 20th centuries.
|
| Handwritten records and notes stored in shacks that were
| retrieved and indexed around (forgive hazy dates) 1905 and
| used to track down "revolutionaries".
| AnonHP wrote:
| > Google still has the original founders on the board
|
| While technically true, they signed out a long time ago from
| what Google ought to be or ought not to be. That much is
| evident from Google's actions and the relegation of "Don't be
| evil" and all that.
| Clo_S wrote:
| I see a lot of non-technical people around me who don't get the
| importance of privacy. Family who buys Alexa and use Facebook
| for everything. I wrote this in an attempt to explain how far
| privacy breaches can get, how the implications can be. Then, I
| tried defining some security terms that non-technical people
| might run into. Security helps protect their privacy, so I hope
| to help them make sense of what those terms mean and how they
| benefit from them.
| css wrote:
| Are you trying to equate buying an Alexa device or using
| Facebook to your anecdote? I do not really understand how the
| concepts are related.
| Clo_S wrote:
| No, that's not what I said. I'm trying to show what sharing
| sensitive information with companies and governments can
| lead to.
| stickfigure wrote:
| Your thesis seems to be "Facebook knows you're shopping
| for a new car therefore Nazis." However well intentioned,
| it strains credulity. You should make a better case for
| why privacy matters.
| lalos wrote:
| Your thesis seems to be, right now things are good
| therefore at no point in the future will a 'bad actor'
| government make Facebook comply and facilitate whatever
| they need to fulfill their goals. Matter fact, there
| could be a long term scenario were the company gets
| nationalized or the data centers confiscated and that's
| the end of it. This is why other countries don't let
| foreign social networks operate in their 'digital soil',
| they are aware of the power of it.
|
| The irony is that this same mentality of 'everything is
| good' was the same mentality that people probably had
| when they walked over to auto-register on the census as
| Jewish back in the day. They just didn't see it coming.
| If we can learn something from history is that every
| 100-200 years the status quo gets thrown out the window.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| Turn it around. Not "Facebook knows things about you,
| therefore Nazis" but rather "Nazis existed as a
| historical fact, therefore what Facebook knows about you
| is incredibly dangerous."
| stickfigure wrote:
| What percentage of your purchases do you make with credit
| cards?
| mhh__ wrote:
| When I discuss privacy with a friend who doesn't share the same
| liberalism as me (Chinese, make of that what you will), I often
| have to point out that it's easy to forget that the spooks will
| get into bed with political conspiracy - Watergate, COINTELPRO
| for example. There are very few checks and balances in the US,
| and arguable none in the UK (You can at least put the US
| Constitution on your pocket)
|
| "I have nothing to hide" should be considered equal to "I have
| nothing to say, therefore I have nothing to say"
| Koshkin wrote:
| The "I have nothing to hide" trope is _patently_ false. We hide
| all the time - we hide our private parts under the clothing; in
| our dwellings, we hide ourselves behind blinds and curtains; we
| hide most of our thoughts by keeping them to ourselves. 99% of
| all information is hidden (and should stay that way).
| whhone wrote:
| I learnt "why privacy matters" from this Glenn's TED:
| https://www.ted.com/talks/glenn_greenwald_why_privacy_matter...
| epoch_100 wrote:
| Related: https://whyprivacymatters.org
| chaostheory wrote:
| With the existence of shadow profiles, is ideal privacy even
| possible unless you live in a remote area with a tech averse
| population? What about the census? The data you provide to the
| gov is also very sensitive and has a history of being abused (see
| the role of the US Census Bureau in Japanese Internment Camps).
| However if you don't provide it, it affects gov funding for your
| demographic. What about the computer in your pocket? Most of it
| isn't open source
| leakr wrote:
| "is ideal privacy even possible" - It is, but 99% of the world
| population won't be able to attain it. Your machines
| (smartphone, PCs) can be fingerprinted with a 99% accuracy even
| if you navigate using Tor or a VPN. I think
| https://panopticlick.eff.org/ can be part of an answer!
| tboyd47 wrote:
| Satoshi Nakamoto apparently did it.
| mLuby wrote:
| It is possible.
|
| A census counts people. It might need to know who's a citizen
| or who's eligible to vote, or maybe even generation or sex. It
| doesn't need to know name, address, eye color, medical history,
| fingerprint, etc. The aggregation provides privacy (unless the
| sample size is incredibly small, like in an extremely remote
| district).
|
| Another example is the TSA: their job is to protect vehicles
| and passengers, which means preventing weapons on airplanes.
| But it doesn't matter who's wielding the weapons. So they don't
| need ID to do their job, and asking for it (and worse,
| recording it where it can be leaked) is an unnecessary breach
| of privacy.
