Privacy = freedom. If you don’t have privacy, or to the extent you don’t have privacy, you are in proportion not free.
It seems to me this is the trade off we are all figuring out how to make. For example, I’ve considered not having a cell phone at all, but then I find it almost impossible to get a job, or operate in the economy. So I use a custom privacy ROM. I have no illusions that this is perfect, but at least a step in the right direction.
I think the most practical answer is to gain knowledge of the situation, and limit our attack surface. I don’t think there’s any silver bullets, unless you want to live like the Amish (which, doesn’t sound like a bad idea, either. If that’s what you want and you can do it, go for it.)
what do you mean by free? if total privacy means i can’t have a phone or talk to most people then does that really make me more free?
i agree that privacy is important, but i think this is fundamentally a legislative problem. there’s only so much that can be done at the individual level without making massive sacrifices and dedicating a serious amount of time to it. i have a vpn, i use content blockers, etc. but i think its too simplistic to say more privacy = more free.
one of the other commenters mentioned the thing about having someone looking in while you’re watching tv. but if the only solution is to go live in the woods, is it really worth it?
if total privacy means i can’t have a phone or talk to most people then does that really make me more free?
Yes, and it’s totally based if you do this. Our gadgets don’t really makes us more free. At least not with how they’re currently used. Everyone is disconnected from nature, sunsets, each other, and more. When’s the last time you saw a concert? Everyone is staring at their phones and not even enjoying the moment they’re in. Many are depressed and drowning in meaninglessness. When we look at old pictures of beaches from the 90s (not even that old) everyone appears physically fit, bright, and happy. Did our gadgets really make us any more free, or happy?
but if the only solution is to go live in the woods, is it really worth it?
it seems like you’re blaming all of societies problems on technology. surely there must be more to it than that, right? the lack of fitness for example may be due to increasing grocery costs, the rise of fast food, the cost of living crises, and/or many other economical/sociological factors.
i just really don’t understand your argument here. you’re conflating the concept of “privacy” (the original topic of the conversation) with “all of our gadgets” and the effects of those gadgets. i don’t see anything in your comment that’s related to privacy.
and do you honestly think you’ll find more meaning by living in the woods? if so, why haven’t you done it?
it seems like you’re blaming all of societies problems on technology.
We are talking about technology, and privacy. And I’m answering your questions. I’m no one special, and I don’t have all the answers. Just because you and I are talking about this specific topic doesn’t mean that’s all I care about. Respectfully, what a silly thing to say.
and do you honestly think you’ll find more meaning by living in the woods? if so, why haven’t you done it?
Again, I’m no one special. But I that’s exactly what I’m doing. Because I wouldn’t offer any advice that I myself wouldn’t be willing to follow. We sold our property in the city and purchased acreage on the countryside, are raising animals, and planting a garden this year. It’s great. Humanity needs more experiences like this that are in harmony with nature and natural living, and less in the dull, gray brutalist, dehumanizing cityscapes we’ve created.
you’re conflating the concept of “privacy” (the original topic of the conversation) with “all of our gadgets” and the effects of those gadgets.
Right. Because there’s nothing inherently wrong with gadgets. But our modern gadgets are purpose-built to be addictive, monopolize our attention and time, and invade our privacy. I believe these are all interrelated.
Privacy = freedom. If you don’t have privacy, or to the extent you don’t have privacy, you are in proportion not free.
It seems to me this is the trade off we are all figuring out how to make. For example, I’ve considered not having a cell phone at all, but then I find it almost impossible to get a job, or operate in the economy. So I use a custom privacy ROM. I have no illusions that this is perfect, but at least a step in the right direction.
I think the most practical answer is to gain knowledge of the situation, and limit our attack surface. I don’t think there’s any silver bullets, unless you want to live like the Amish (which, doesn’t sound like a bad idea, either. If that’s what you want and you can do it, go for it.)
what do you mean by free? if total privacy means i can’t have a phone or talk to most people then does that really make me more free?
i agree that privacy is important, but i think this is fundamentally a legislative problem. there’s only so much that can be done at the individual level without making massive sacrifices and dedicating a serious amount of time to it. i have a vpn, i use content blockers, etc. but i think its too simplistic to say more privacy = more free.
one of the other commenters mentioned the thing about having someone looking in while you’re watching tv. but if the only solution is to go live in the woods, is it really worth it?
Yes, and it’s totally based if you do this. Our gadgets don’t really makes us more free. At least not with how they’re currently used. Everyone is disconnected from nature, sunsets, each other, and more. When’s the last time you saw a concert? Everyone is staring at their phones and not even enjoying the moment they’re in. Many are depressed and drowning in meaninglessness. When we look at old pictures of beaches from the 90s (not even that old) everyone appears physically fit, bright, and happy. Did our gadgets really make us any more free, or happy?
Yes.
it seems like you’re blaming all of societies problems on technology. surely there must be more to it than that, right? the lack of fitness for example may be due to increasing grocery costs, the rise of fast food, the cost of living crises, and/or many other economical/sociological factors.
i just really don’t understand your argument here. you’re conflating the concept of “privacy” (the original topic of the conversation) with “all of our gadgets” and the effects of those gadgets. i don’t see anything in your comment that’s related to privacy.
and do you honestly think you’ll find more meaning by living in the woods? if so, why haven’t you done it?
We are talking about technology, and privacy. And I’m answering your questions. I’m no one special, and I don’t have all the answers. Just because you and I are talking about this specific topic doesn’t mean that’s all I care about. Respectfully, what a silly thing to say.
Again, I’m no one special. But I that’s exactly what I’m doing. Because I wouldn’t offer any advice that I myself wouldn’t be willing to follow. We sold our property in the city and purchased acreage on the countryside, are raising animals, and planting a garden this year. It’s great. Humanity needs more experiences like this that are in harmony with nature and natural living, and less in the dull, gray brutalist, dehumanizing cityscapes we’ve created.
Right. Because there’s nothing inherently wrong with gadgets. But our modern gadgets are purpose-built to be addictive, monopolize our attention and time, and invade our privacy. I believe these are all interrelated.