This isn’t meant to start a war in the comments.

I have been thinking… Platforms that advertise encryption and unmatched privacy have almost always been used by bad actors that ruin it for everyone else. This leads to some sort of middle ground being set up that ends up being further from privacy than we’d like it to be.

I see the benefits of both situations, and am left wondering if we can even survive as a society if we were to have absolute privacy.

Any thoughts are appreciated.

Edit:

I’m asking how we can navigate this conundrum in order to reach a common ground where we do NOT have to give up our precious privacy in exchange for security.

Nothing else. I’m sorry if my post didn’t reflect that.

  • Candelestine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s important mainly to give people a way to interact with the digital space from highly controlled regions, like occupied Ukraine or Hong Kong or something. Joe Bob who is afraid of google tracking him deserves his privacy too, but it’s not as important.

      • Candelestine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Different degrees of threat. Google will chase you to try to sell you stuff. If CCP police are chasing you, it’s probably for a more hurtful reason.

        • HMN@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Do you think perhaps that valuing privacy differently from one individual to the next would have a net negative effect? If we’re now also talking about threat assessments, that’s another topic altogether, with privacy only being a part.

        • NaN@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Google also assists those law enforcement agencies with plenty of useful info.