• milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      But what liberty is essential? Proveably secret postcards to people on the other side of the world?

      That’s also quite a harsh quote to bring in the context of the many hidden erosions of privacy - would you say the tick-tockers don’t deserve privacy or safety because they chose that social ability over a privacy they little understand?

        • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Essential in the sense of privacy being central to our nature

          Yeah, I’m on board with that. Really what I was thinking about was imagining a world where internet presence is not a place where there’s privacy - like if you meet a friend in public, and talk on a park bench, you can’t assume no one will see you. You know that, and accept that, and adapt accordingly.

          I want a world where internet communications are private and their metadata are also private, and my internet use is private… But I’m contemplating the what ifs of a different world, and how best to live in it, and how to help my children and children’s children live in it. I do think fighting for better laws and protections is part of that and I’m incredibly grateful for people like the eff; but I think it’s also worth thinking about how we can find ways to live in a new environment, understanding that society’s rules around us don’t always work in the best ways.

          (On that note: you’re quoting the US Constitution a matter of EU ruling…)

          I’m not sure why you would think that I believe tick-tockers should not have privacy protection.

          Just your quote, that says such people who give up some liberty don’t deserve any. I suppose you didn’t mean it that way but it seemed harsh.