TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why Privacy Matters

262 点作者 Clo_S将近 5 年前

21 条评论

css将近 5 年前
I do not understand what this article is trying to communicate. It starts with a rambling anecdote and ends with a list of some unrelated terms barely tangential to privacy.
评论 #24343452 未加载
评论 #24341962 未加载
评论 #24343102 未加载
评论 #24343075 未加载
teddyh将近 5 年前
I vastly prefer Bruce Schneier’s take (from 2006):<p><i>The Eternal Value of Privacy</i><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wired.com&#x2F;2006&#x2F;05&#x2F;the-eternal-value-of-privacy&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wired.com&#x2F;2006&#x2F;05&#x2F;the-eternal-value-of-privacy&#x2F;</a>
评论 #24342122 未加载
tremon将近 5 年前
... published on a site that accesses 7 different top-level domains. And that&#x27;s even before allowing any javascript to run.<p>Oh the ironing.
评论 #24341804 未加载
评论 #24342185 未加载
评论 #24341832 未加载
评论 #24341783 未加载
oshea64bit将近 5 年前
Maybe I&#x27;m missing something, but it seems like the foreword has little to do with the rest of the article. I was hooked after reading the beginning anecdote, but the transition to a general overview of security concepts felt a bit abrupt. I agree with the general sentiment of the article though. I&#x27;m glad that there&#x27;s been an increasing amount of attention placed on privacy lately.
wnd_pn将近 5 年前
I totally agree with you. Unfortunately as of today, people are not putting enough attention on who they give their sensitive information to. Data breaches are increasing in number, billion of accounts are hacked every day (I just discovered one of my side-accounts got hacked through <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;haveibeenpwned.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;haveibeenpwned.com&#x2F;</a>), nevertheless the majority of us is still not protecting its data properly (perhaps the problem relies on ignoring the problem itself?). And the situation is even more dramatic in the B2B market: I work in the cybersecurity industry and every day I see companies being hit by these attacks. That is why, I always advice the people I know to start using privacy-oriented tools that could actually prevent or help preventing something like this to happen. Like using a password manager (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;1password.com)to" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;1password.com)to</a> create strong password and store them, or a secure email system (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;protonmail.com" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;protonmail.com</a>), or &quot;simply&quot; by keeping your systems and softwares up-to-date or by backing up your data.<p>We, at Cubbit, are contributing to the mission of getting back our privacy by building a distributed and encrypted cloud storage service that puts users in control of their data (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;business.cubbit.io" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;business.cubbit.io</a>).
评论 #24347081 未加载
评论 #24342265 未加载
评论 #24345747 未加载
matz1将近 5 年前
So privacy matters because the information can be used against you. That is reasonable but hiding information is not the only the way to fix the issue.<p>Knife can be used to harm people, sure you can fix it by banning&#x2F;destroying knife but thats not the only way to fix the issue.<p>I&#x27;m more interested to solution where we assume the information will be public and fix the issue that arise due to that.
评论 #24342334 未加载
mindfulhack将近 5 年前
I like this article because it reminds us of the relationship between privacy and freedom. Important freedom. Freedoms that go far beyond our computer code. In fact, survival.
评论 #24350292 未加载
bad_user将近 5 年前
&gt; &quot;<i>On the other hand, open-source software has a less strict definition, and a different philosophy. You can also see the source code, amongst other things.</i>&quot;<p>No it doesn&#x27;t. The Open Source definition is very much equivalent with that of Free Software, while having the virtue of being more clear, and I wish FS advocates would take the time to actually read it before talking nonsense.<p>The political vs non-political aspects have nothing to do with their definitions, but with the organizations behind them.<p>Also not sure what this had to do with the subject of the article.
haylem将近 5 年前
<i>That grandfather and two of his brothers left [...] with no plan [...]. They were helped by strangers and survived. Their mother however, along with two other siblings, had a plan. They had a deal with a smuggler [...] and all 3 of them died in deportation. Lesson: each person who has information on you represents an additional chance for it to be leaked.</i><p>This puzzles me... The paragraph clearly states that the grandfather had contacts with strangers (and we can then assume there was some exchange of information of some kind), and the ending was positive, whereas another exchange with a single point of contact had a negative outcome. But goes on to present as a lesson that the chance of a negative outcome increases with the number of contacts.<p>I see the point the author is trying to make, but I think this part fails to prove it satisfyingly. It either doesn&#x27;t prove anything, or it&#x27;s missing key information (shared information with the strangers and the smugglers) to support the point. To me, it proves that luck (and maybe the grand-father&#x27;s ability to be a good judge of character in picking which strangers to rely on) were more likely deciding factors.<p>(Or that having no plan helps. But that&#x27;s for a different perspective.)
chaostheory将近 5 年前
With the existence of shadow profiles, is ideal privacy even possible unless you live in a remote area with a tech averse population? What about the census? The data you provide to the gov is also very sensitive and has a history of being abused (see the role of the US Census Bureau in Japanese Internment Camps). However if you don’t provide it, it affects gov funding for your demographic. What about the computer in your pocket? Most of it isn’t open source
评论 #24342666 未加载
评论 #24342062 未加载
评论 #24343118 未加载
yboris将近 5 年前
Somewhat related: <i>Privacy is Power</i> - Why and How You Should Take Back Control of Your Data by Carissa Véliz<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Privacy-Power-Should-Take-Control-ebook&#x2F;dp&#x2F;B08788L77V&#x2F;ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&amp;keywords=veliz&amp;qid=1598969278&amp;sr=8-1" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Privacy-Power-Should-Take-Control-ebo...</a>
