7 ms·

Life is considered the highest value in the west. So let me ask you this. Is the life of a person less worth than your privacy?

VBprogrammer 26d ago
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin
Ardon 26d ago
People don't think the invasion of their privacy will 1. save lives, and 2. not take lives. Faith in governments is not only low, people are pretty sure any power governments have will be abused. The equation is a little bigger than that, basically.
foltik 26d ago
False dichotomy.
sfdlkj3jk342a 26d ago
It's obviously a balance. But if you're asking if say 1,000 lost lives per year is worth it to save the privacy of 350 million people, I would say yes. Just look at the 10's of thousands of people who die every year so that we have the convenience of driving cars. Not to mention the millions whose health are affected by the air pollution.
- dawnerd 26d ago
  That’s even assuming flock saves lives, which it doesn’t. Really the question should be, is giving up privacy worth it if it helps law enforcement solve a crime faster? Still don’t think so.
deleted 26d ago
[deleted]
estearum 26d ago
pov: a vatnik tries to understand western values
mindslight 26d ago
Your phrasing is weird. In this case, the two are not in conflict but rather symbiotic - this grand jury chose to preserve the life of the person who was being accused of protecting our privacy. There is also a good chance that privacy (evidentiary rules) helped preserve this person's life. But also you're going to have to elaborate what you mean by life being considered the highest value. Have you seen how we treat one another? We're always looking for rationales as to why someone else's life should be considered unimportant.
antonvs 26d ago
This is such a bullshit "think of the children" kind of question. You should be ashamed of yourself. If you state it in the form of an actual argument that sets up a meaningful comparison, you'll find that it falls apart completely. Which makes me wonder, why would you ask such a question? None of the answers I can think of are flattering to you.
cucumber3732842 26d ago
"how many kids have to die before you..." All of them.

VBprogrammer 26d ago

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin

Ardon 26d ago

People don't think the invasion of their privacy will 1. save lives, and 2. not take lives. Faith in governments is not only low, people are pretty sure any power governments have will be abused. The equation is a little bigger than that, basically.

foltik 26d ago

False dichotomy.

sfdlkj3jk342a 26d ago

It's obviously a balance. But if you're asking if say 1,000 lost lives per year is worth it to save the privacy of 350 million people, I would say yes. Just look at the 10's of thousands of people who die every year so that we have the convenience of driving cars. Not to mention the millions whose health are affected by the air pollution.

dawnerd 26d ago
That’s even assuming flock saves lives, which it doesn’t. Really the question should be, is giving up privacy worth it if it helps law enforcement solve a crime faster? Still don’t think so.

deleted 26d ago

[deleted]

estearum 26d ago

pov: a vatnik tries to understand western values

mindslight 26d ago

Your phrasing is weird. In this case, the two are not in conflict but rather symbiotic - this grand jury chose to preserve the life of the person who was being accused of protecting our privacy. There is also a good chance that privacy (evidentiary rules) helped preserve this person's life. But also you're going to have to elaborate what you mean by life being considered the highest value. Have you seen how we treat one another? We're always looking for rationales as to why someone else's life should be considered unimportant.

antonvs 26d ago

This is such a bullshit "think of the children" kind of question. You should be ashamed of yourself. If you state it in the form of an actual argument that sets up a meaningful comparison, you'll find that it falls apart completely. Which makes me wonder, why would you ask such a question? None of the answers I can think of are flattering to you.

cucumber3732842 26d ago

"how many kids have to die before you..." All of them.