Our latest blog post is aimed at people who ‘get it’ about online privacy, but who struggle to convince friends and family to take it seriously. We hope it helps!

  • kindred@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    That doesn’t address the other two bullet points.

    It’s like tracking an animal moving in tall grass. You don’t need to be able to see the animal directly to tell where it is.

    If I can’t disappear completely, there’s enough data points around me that a useful silhouette can be reconstructed from all the surrounding data.

    What’s the point?

    • Paddy66@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      That is an entirely valid point - and exactly why I wrote that blog post. To help people to explain to those around them that they also need to do something about their privacy. Otherwise they’re giving you away by association.

      Come to think of it, I probably should have mentioned that in the post 🤦🏼‍♂️

    • jherazob@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      The point is that by fighting back they cannot get any more accurate than that, which helps, even if it’s incomplete and imperfect.

      There’s also the spite angle, because fuck them, i am not gonna give them shit if i can help it!

    • SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      The article addresses this. Data must be fresh to be valuable. Yes old data can be useful, but can it be sold? That’s the main vulnerability to surveillance capitalism that hiding exploits.