Stierlitz将近 5 年前
We don&#x27;t have any privacy, we gave it away in exchange for the promise of safety:<p>“.. the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn&#x27;t there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, think, and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillence coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? ..”<p>“.. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn&#x27;t be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now High Chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent ..”<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=dKnjxT5HRJQ" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=dKnjxT5HRJQ</a>
XCSme将近 5 年前
So, why does it matter? The article talks about random security things, that have nothing to do with the title.
stereolambda将近 5 年前
I don&#x27;t think that striking high chords, historical and political, is all that useful when talking to people about these things. They tend not to take it seriously or at best just file it mentally with other bad things in the world that they have little agency about. Of course, you may already get the broad societal ramifications if you&#x27;re already in the privacy camp, but perhaps it&#x27;s not a very effective entry point.<p>(It&#x27;s another thing if we&#x27;re talking about politics, not about individual choices. In pure politics big picture arguments, like &quot;what if there&#x27;ll be a dictatorship&quot;, might be more proper).<p>I would try to frame it, for individual people, as a question of quality and technical savvyness. If a supposedly hi-tech company behaves like a scammy phone marketing operation selling you garbage bundled with hidden subscriptions, we should treat is as such. They <i>should</i> be able to treat you seriously, i.e. give you good quality, reliable products for the money, without scheming behind your back and siphoning all the data they can. Their business model should be sound without this. If they don&#x27;t, it&#x27;s just an inferior product and you&#x27;re being exploited.<p>A related point is that I don&#x27;t like products being sold solely on privacy. The tone should be more, we provide you an excellent thing (inside our capital constraints) and of course, it also respects your data.<p>Currently I see a tendency among people to be more-or-less aware of privacy invasions and their potential, but to think that&#x27;s ultimately a fact of life and they&#x27;d have to be some crazy nerds to do something about it. The thinking should be more that they&#x27;re using low quality stuff and hurting themselves. (I&#x27;m not saying that you should now go and antagonize people in your social bubble, just that it may be a communication strategy if there&#x27;s an opportunity.)<p>Besides, trying to defend ourselves from the future state will be probably always perceived as kooky. Better do something about politics directly if you&#x27;re in a moderately free country. It&#x27;s more about rogue actors inside the companies and in the broad underworld. There was a time when people installed the damn antivirus.
ryosuke将近 5 年前
I&#x27;m not sure who this article is meant for.<p>If the idea is to convince non-technical people of the importance of privacy, the article should have just stuck to that. Parts like the free vs. open source discussion seem unnecessary.
wuliwong将近 5 年前
The title of the article is &quot;The Why and How of Privacy and Security.&quot; That should be the title on this HN post as well.
erikerikson将近 5 年前
These discussions never seem to recognize the role of privacy for empowering oppressors. Shining light into the darkness is the metaphor used by journalists. What if there was no or drastically less darkness?<p>How would the Uyghur example be different if the Chinese governments discussions, plans, and actions were public knowledge? More implementable, if every citizen concerned that they were at risk ran a self monitoring system that could be purchased or issued by NGOs or reporters which created a public document of their treatment.<p>What if the German population had been shown the images of torture and abuse so that they could know what the politics were doing? What if married soldier&#x27;s philandering and rape were shared with their partners?<p>What if today in the U.S. the smaller scale oppressions of domestic violence were thoroughly documented for courts and automatically detected to provide systemic support? What if &quot;he said, she said&quot; was a problem of the past?<p>What if every government official&#x27;s behavior was publicly documented so that any bad actors could be proactively and clearly identified and their good actions could be commended?<p>What if your argument with your partner(s) or friends were reviewable so that you never had to argue about what you said, you could check it and apologize for what you said (or be apologized to) and get back on track to building understanding instead of entrenching in conflict?<p>There are obvious challenges that would need to be thought through but it might be worth considering.
whhone将近 5 年前
I learnt &quot;why privacy matters&quot; from this Glenn&#x27;s TED: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ted.com&#x2F;talks&#x2F;glenn_greenwald_why_privacy_matters" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ted.com&#x2F;talks&#x2F;glenn_greenwald_why_privacy_matter...</a>
epoch_100将近 5 年前
Related: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;whyprivacymatters.org" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;whyprivacymatters.org</a>
mhh__将近 5 年前
When I discuss privacy with a friend who doesn&#x27;t share the same liberalism as me (Chinese, make of that what you will), I often have to point out that it&#x27;s easy to forget that the spooks will get into bed with political conspiracy - Watergate, COINTELPRO for example. There are very few checks and balances in the US, and arguable none in the UK (You can at least put the US Constitution on your pocket)<p>&quot;I have nothing to hide&quot; should be considered equal to &quot;I have nothing to say, therefore I have nothing to say&quot;
评论 #24343617 未加载
maproot将近 5 年前
Privacy tools and OS really matter: privacytoolslist.com