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.

  • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    They’re telling you that these “private” spaces are allowing for child exploitation because it triggers exactly the thoughts you’re having now.

    “Oh I don’t want that, I guess I’ll give up my privacy”

    It’s an excuse. Apple had client side image scanning, cutting through ALL privacy. The program basically found 0 child porn images, but instantly that it existed, governments wanted to use it to censor images they didn’t like.

    It’s a lie, it always has been. “Won’t people please think of the children” has been used to create horrendous lies of policy since the beginning of time.

    You know what existed before these services? The same evil that existed after them.

    We can ban knives because a few people stab others with them, but ultimately if your goal is to stab someone, you’ll use what you have available. Perhaps a fork? And society will no longer have knives, but is that actually a reasonable answer? I mean there are no knives allowed in prisons, and they still make decent shanks .

    Killing privacy to solve child exploitation is just a nice lie they sell you to convince you that your privacy doesn’t matter. Facebook has zero privacy and it’s currently the biggest distributor of child porn. It’s a huge problem, and clearly the lack of privacy didn’t solve it like they said it would.

    • ElPussyKangaroo@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      True that.

      Also, it’s kind of weird how we know that these corporations and governments do this, yet somehow they keep getting away with it…

      Like, what the hell?

      • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because they’re distracting you with bullshite problems.

        For example, gay marriage. There’s a simple answer that appease everyone…… the government doesn’t regulate marriage, they regulate “civil unions”

        You just change all the official paperwork to call everyone’s “marriage” a civil union and let the people decide if they want to call it a marriage or not. Who the fuck cares?

        But no, they made it a culture war. “The gays are destroying society and they’re gonna make our kids gay” Vs “They are denying the gays marriage and next they’re going to start assassinating them”

        Left or right, they both crave power and are selling us out for it.

  • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    have almost always been used by bad actors that ruin it for everyone else.

    …So what? You’re suggesting that, because some people misuse a right in an illegal way, that the right should be taken from everyone. It’s the equivalent of saying that because some people use speech to incite violence, the right to free speech should be taken. I completely reject that view.

    • ElPussyKangaroo@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re suggesting that, because some people misuse a right in an illegal way, that the right should be taken from everyone.

      I’m not. 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.

      I’m sorry if my post didn’t reflect this. I’ll update it.

      • seaQueue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not. 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.

        That’s easy. You tell the people who want you to give up your right to privacy to go fuck themselves. The common ground is when they go fuck themselves, problem solved.

          • seaQueue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It’s equally unrealistic to give up all of your privacy in the name of security. Not everything can be a compromise, the opponent will fight with everything they have to take your right to privacy, if you want any privacy at all you need to fight every attempt.

            When you give up your privacy in the name of security you end up with neither.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    What makes you think that the bad actions of bad actors are going to cause our society to no longer survive? Bad actors have always existed, and yet we survive.

    I disagree with the implication that anything you mentioned represents an existential threat.

  • Reygle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Everything is exploited. Shady fraudsters and “hackers” know what’s good and why, and that’s why they tend to use them.

    wondering if we can even survive as a society

    I took a bit of liberty with that quote. Privacy or no privacy, humanity is absolutely fucked.

  • Candelestine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s important mainly to give people a way to interact with the digital space from highly controlled regions, like occupied Ukraine or Hong Kong or something. Joe Bob who is afraid of google tracking him deserves his privacy too, but it’s not as important.

  • zxqwas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I want to be secure from bad actors myself. Currently there is no technology that would safely let government break encryption without letting bad actors use the same backdoor to empty your bank account. Sure they would not be given the key but there is a huge incentive for them to try to find it.

    Also how would you make sure a bad actor don’t make their own app with unbroken encryption and running a system without client side scanning? Again there is huge incentive to do this and the information how is publicly available.

    So in the end bad actors get their private conversation while law abiding citizens don’t.

  • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Absolute privacy must be available as a possibility at least, and then it’s the user’s own decision if he wants to open it (at times, or for certain people, or for certain services, etc.)

    If you as a user don’t have the possibility, then there is no safe space and no safe person anymore, like your sleeping room, or your children, etc.

    Services trying to take the decision away from the user are evil. No exception possible and no excuse.

  • dan1101@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you had 100% privacy no one would know you exist because you could never interact with anyone else.

  • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t believe in excessive monitoring, but I also think it’s weird we think of the lack of observation as a fundamental right. Too much privacy, I think universally, is any time we go out of our way to guarantee/fight for it.