|
| The general problem is there are incentives for collecting
| excessive information and very few disincentives. Laws and
| regulation can change that.
| maproot wrote:
| Privacy tools and OS really matter: privacytoolslist.com
| wnd_pn wrote:
| I totally agree with you. Unfortunately as of today, people are
| not putting enough attention on who they give their sensitive
| information to. Data breaches are increasing in number, billion
| of accounts are hacked every day (I just discovered one of my
| side-accounts got hacked through https://haveibeenpwned.com/),
| nevertheless the majority of us is still not protecting its data
| properly (perhaps the problem relies on ignoring the problem
| itself?). And the situation is even more dramatic in the B2B
| market: I work in the cybersecurity industry and every day I see
| companies being hit by these attacks. That is why, I always
| advice the people I know to start using privacy-oriented tools
| that could actually prevent or help preventing something like
| this to happen. Like using a password manager
| (https://1password.com)to create strong password and store them,
| or a secure email system (https://protonmail.com), or "simply" by
| keeping your systems and softwares up-to-date or by backing up
| your data.
|
| We, at Cubbit, are contributing to the mission of getting back
| our privacy by building a distributed and encrypted cloud storage
| service that puts users in control of their data
| (https://business.cubbit.io).
| devanon wrote:
| https://privacytoolslist.com/#leak-test-tools full list of such
| tools and many others. And protonmail is anti-privacy. They
| have access to emails and happy to give access to any data on
| demand
| AzuraJergen wrote:
| Even when you do intentionally accept to give your sensitive
| information to X player, you don't what other players will get
| their hands on that data, whether through breaches, sale of
| information, etc.
| Clo_S wrote:
| Oooh yes! The 2nd part of this article is about all the tools I
| use that help with privacy and security, including ProtonMail
| and Have I Been Pwned! I will look into Cubbit, thank you
| wuliwong wrote:
| The title of the article is "The Why and How of Privacy and
| Security." That should be the title on this HN post as well.
| tremon wrote:
| ... published on a site that accesses 7 different top-level
| domains. And that's even before allowing any javascript to run.
|
| Oh the ironing.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Ironing?
|
| Are we going to see the same comment on every article about
| privacy?
| atoav wrote:
| If you are writing about the importance of privacy, you might
| consider what you are doing about it yourself if you want to
| be taken seriously.
|
| It is 2020, setting up a website that doesn't send off the
| data of your trusting visitors to third parties should be
| totally standard. Yet not even people advocating for privacy
| can get this done.
|
| BTW. one benefit of not collecting and tracking is that you
| won't have to show that silly cookie banner.
| Clo_S wrote:
| Oh I'm well aware and I wish I didn't have to show the
| banner. If you know an alternative with which I could build
| that website, that doesn't force me to use cookies on
| users, I'm all ears
| jpttsn wrote:
| HTML
| rexpop wrote:
| This is awfully dismissive. Not everyone with technical
| skills in one domain or another are capable of building a
| website from scratch, and that's perfectly fine.
| leakr wrote:
| Yeah that's a great theorical piece of advice. But here's
| the thing. In 2020 if you don't wanna self-host your
| website and have a resilient and flexible website, you
| don't have other options than squarespace/wix and other
| platforms using cookies.
| Nextgrid wrote:
| I use Squarespace and you can configure it to disable any
| tracking and not have to show a consent banner. Not sure
| about Wix.
| sanderjd wrote:
| Sure you do. Those may be the easiest ones, but they are
| not the only options. There is probably a discoverability
| problem though. It's not great if the best way to learn
| about the other options is through HN comments...
| leakr wrote:
| Your "standard" user without any git or HTML/CSS/JS or
| command line knowledge hasn't a lot of options imho.
| Obviously, self-hosting with https://sitejs.org/ or
| something similar would be ideal but when you don't have
| a dev/IT background and you're looking for a way to host
| a blog there isn't a plethora of viable and easy-to-use
| solutions, especially if you don't want to use a service
| provided by Microsoft, Google, Facebook etc... I did the
| research a few months ago and maybe I missed some options
| though? If you have resources I'm interested!
| Clo_S wrote:
| Yes, that's something I'd love to do differently. The problem
| is I don't have the technical skills to build that website
| myself. As I said in the cookie banner, I disabled all the
| trackers I could. Unfortunately, Squarespace doesn't let its
| customers disable _all_ of them, which is extremely annoying.
| msc1 wrote:
| I liked your article, why don't you check out Ghost? I can
| help you spin up a VPS and a Ghost blog if you like in an
| hour, pro bono of course.
