Not to say anyone here is right or wrong about this, but I just do t get the whole privacy paranoia. Yes, I get that our rights are being violated. Yes I know I need to be aware and concerned.

People use specials rims, VPN software, etc... The bottom line is every keystroke, SMS, voice call, search text, historical reference... every piece of digital communication is recorded (At least in the US).

The sad reality is I can be as angry as I want, but unless I forego using tech or leaving the house, there is nothing I can do about it.

I await your comments, both positive and negative.

government collecting my data - meh, not much i can do

3rd party companies (eg google) collecting my data - nuh uh

This is a generic positive comment

@linuxxx might have an opinion

Thank you...

I feel like the fight for security is futile. It's a myth. I'm not giving up basic services to paranoia. Or any services for that matter.

Be safe where you can, but don't let paranoia get in the way of anything. I use Google products and Snapchat. Sure, they collect a lot of data from their users and aren't always totally honest about it but, what, should I avoid programs I like because of it? Not really.

*Waits for hate*

Also, I wonder what @linux thinks about this rant, he seems very security oriented.

@runfrodorun I am only concerned about financials, and any information which can be used to gain access to my bank account for instance. Is there other information I should be protective of? For example I see location is a common complaint of Google users.

@runfrodorun I agree that encryption is more of an added bonus in development when it should be a core concept, and that is incredibly wrong. It is not good enough to only hide error stacks and password protect databases. This is not the 1990s, there are very smart people out there working to do a lot of harm to a lot of innocent people. Devs have a responsibility to protect their users to the BEST of their ability.

I see a day in my near future where social engineering attacks actually become less frequent than cracking as computational power continues to increase (Just fucking look at Bitcoin farms and tell me that can't crush a rainbow table in 3 seconds flat), and that scares me, because anyone with half a brain is immune to "oh no! <Bank> has an issue and needs you to log in to bit.ly/fuckyou" but nobody is immune to weak encryption.

@runfrodorun I see what you're saying, but I really believe any encryption can be compromised, eventually. And encrypted traffic is also captured, from what I understand.

I wish I had the answer here, but I don't. It just seems that if you want to use any connected devices in any capacity, your subject to scrutiny from some agency. Maybe I am not overly concerned because my communications are mundane, this is the only social media I use anymore, and sometimes I look at porn. But I understand the fact that our rights are regularly violated. I just don't see a solution to it.

Historically, we know that Governments and Corporations will exploit circumstances and opportunities to gain power and profit at the expense of a given group of people. Whether there is a risk of danger or the type or degree of some danger has been routinely overlooked, dismissed, or even actively hidden or covertly disguised. We should know that when the affected people or CONSUMERS are able to collectively demand change that calls for change are more likely to be effective and get results.

Cynicism, defeatist attitudes, or being content with ignorance can feel good in the short-term; but they make for terrible long-term decisions and outcomes.

I agree with @ILMostro and I believe that, like the issue of constant cybersecurity breaches from actual hackers, this is an opportunistic power grab that will be slowly remedied over time. There simply is no quick solution, and some of us might die before we see this go away. But everything changes and I think as central as this is to our lives, it will be addressed relatively soon in the grand scheme. But not this year.

I agree for the most part. Especially since most encryption algos come from government sources. I can (almost) guarantee the government of the US and etc can already sniff your traffic. That's why I don't buy the privacy thing. Not to mention quantum computing can break most/all modern crypto algorithms and I am fairly certain that there isn't a good one out yet that can't be defeated in quantum space.

@runfrodorun says that mitigation is only as strong as the weakest link and I believe that is true, but I believe he misplaces where the weakest link is. IMO the weakest link is me. So I am careful about what I put out in the world.

After all of that, it's left up to the hostile actors. And I don't trust tech and tend to lean on the side of all tech has been defeated.

Vote for Libertarian parties
Use Free Software when possible

@ILMostro @chadd17 personally I disagree. I believe that cynicism and pessimism is exactly the right way to go. Don't trust tech. Assume the governments and corporations already know how to defeat everything, they just don't. I don't believe they are spying on me in particular like so ranters do, but I do know they collect data and aggregate it about me. Just not me in particular. So I just stay off the radar.

@clovisIrex absolutely not. Libertarianism is terrible. If anything it frees up more of your data to big brother. But in this case it is a big brother than wants to monetize and commoditize you so even worse.

