There are many enemies of privacy. There are politicians claiming the (at best) misguided pretense of “protecting the children,” intellig…

  • auth
    link
    12
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Privacy is a thing of the past with modern cars, phones, cameras everywhere/facial recognition, NSA, evidence laundering, credit cards, TPMS censors, etc… we need new laws to restore privacy.

    • @EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      24
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      This defeatist attitude, as well as “all-or-nothing” one, is one of the major privacy enemies by itself.

      modern cars

      You can not own a car at all, have an older one (which, granted, is not quite a universal longterm option), or from what I’ve seen in discussions - depending on the model, a lot of them can have the telematics units disconnected.

      phones

      Not using a smartphone, leaving it at home or using a Faraday cage (same goes for a dumbphone), using Lineage/Graphene/whatever on it.

      credit cards

      Cash. Even in a lot of online stores (the smaller ones, not large universal Amazon-like) I’ve shopped at you can order delivery to the store’s office (which is usually at no extra cost) and pay with cash.

      Yes, there are a lot of areas where you have lost. But that doesn’t mean you should give up on everything at once then. Privacy is not binary, it is a spectrum.

      • TFO Winder
        link
        92 months ago

        People in USA take pride in using cashless modes.

        I don’t understand the flex. You are literally paying commission to a private company for every transaction as well as a permanent record of the purchase in company database linked with so many personally identifiable details.

      • @h3ndrik@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’d argue it’s not a defeatist attitude, since they included the proper solution. To “need new laws”. And that’s how we generally do it. We disallow companies ripping off people, despite that maybe providing a better profit margin. We force water parks to implement some minimum standards to prevent accidents, despite not caring about safety would cost them less. I’d argue it’s the same here. Just blaming it on the user isn’t the proper thing to do. It just doesn’t work for the general audience. Yes, you could do the water park inspection yourself, everyone could do some research which one is safe… And following that analogy everyone could get educated and use cash and GrapheneOS. But it’s not the correct approach to the issue as a whole. And it doesn’t really work.

        • @EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          32 months ago

          I was referring to him saying “privacy is a thing of the past”. And yes, while laws would be the best course of action, they’re unlikely (and in case of facial recognition - kind of impossible because at least here, the main facial recognition system is operated by the government). My point was that with what he mentioned, there is far from nothing a regular person can do for themselves and their loved ones.

          • @h3ndrik@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            22 months ago

            That is correct. And I think the same dynamics are at play with some of the other currently discussed topics. For example things like recycling and the switch to renewable energies. You as an individual can do something about it. And it’ll make a difference for you and your life. And that’s also enough for me to do it. But it doesn’t really change anything in the broader picture. The rules foster egoistical behaviour. You’ll often suffer and have a competetive disadvantage against the people who think about themselves first. That’s why companies won’t participate in making the world a better place, because they have to stay competetive. And also 90% of people are somewhat uneducated and just think about themselves.

            I think regulation is the only way to tackle these issue. Yes, you can pay attention to privacy and do recycling. But it won’t really do anything of substance for the environment or what companies try to do with your data. And it won’t change the situation.

          • @acastcandream@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            He is saying our understanding of privacy and assumption we have any privacy is. He is clearly saying we need to protect it and assert our rights.

      • DeadNinja
        link
        fedilink
        42 months ago

        Privacy is not binary, it is a spectrum.

        You have no fucking idea what a beautiful thing you just wrote.

      • As someone in the market for a car, I’m appalled at how much BS they all have. Neither of my current cars have any wireless functionality aside from the AM/FM radio and TPMS, yet even base model newer cars have wireless crap everywhere.

        Likewise for TVs, I have a smart TV because we use the apps, and it’s old enough that it doesn’t have a microphone, so data collection is limited (I guess they can see the Netflix and Disney+ stuff we watch). I’m hoping to buy a newer TV, and pretty much everything is a privacy nightmare. I just want an option to stream video from my NAS, and that’s about as much as I need.

        phones

        This is honestly one of the better times for phones. Linux phones are almost daily driveable, GrapheneOS on Pixels is pretty much ideal, and even stock Android gives way more options to reduce app access than just 10 years ago.

        credit cards

        This is one area that I’m not going to budge on. Credit cards are just way too convenient, so I use virtual card numbers for online stuff and just deal with the privacy leaks elsewhere.

        It’s still totally possible to go without a credit card, and I’ll hopeful that cryptocurrencies or digital payments will improve in a privacy-respecting way (I’m told in India, you can pay using a QR code, so hopefully that means virtual cards could be used at the POS).

        But yeah, like you said, it’s a spectrum. Don’t compromise on what’s most important to you, and compromise a little on the others where convenience wins out.

    • TFO Winder
      link
      42 months ago

      I don’t understand, if so many people care about privacy how come no one in the phone/car etc market are able to make good product which cater to these needs?

      • Tempo
        link
        102 months ago

        There’s no money in privacy.

        Harvesting and selling personal information is practically a continual source of funds with little to no cost. Why spend time and money developing a product with all the data harvesting elements stripped out to appeals to maybe 5-10% of the market?

        • @acastcandream@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Just sounds to me like excuses made by a marketing department that doesn’t know how to do its job. People just don’t know they want more privacy, largely because they don’t realize the extent to which they currently have none and how easy it would be to claw some of it back.

          Apple is flexing about privacy (rightly or wrongly) and has rolled out a lot of privacy/transparency features. Clearly they see value there. Firefox has seen growing adoption with the EU breaking apple’s walled garden. Clearly people care to some extent and with marketing/education more can care.