|
| https://ghost.org/marketplace/
| addajones wrote:
| I would love info on this, I only see their plans. Thank
| you!
| Clo_S wrote:
| Thank you! I've heard of Ghost but it seemed to be only for
| blogs, so I didn't think it'd fit. I'll check it again.
| leakr wrote:
| Ghost is pretty neat! It's self-hosted solution though,
| which means that you have to update your OS and the
| software (Ghost related or not) on it regularly if you
| don't want it to be vulnerable which isn't ideal if you're
| not technical and don't want to deal with this.
| actiondoes wrote:
| If you value privacy and want to post your voice anonymously
| online, then don't use or even support tools that you cannot
| understand. Who cares if things dont look "professional". If
| they are professional then they probably were created by
| someone you don't know with intentions you don't know. A
| perfect blogging site in my mind is one that you own, hosted
| using a domain with privacy protection and is written in code
| that you can understand. Basic code knowledge is a must if
| you want privacy
| Karunamon wrote:
| You may wish to give Wordpress a look. It's infamously easy
| to install, and will happily run on a $5/month digitalocean
| VM. Installing a caching addon (one or two clicks from the
| store) will make a site that can survive being linked to
| directly on HN.
|
| Last I knew Squarespace had an export option, so you might be
| able to just bring all your content over without much hassle.
| Clo_S wrote:
| Thanks! I had a WP site before, but it was getting too
| complicated for me. I have basic CSS skills, but they
| weren't enough so I was always asking my SO for help. I had
| plugins to update but I was never sure of how safe they
| were, if they were going to break the site, etc. With the
| skills I have, something like Squarespace is more
| manageable and easier to tailor
| user5994461 wrote:
| Get a fully managed wordpress from wordpress.com. That
| will cost you a few dollars per month and you won't have
| to manage Linux/PHP/SQL or any plugin. There is a bunch
| of themes included that look pretty good overall.
|
| GitHub Pages are also a good suggestion but they don't
| come with comments, stats or themes. There's quite a bit
| of development and design to do to match
| squarespace/wordpress.
| leakr wrote:
| Unfortunately WordPress is a pain in the butt to maintain,
| every plugin and even the core is a security liability if
| you don't auto update everything (which is likely to
| randomly wreck your blog someday) and Wordpress's default
| configuration (with its XMLRPC API) is far from perfect.
| tremon wrote:
| I guess the cookie banner only shows up after enabling
| javascript; at least, I never noticed it (reader mode worked
| fine for rendering the text).
|
| As for the content, I think it's a bit all over the place.
| You start with references to abuses of vast data stores, and
| then immediately jump into a technical expose of personal
| protective measures, but the introduced concepts have no
| relation to each other, nor do they appear to protect against
| the abuses that you started out with.
|
| What was/is your intended audience?
| mhh__ wrote:
| I would have a look at GitHub pages, for a static site it's
| really all you need (blog, right?)
|
| I haven't actually used it for anything yet but I have a
| script that turns LaTeX into nice looking HTML pages, saves
| messing around with the CSS for hours.
| Clo_S wrote:
| Thanks! I've heard of GitHub pages, and yes I just need a
| static site. I'd have to look if I can allow newsletter
| subscription with GitHub pages.
| jedimastert wrote:
| You could try MailChimp. I've used it for a few gigs
| StavrosK wrote:
| You may like Quick Site (https://quicksite.stavros.io/),
| which I made for exactly this purpose.
| Clo_S wrote:
| Thank you! I've bookmarked it, I'll look at it with my SO,
| he's the more technical one :D
| StavrosK wrote:
| Great, hopefully it won't be too hard to set up.
| zygy wrote:
| Nice work, this looks cool!
| StavrosK wrote:
| Thanks!
| encom wrote:
| uBlock says 9 domains, and the article starts with a "trigger
| warning". Hard pass.
| driverdan wrote:
| > the article starts with a "trigger warning". Hard pass.
|
| You're passing because someone is attempting to help people
| with mental health problems? Perhaps the problem is with you,
| not the warning.
| rexpop wrote:
| It's truly horrific how many people are disdainful of those
| of us who have PTSD, as though this "weakness" were a moral
| failing, and therefore also a moral failing to accommodate.
| encom wrote:
| Or perhaps the problem is taking a concept that is poorly
| understood by most, and running it into the ground until it
| loses its meaning.
|
| Triggers and warnings are concepts that are absolutely
| real, but in most usage is instead a fad and a virtue
| signal. That much is obvious in this case, when the author
| puts up a warning for authoritarianism. Please.
