5 ms·

> But it wasn't the case that thousands maybe millions of people could be compromised (or spied on by governments) in one go. And? Besides you being hysterical

> But it wasn't the case that thousands maybe millions of people could be compromised (or spied on by governments) in one go. And? Besides you being hysterical. What happens? > The trend towards online everything, is equivalent to putting all your eggs in one (huge) basket. And? What happens if the internet disappears today? Life goes on. > but if it is the case that there are no alternative viable options but to accept a compromised state of privacy For most of humanity, people lived without any right to privacy. You want old-fashioned right? > I absolutely get why governments and corporations are fine with eroding personal privacy for their benefit. Governments and corporations are run by people too. > that there is eventually some consideration given to privacy and its loss. There is more consideration for privacy today, especially in the online world, than in the real old-fashoined world. How about you set the example and go offline for a bit? Get some air.

verisimi 3y ago
> > But it wasn't the case that thousands maybe millions of people could be compromised (or spied on by governments) in one go. > And? Besides you being hysterical. What happens? from the article: > Among the apparent targets of tools provided by the impacted company, I-Soon: ethnicities and dissidents in parts of China that have seen significant anti-government protests, such as Hong Kong or the heavily Muslim region of Xinjiang in China’s far west. > The documents show apparent I-Soon hacking of networks across Central and Southeast Asia, as well as Hong Kong and the self-ruled island of Taiwan, which Beijing claims as its territory. I think millions could be impacted. Perhaps nothing comes of it. Not hysterical though. > There is more consideration for privacy today, especially in the online world, than in the real old-fashoined world. Yes.. but its consideration about how to erode it, not how to respect it! The level of intrusion is off the scale, in comparison to the past - and, in general, we have only a blinkered idea of the fine grained details that are available to corporations and government agencies. > How about you set the example and go offline for a bit? Get some air. Childish, ok. No, you.

verisimi 3y ago

> > But it wasn't the case that thousands maybe millions of people could be compromised (or spied on by governments) in one go. > And? Besides you being hysterical. What happens? from the article: > Among the apparent targets of tools provided by the impacted company, I-Soon: ethnicities and dissidents in parts of China that have seen significant anti-government protests, such as Hong Kong or the heavily Muslim region of Xinjiang in China’s far west. > The documents show apparent I-Soon hacking of networks across Central and Southeast Asia, as well as Hong Kong and the self-ruled island of Taiwan, which Beijing claims as its territory. I think millions could be impacted. Perhaps nothing comes of it. Not hysterical though. > There is more consideration for privacy today, especially in the online world, than in the real old-fashoined world. Yes.. but its consideration about how to erode it, not how to respect it! The level of intrusion is off the scale, in comparison to the past - and, in general, we have only a blinkered idea of the fine grained details that are available to corporations and government agencies. > How about you set the example and go offline for a bit? Get some air. Childish, ok. No, you.