The most common argument used in defense of mass surveillance is ‘If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear’. Try saying that to women in the US states where abortion has suddenly become illegal. Say it to investigative journalists in authoritarian countries. Saying ‘I have nothing to hide’ means you stop caring about anyone fighting for their freedom. And one day, you might be one of them.
Ok but you don’t need to pay a vpn to have a reasonable amount of online privacy. Even more because most of the things today work online and you need to provide an identity por example for government services. So is not bad to have a a standard profile but take precautions that don’t need to use a vpn. Even if true, this is propaganda to have fear and buy it.
It is not possible to have privacy online anymore. Full stop.
Sure it’s possible, but it’s not practical.
If you read the blog post you would there are 0 mentions of VPNs there. VPNs have very limited purpose, and it’s just a small tool in the arsenal of privacy.
A vpn service, that it’s just that a company selling a product , publishing a blog post about the terrible things about not concerning about privacy… ah they didn’t mention vpns … so ok noting is being sold here…. :D
What other tools than VPNs would you say are important?
It really depends on each person’s threat model. But there are a few things everyone would benefit from. Like VPN, email aliasing, password manager, 2FA/MFA. They don’t have any convenience cost and in most cases make your life easier.
If you are interested in learning more:
Pornstars show us their assholes but I’m pretty sure they don’t want everybody to know where they live. Just like normal people aren’t comfortable shitting in a public toilet with the door open.
Jokes on you I’m a claustrophobic shitter!
Abortion should be illegal because it violates the UDHR. Other than that true.
do you live your whole life this confidently incorrect every day?
Calling someone’s opinion “incorrect” shows the true nature of you and the people you represent.
That was not an opinion
Then they should’ve used a different word. “Incorrect opinion” is what only a toxic person would say.
Can you just take a second to reflect on how inelegantly you have taken being wrong? You made an incorrect assertion of a fact, just accept you made a mistake and move on. Being stubborn and defensive makes you look kind of immature.
Hope you can take this advice
I did admit my mistake but instead of looking at it, you just decided to falsely accuse me…
Yes you admitted your mistake. And yes you still acted a bit foolish. That’s not a false accusation, it’s just an accusation.
(THIS is an example of an opinion)
Abortion should be illegal because it violates the UDHR.
This is an (unsubstantiated) allegation of fact, not an opinion.
I agree because someone told me that the law was edited but the person who replied clearly said “opinion”, not “information”. I do believe that was a sign of toxicity and not just laziness or English issue. As a proof, my own psychological researches confirm that people from similar communities tend to exhibit increased irritability, toxicity and desire of creating exclusive communities.
Where did they say opinion, I don’t see an edit on their comment.
Huh did I reply to a wrong comment then? I’m pretty sure there was “opinion” in it.
Lol the fact that you think someone presenting a different opinion means they represent anyone is silly, stop perpetuating the politics = sports teams mentality
Um, pretty sure that is very not correct. https://reproductiverights.org/un-human-rights-committee-asserts-that-access-to-abortion-and-prevention-of-maternal-mortality-are-human-rights/
This information is pretty new. I didn’t know there was the edit.
It’s from 2018. Sounds like what you don’t know could fill a warehouse.
Nobody can ever know even remotely everything. It’s physically impossible. I’m not a lawyer so it’s not even my main sphere of interest.
You’re right, nobody can ever know even remotely everything.
Luckily, the same device you used to post that comment can also be used to check if what you are about to say is actually true, so you can prevent yourself from spreading misinformation like this in the future.
10.31.2018
Yes ik. My sources were from 2019 or so but I guess they had some outdating issues at that time already.
What is the 31st month? Modulo 12 would make it July.
10th July 2021. Gotcha.
Further proof that what is illegal or not is volatile.
I’m all for privacy, but I’m not all for using the comment section to talk about abortion rights. Sure there is some overlap, but the comment section here seems to show the ease of which the human psyche can get distracted, these tangential bickerings are the reason big data is so effortlessly steam rolling us.
Upvoting for admitting you were wrong in your edit.
I wish more of the internet acted that way.
I don’t think that’s relevant but still curious to know where you think in the Universal Declaration of human rights or in the Déclaration des droits de l’Homme de du citoyen it forbids abortion
I’m not French and idk French laws. I was talking about the US.
What are you even saying? You were talking about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is NOT a US text. And it is based on the Declaration from France from 1789.
Anyway, the UDHR says that humans are born equal in rights, and that individuals have the right to live. It’s a good question to wonder what is considered an individual indeed. For example, the US law defines an individual as a human being who was born alive
It is not a US text but it is accepted to work in the US afaik and I’m quite sure of it. Another person told me that the declaration was edited in 2018 to include the right of abortion. I didn’t know about that and I, in contrary to most people in this discussion, am not afraid to admit it and therefore that I was wrong.
Alright then. Good for you
I don’t think you know US laws either
Did I ever claim to?
Guys, stop falling for the obvious bait in the comments.
I don’t know where I read it but the best defence to “if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear” is “I don’t have anything to hide but I don’t trust your judgment or intentions”
deleted by creator
I have nothing to hide
Ok, pull down your pants and hand me your unlocked phone.
The ‘hand me your unlocked phone’ has worked for me on several occasions.
To me they just say ‘I have stuff to hide from you, not from Google, Facebook, or the government.’
“And the government officials can sell this data to me. Relatively inexpensive too”.
This applies to so many things. Someone’s lifestyle might come under attack, someone’s religion might be persecuted, someone has sensitive information to share, and so on and so forth.
It literally happened in the US with period tracker app data getting subpoenaed in a state with an abortion ban.
“i have nothing to hide”
no, you are wrong, you just do not understand what other people know about you.
And how they might use that information against you, now or in the future.
or yesterday, maybe a week ago, who knows when it will come back to haunt you!
Nor that the information that they use against you be necessarily true given their accepted monopoly in ‘truth’.
ah yes another classic, although this would be a timeless issue regardless of privacy, manufacturing problems is really easy, it turns out.
Saying you don’t care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is like saying you don’t care about freedom of speech because you don’t have anything to say.
It was Edward Snowden who said that “Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.”
I have nothing to hide, but I will hide it anyway.
There is so many good responses to this. Here is one I just came up with:
Legal and not embarrassing are not the same thing.
This is why you don’t rig a fair system… Because your ‘rig’ may one day be used against you.
Problem is that people are essentially brainwashed to cheer in favor of oppressive policy. It should be a crime to make misleading claims or statements, but, such is the world of advertising and marketing.
There are a surprising number of grammatical errors in that blog post. Did anyone proof read it, I wonder?
Jag garanterar att deras engelska är bättre än din svenska.
Ah, right. I forgot that they’re based in Sweden. That’s understandable if it’s simply a lack of familiarity with the language, but, still, I would expect a company like Mullvad to at least have one native-equivalent English speaker to look over their public facing English stuff. None of this is the end of the world, ofc — I’m just mildly surprised.
investigative journalists in authoritarian countries
You mean like the US? Who achieved the feat of persecuting a foreign journalist as if he were an American citizen?
EDIT: I know that Mullvad is also critical of american surveillance, but I find it very funny that when in the West they call a state democratic that does exactly the same (or worse) than a state in the East that they call “authoritarian”. It really reveals how empty of meaning this word is. “Ah, but these Western states have ‘democratic institutions’.” News for you: the states you call “authoritarian” have them too. In both cases, they can be and de facto are dictatorships.