| mhh__ wrote:
| > trigger warning
|
| I dislike them, but I have met people who genuinely do not
| want to think about bad things. I can accept the viewpoint,
| but these are the people that turn a blind eye during
| genocides. If you really can't handle discussing topics like
| these I don't mind a warning, at least rather than self-
| censoring.
|
| However, I'm reminded of the fuss that was made over the term
| "Joyplot" due to the term Joy Division - ignoring that band
| is named after the historical term as an artistic statement,
| it just seems like pandering into the void.
| mLuby wrote:
| If you saw your family and friends murdered in a genocide
| and were understandably traumatized, it's reasonable to not
| force you to relieve that experience unprepared. A trigger
| warning for genocide would help you emotionally prepare to
| engage with the topic, or if you're still not ready, to
| avoid it.
|
| It's not for society at large to dismiss controversial
| topics (though some people mistakenly use it that way).
| 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
| If you control your own "DNS" this site does not access any of
| those different domains. I do this, for speed and reliability,
| not privacy. When I access this site, the only domain my client
| accesses is "thistooshallgrow.com", which is hosted on
| squarespace. That hosting company requires a UA in addition to
| Host and Connection headers otherwise no others are required.
| Most sites do not require a UA header. I like to control the
| headers I send, too. Not for privacy; I just like the control
| and minimalism. This site, like most any site, works just fine
| for me in a text-only browser. I read the same content as
| anyone using a "modern" browser, minus the ads, tracking or
| other nonsense. I see no irony. Except perhaps that you are
| using a browser that defaults to enabling those automatic
| accesses to different domains, a browser that is in fact
| supported by the web advertising industry. You need an
| extension to modify the program's behaviour to block ads, etc.
| [deleted]
| teddyh wrote:
| I vastly prefer Bruce Schneier's take (from 2006):
|
| _The Eternal Value of Privacy_
|
| https://www.wired.com/2006/05/the-eternal-value-of-privacy/
| Clo_S wrote:
| Oh thanks, I'll give it a read
| matz1 wrote:
| So privacy matters because the information can be used against
| you. That is reasonable but hiding information is not the only
| the way to fix the issue.
|
| Knife can be used to harm people, sure you can fix it by
| banning/destroying knife but thats not the only way to fix the
| issue.
|
| I'm more interested to solution where we assume the information
| will be public and fix the issue that arise due to that.
| auslegung wrote:
| I think your knife analogy is poor. Banning/destroying data is
| not what privacy is about. Privacy is about ensuring no one has
| your data who shouldn't. Knife safety also involves ensuring no
| one has a knife who shouldn't, such as toddlers.
|
| Assuming all information is public and fixing the issues that
| arise is like giving everyone (even toddlers) a knife and then
| fixing the issues that arise from that. There is no fixing the
| issues that arise from a toddler having a knife. The solution
| is to take the knife away, they should not have a knife. The
| same solution is there for data, take the data away from the
| people who shouldn't have it, they should not have it. Or even
| better, don't get a knife to a toddler/your data to people who
| shouldn't have it in the first place.
| matz1 wrote:
| >Privacy is about ensuring no one has your data who shouldn't
|
| Yes and that is because that someone can use it to harm you
| and you'll suffer. Ensuring no one has your data who
| shouldn't is only one way but not the only way to prevent the
| suffering.
|
| Let say you know my credit card account number, the reason I
| don't want other people to know the number is because it can
| be used to stole my money.
|
| But what if there is way that even though you know my credit
| card number, you can't stole my money, then having my credit
| card number public would not be an issue for me.
|
| Analogy is not perfect, but with knife, my point is we let
| everyone to easily obtain knife even though we know that it
| can be used to harm people. One way we do this is by having a
| severe enough punishment as a deterrent for people who use it
| to harm other. This is what I mean by fixing the issue that
| arise due to easily accessible knife.
| auslegung wrote:
| I'm fairly certain we will always require privacy. If I
| have your credit card number and I want to use it to hurt
| you, I can, unless there's something else I need that I
| don't have, perhaps a security code. If someone can figure
| this out without needing privacy that'd be pretty
| phenomenal, but my little brain can't conceive of such a
| thing. And until then, we need very strong privacy.
| matz1 wrote:
| The solution for the credit card problem would be hard
| but there are plenty of situation where the solution is
| not that inconceivable.
|
| One way that it may work is if there is way you can trace
| any transaction good enough so that you can't use the
| credit card number without revealing yourself.
|
| Another example would be if I'm gay. This information can
| be used to really hurt me in the past but not so much
| these days. Sure I can hide this information to prevent
| people to hurt me but I rather to fix the issue of the
| need of hiding it in the first people.
|
| I would imagine if people can hide being gay perfectly
| there wouldn't be that much acceptance today.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-09-01 23:01 UTC)