Hacker News Reader

Comment by cremp | Hacker News Reader

I do the same thing.

My SO's response is generally along the lines of 'I'm fine with it, because it isn't in the hands of anyone I know. If you go out and buy that information, that's creepy and scary because you know me.'

I've started coming to terms with the fact that I won't be able to convince her of anything with privacy; because she isn't a technical person, and just like users; they won't care how/why/what cost so long as they can do what they want.

View on HN

You could always offer to take off all the window curtains/shutters in the house, take down all fences around the property, and leave all windows/doors unlocked. Your SO should be fine with that since it's likely that most of the people that pass by are not people they know.

This does nothing to help convince people that data privacy is important. Physical privacy and data privacy are two very distinct ideas that have very different implications in people's lives. Please don't conflate the two as if they're equally important and you can't value one without having to value the other.

sadly, you really need to have your data privacy abused to understand the potential. Accounts emptied. Stalked. Secrets posted on line. But then only the victim gets it and everyone else goes happily on their way.

Care to elaborate on how they are ultimately different? Sure there's the superficial differences (they could see you poop vs. you emailing someone), but how is knowing exactly where someone has been, knowing the vast majority of their digital correspondence (content and recipients),knowing their purchasing history, knowing their social preferences, etc (and putting it all together), ultimately, any different than being able to watch someone in their home 24/7?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com