Let's take a look at the Netherlands. We just got a new surveillance law thingy which allows the AIVD (Dutch NSA equivalent) to tap everything they want and keep the data for up to 3 years. If the data is encrypted they can keep it up to six years. Oh and they do have a restriction but that's simply that if anyone in an area might want to commit any kind of crime, they're allowed to tap that complete area for up to i thought three months. Next to that they're allowed to hack any device they deem necessary in order to get the evidence they need.

That shit is scary and infringes about any principle of privacy we have.

Next to that, the big companies can use the data we pretty much 'voluntarely' provide them in any way they seem fit.

Let's say I joined a demonstration against cows (yeah just making the subject up) and we communicate over gmail or other non encrypted mediums. After ten years we get a government in place which is so strongly against cows that they court order all data, get some data from their mass surveillance programs and start picking up people. Your 'nothing to hide' data suddenly becomes a liability, doesn't it?

We don't know how our data can be (ab)used in the future so I try to encrypt everything.

'but encryption can be cracked in the future' - true but for one, there are algo's that are secure for now and two, not encrypting might get you fucked by default.

Honestly it's not that hard. I use Signal, tutanota, duckduckgo, Linux with SELinux (hardened security kernel module I thought), vpn, tor browser and some more. I just use different tools but it hardly costs me extra work.

@projektaquarius
You say that Libertarianism is terrible, yet you know the alternative to free market is government interferance which is far worse than anything.

The only thing that can help us retain our privacy is ourselves using the free market. Governments never solve problems, they only create new ones in their stead.

IMHO people have too much free time. Nobody explicitely searches your data and laughs when you have sexy time all by yourself, there are illicit people doing illicit activities that are a bit less drastic with their privacy than you want to be because you are bored. These are little fights the other party doesn't care at all and all it does is inflating your ego a bit? Google doesn't care you disable their apps, now if everyone would do, they would care, but not everyone shares the view that time is well spent fighting the diabolic data collecting machine. Do you plan in the foreseable future to become the next Kingpin of the underworld? Then I may understand.

@clovisIrex @projektaquarius, I am a fan of social libertarianism.

Liberty is extremely valuable. I sometimes think it is very condescending, and potentially dangerous when we as adults are told what is good or bad for us.

That being said, I really don't think about the privacy of my data as much as I should. I believe we have the right to not be spied upon in our own homes. Though fortunately it seems this isn't up for debate here.

I try and raise awareness of privacy enabling tools on my Facebook (ironic I know). And engage discussions with friends.

As far as voting, first past the post sucks. I am in a safe seat area so no chance to unseat the Tory MP here.

I'm not using facebook because I don't want the public to see my private infos but I'm using Google for everything. The fear of then having your data is irrational. They have it but they don't have access to it.

I'll admit I don't have firm stance on this. I am against exploitation of our data by any party (governments less than corporations, I suppose), of course.

Now, how do you define "exploitation"? Is it different from "fair use"? Is ad targeting already an exploitation, or is it fair use? And that's the most benign example, an obviously stated business model.

The problem is that we cannot possibly know the extent of how our data is/will/can be used by third parties. If anything bad can happen - it necessary will? I don't know.

I suppose "privacy common sense" must be applied in the same way like "don't go on shady sites / open shady email attachments" is "anti-virus common sense".

All that being said, I do use gmail / chrome / google keep mainly because of convenience and my laziness to establish similar usability from alternative sources...

This makes me *mainly* go with the flow, I guess?

What I think is important is that people know what the options and alternatives are so you can make informed decisions for yourself. For example I requested my data from Facebook, I now know what they keep on me, so I can decide if I like that or not.

I do feel we need strong privacy laws. My general experience is that companies will keep a lot either just in case. Current software I am on does not do true deletes for recovery purposes. That is fine but if a company does that it should follow rules. As a dev I can see everything in the DB but I can't use that info. Our users might not know our deletes are not true but they should not have to worry about this. I also feel they should have the right to request a true delete.

@Linux lazy bonez :D he's been tagged and answered already

One word : blockchain

@olezhka
Hahaha, we just had a blackout so I dont have time to read everything

@Hedgepig
All the right a human has is the NAP.

If some company spies on you and violates your freedom it's acceptable as long as you agree to it by using its' proprietary software and accepting the EULA.If it bothers you you can have a choice and use and/or develop FOSS alternatives instead of proprietary software.

