comfypotato

Segments of the world with different ideological views represented by their governments.

If the behavior was blatantly unethical, which I don’t think it is, it would be illegal everywhere. Just because my opinion is different than the popular opinion doesn’t make it anti-vax. Grow up and open your mind.

The Cambridge Analytica scandal was prosecuted under the current privacy situation. My ire with the level-0 comment was in it stating that the current situation doesn’t work. Also downloading random apps off Facebook is hardly behavior that a privacy conscious person would take. Not to mention that the use of the data, unless I’m missing something, did no more than make people uncomfortable.

Well, that’s how the other side feels, yes.

The closest thing this entire thread has given as evidence of overfishing is that a journalist was killed for meddling in government affairs, which has nothing to do with overfishing.

Your comments about violence in America are generally naive. I assume you’re a young person.

As I stated in another comment, yes, it’s ideological differences on which we differ.

All done through the ISP, a related party, having absolutely nothing to do with stalking. Poor argumentation.

It was on completely ideological grounds that we differed. (Which is also against the HN rules to argue about.)

I was attracted to the industry effectively to verify authentication through device fingerprinting. Others, en masse, are drawn because they don’t like the current privacy situation. Can you imagine someone being attracted to marine biology that didn’t like fish?

It’s perfectly reasonable to say that, yes, I disagree with the majority of the field. In this instance, “I don’t like fish.”

An unrelated third party can’t surveil your browsing without malicious software or hardware intervening.

Well, your discomfort makes it clear you’re not American poor. Verbal confrontations, even disagreements led along insults, are enough to get shot where I’m from. Obviously nothing about that is a good thing.

My point is that the internet is already an extremely private place. I started this in reply to someone proposing privacy evangelism in the wake of ignorant sheeple, and that’s stupid and insulting.

Insults in person start fights. It’s only the privacy of the internet that lets you do it here.

Kashoggi was a journalist investigating government corruption. The context of reasonable internet privacy is completely irrelevant.

What does Tor have to do with stalking? Since when has someone’s internet browsing been affected by a stalker?

If you peruse down the flagged comment nearby you’ll see maxbond backhandedly agree that I only care about myself. I’m not one to punch people in the face, but that’s grounds to be punched in the face in any bar.

That being said, it’s perfectly reasonable not to see eye to eye regarding privacy, which is effectively what I said that started this entire thread. I personally don’t think that online privacy is the front on which discussions about abortion legislation should take place. Even Google, manufacturing Chromium, takes privacy into account to a reasonable extent [0], and I personally feel that it is enough.

[0] For example, if your machine has more than 16Gb of RAM, Chromium only reports 16 because there’s no browser application that needs to know you have more than 16, and it would instantly make your device fingerprint unique.

I started getting a PhD in device fingerprinting and quit when it became apparent that my views were relatively far removed from most people in the field.

I’m trying to say that the current privacy situation is good enough. The status quo can’t be abused such that money can be made.

Would be nice if I could respond to all of you in one place, because y’all are more or less saying the same thing.

In don’t appreciate the personal attacks on my character. It’s really a testament to my point, though. The internet is private enough that you feel comfortable commenting fighting words from behind a keyboard. Hypocrites the lot of you.

It’s perfectly reasonable to say that I have no moral commitment to improving the online privacy situation in light of your given example. State actors in Saudi Arabia are so far removed from a typical citizen that they’re completely irrelevant to the discussion.

This is because you lost the Revolution.