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.

  • HMN@discuss.tchncs.de
    2·
    1 year ago

    Totally agree that it helps in dangerous regions (depending of course on the source of the dangers). I shouldn’t be deciding on what level of privacy you should be entitled to. Democracy, or any decision making, whatever you want to call them that involves making decisions that affect many people will be a constant battle. Ideally we should be giving people as many protections as feasible, while at the same time allowing them to have autonomy to choose what’s appropriate for them. And you’re right, thinking about the future is something we (as the human race) don’t tend to do enough of, leading to many short-sighted decision-making because votes. Nice chat, see ya round.