But when a government spies on you it violates the NAP because you have no say in it, they have a monopoly on the usage of force(military,police) and can punish you ig you disobey. They act on behalf of statist officials elected by the dictatorship of the majority.
Their motives are malevolent and not for profit, but to control and violate your freedom for special interest groups and corruption.

I believe that it should be quid pro quo where the quid is approximately the same "weight" as the quo with the additional constraint that both are made known to their full extent.
E.g. if I want Durex to make condoms in the right size for me I'm gonna be happy to give them the size of my penis, but if Facebool wants the size of my penis because it wants all the info about me than I'm simply not going to use it. Other people who might be fine with that can use it and people who don't want Durex to know their size don't have to use it (obviously here there's also the issue of it being a paid product so it's not just the privacy but it's just an example).
However, when they take my penis size I expect them to have that data reasonably well encrypted, from the point of getting it to me to storing it; that's non-negotiable.
Whether I decide to tell someone my size via an unencrypted channel is up to me, but they need to encrypt it.

If someone really focuses on you personally for whatever reason, there's a decent chance they're gonna find something regardless of how well you protect yourself, as long as you actually do use technology. But with that said, opportunists should not be able to get all your info so take care not to just leave everything on a silver platter and operate on the assumption that of someone wants your data, they will get your data.

@Linux Scroll a little up :)

@linuxxx
Yeah I noticed :)
Still, we need to get in touch with each other,

@Linux Yas good one, about what was that again?

@linuxxx
You had a dream

@Linux Wait the VPN thingy?

@linuxxx
Ye

@Hedgepig @clovisIrex the reason that libertarianism is terrible is that it trusts the free market to be self regulating. It is not.

Libertarianism fails for similar reasons communism fails nut at the opposite end of the spectrum. In order for it to succeed the consumer must have perfect information and perfect access to information and alternatives. In practice, consumers lack at least one of these things. Just look at the effective monopoly Walmart has in parts of the world. The free market is a great thing on paper but it can, and has in the past, led to seedy business practices and exploitive monopolies which then leads to the collapse of competition and the free market.

Libertarianism is as bad as anarchism and communism, simply because it lacks an effective system of checks and balances between government, the people, and businesses. Sorry but there are PLENTY of alternatives to the free market that aren't "the government just tells you what to do" e.g. the US mixed economy

@projektaquarius
Government is not the solution to your problems. It obly creats more problems.

To achieve maximum potential regulation and "checkd and balanaces" must be removed if they hurt the NAP.

Free market is the natural state of things. Humanity can grow and flourish tenfold without any regulations. It will take time but eventually there won't be any governments. As civilization becomes more advanced people become more independant and less relied on their 'chieftains'.

@clovisIrex yeah see that is a very optimistic outlook and I am not that optimistic. Humans are largely self serving and really bad at forward thinking. Lack of government regulation has led to smog choked cities throughout the US and the death of the US public transportation industry that was once the envy of the world because of shady back room dealings. In getting rid of the government you are just trading one master for another.

@projektaquarius
You don't trust humans yet you want them to rule over you in a government?

@clovisIrex in a proper government there are checks and balances that prevent them from "ruling" anything. Corporations don't. The check on a company is government regulation. The check on the government is the people. Internal interests can't regulate themselves. They need an outside force. Like I said, that is why communism doesn't work (no outside check on the government) and anarchism doesn't work (no outside check on the people).

I am glad I made this rant. I am learning a lot.

@projektaquarius
No such thing as 'proper' government. Every government is an abuse of power by some humans on another roup of humans. "Checka and balances' are human controlled and can be changed as easily as public opinion(see the rise of Nazism in Germany for an example). The free market is not controlled by anyone but the 'invisible hand'- the conflicting interests of individuals.

Governments were essential in a time when humans faced harsh realities and endless conflicts as a rsult of their own selfiahness and hubris that came from a rebellion against God. Governments evolved from chiefdoms to small kingdoms to totalitarian empires ro republics(more liberty with each passing age).

In the future we will not need any human-made government to rule over us. The only power in this universe comes from God alone.

@clovisIrex there is no invisible hand. It is very visible. However, the rise of Nazism was caused by whipped up emotions resulting from a destroyed economy. And that was not determined by the people it was determined by back room dealings in a government with no checks and balances. However, and this seems to be the part you fail to understand. Businesses are JUST AS BAD OR WORSE. Period. Dot. End of sentence.

