• xyzzy@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    I think it’s explained by the fact that governments assert a monopoly on violence, including imprisonment. The apparent risk is higher. You also can’t opt out, whereas you (theoretically, if not in practice) can with private services.

    And more importantly, it’s highly visible, versus buried in a disclosure or hidden on a server. If the information those companies gather were in front of people’s faces, they’d be more up in arms about it.

    • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Also the UK gov has has the cyber security track record of an open door with a neon sign saying ‘free sensitive material this way’ This is basically a giant government backed scheme for mass identity theft.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        As is the online safety act. But at least that can be circumvented pretty easily

      • GiveOver@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        15 hours ago

        It’s ok they’ll store every person as a column in an Excel 2003 spreadsheet so they’ll only have data for the first few thousand people