Example: Henry Ford destroyed the entire rail industry on purpose because he was not happy with his profit margins. There was no regulation in place to keep him from doing it. He and other auto makers literally just bought up railway companies and intentionally bankrupted them, removing competition in clear violation of the NAP. There was effectively no government involvement in that, yet it still happened. Now government would step in to prevent something like that. Absent a government how would something like that be prevented? The NAP is pretty words but that's all it is.

@clovisIrex the advantage the government has over a business is that it can great and enforce rules. It prevents predatory practices such as the destruction of the American rail industry. The consumer does not have that kind of power. Absent a government, corporations and those with economic power prey upon the individual. Then the corporations create a pseudo-fascist oligarchy and you end up right back at governments. God may grant rights, but people with power and money very easily violate those rights.

@projektaquarius
When people with money violate your rights you are obligated to rise up and compete with them, not to cry for help from mommy government to save you.
Consumers have enormous power. Your consuming choice is what generates profits and gives power to companies, which you see as separate entities that prey, but in reality in a truly free market everyone are consumers and producers at the same time.

All the power a government has on the people is achieved by using violence and fear(police, law and military). I prefer to be on a mpre free and equal playing field and compte with money and markets to gaun power instead of dealing with autocrats using tanks, aeroplanes and mass surveilance.

@clovisIrex which is nice when you CAN compete. Which, again, you can't when you have people who already have money and power. Ask pretty much any mom and pop business in the Midwest what happens when Walmart comes to town. More than likely they go out of business because they can't compete. The individual consumer has little to no power, a mass of consumers has power but they all have to be directed toward something which, without leadership isn't going to happen.

And governments don't just use violence. They have monetary power to. They can withdraw contracts, withdraw funds etc. The number one purpose of a government is to protect the citizenry. It isn't "crying to your mommy" it's calling out unfair business practices and monopolies, which also wield violence against the consumer, via coercion and exclusion, according to the NAP.

You have provided no example whatsoever to prove that the consumer can do anything against a monopoly or unfair business practices. Realism > idealism.

@clovisIrex It's easy enough to be Libertarian if/when you have a shitload of personal wealth to use for protection. There is a place for strong Government in our lives; to limit the power of plutocrats and aristocrats. The trick is to be well informed to make sure it serves the collective; unfortunately, however, this becomes even more difficult in scale, as crowd mentality and wisdom is, generally, even worse than individual/personal intelligence.

@ILMostro libertarianism doesn't necessarily have to be economic liberalism.

@ILMostro
It's easy to support a strong government when you're living in a country with liberal values and high freedom.

Come here to Israel, when the government forces you to be a slave in the military for 3 years of your life just after finishing high school and takes an outragous amount of your income in taxes to pay for populist laws and military spending.

@Hedgepig Granted; though, if a person's economic outlook isn't that great to begin with, there's not much sense in striving for other ideals of Libertarianism, especially if it would degrade even further protections against the powerful.

@clovisIrex I have not comsidered how Libertarianism would fit into political sphere of other countries.

@ILMostro to the contrary, left libertarianism strives to grant liberty both socially and economically.

I think the right libertarians can't grasp what freedom really is.

Poverty certainly doesn't make a person free

@Hedgepig
Left-Libertarianism is an oxymoron.

You can't have a free society without free economy. If some poor guy won't work and won't pay taxes but gets welfare on behalf of a richer guy that contributed to the economy and pays taxes that's not fair. But in a society where nobody needs to pay taxes, everyone has to contribute to the economy and there are no parasites

Do not confuse Freedom with Equality. Freedom is the oppurtunity, the equal chance in the economic playground for obe to live by the sweat of his own brow.

Equality cannot exist because humans are not equal. Anyone telling you otherwise is a crook that wants to take away people's freedom with theft(taxation) and violence(law enforcement).

@clovisIrex free markets have arguably done their part to bring a lot of people out of poverty. But that and globalisation are a double edged sword, productivity is at an all time high, and through tech improvements will continue to grow, yet wages are being continually squeezed. further the pursuit of economic growth ignores ecological impacts. Waste is a good thing for capitalism, it means more shit is bought and more money is moved.

To survive we need something else.

@clovisIrex you call it a level playing field, you must see the world in a very different light to me.

Most people who are rich or powerful are that way due to luck of birth.

@Hedgepig and/or exploitation of the poor.