Have you guys also noticed this? I’m not talking about “Oh my family isn’t privacy conscious” I honestly get that for ur average moms and pops, they don’t know any better.
The problem is with how these big tech companies effectively poisoned the everyday Joe to think that handing over ur data like a good boy is the norm and breaking out is “weird” and “too much”, this blame also goes on Hollywood.
Yesterday my friend called me “Mr robot” for just taking my privacy seriously I thought it was funny.
Some people also fired their single neuron and told me “People only do this when they have something to hide”
These remarks that I face from time to time really highlights the mentality of the general society where if you break out of the norm, even if it doesn’t harm them, they would find a way to make off handed remarks about it almost like they’re dissatisfied that you’re fighting.
OC by @OppressedBread@lemmy.ml
On a related note, I really don’t appreciate that some of my relatives have used 23 and Me.
If it makes you feel any better, they might not be your relatives
A lot of us are practically identical.
when ever some one says “something to hide” excuse, I always ask “so, do you publicly post your banking details, sex life, history of bowel movements and other personal details online? everyone has something to hide, it’s why privacy is a concern when we feel it’s been violated. the problem is you don’t seem to realise this type of data exists about you, little bits of data collected ‘anonymously’, that when it gets combined with personally identifiable information, makes it be correlated to you… what’s worse is, once that privacy is gone it’s incredibly difficult to get back and bad actors can and will use it eventually… that’s why companies want it, as when that ‘eventually’ comes, they profit from it…”
“I have nothing to hide”… “ok, pull down your pants and hand me your unlocked phone.”
It’s so weird how the culture shifted, in the 90’s everyone was telling you not to give out PII on the internet because it’s full of shady weirdos and now people are just doxxing themselves for those same shady weirdos.
Often in dystopian books/stories, most of society is just living their average life, unaware of how bad things really are. It’s usually the main character that is different, and begins to realize what’s really happening; they then act as a catalyst to convince people to see what’s going on (but usually only when it gets bad enough). And even then, some people will still choose to be blind. That’s essentially what’s happening in reality now, and why people don’t really care about privacy (along with many other rights that are being eroded)
There are still people who think Idiocracy is a movie… but it was just a documentary.
About “the mentality of the general society” (‘the’ society?, of what?):
OppressedBread@lemmy.ml probably meant the propaganda of a feudalist monopolist network of a very few real addresses near your residence.
About “break out of the norm” (‘the’ norm?, of what?):
OppressedBread@lemmy.ml probably meant: break out of their discursive shackles and traps. In any case where some ‘person’ has the indecency of regurgitation of the sewer content trope “they have something to hide”, an appropriate response should probably look like: “oh, if you don’t have ANYthing to hide, then I would like to review the contents of your bank accounts, credit cards, all of your passwords, all of your work files, etc.”, pursuing after a confused reply with: "so YOU too DO HAVE THINGS TO HIDE, and a short list of serial multiple HOMICIDERS HAVE BILLIONS more THINGS TO HIDE, INCLUDING BODIES, in addresses in cities with names that rhyme with San Francisco, Houston, and Florida, for example, not to mention other rotten illegitimate jurisdictions of the likes of London, Paris, Panama, Moscow, Luxembourg, Beijing, etc.
A sensible norm would have at least incarcerationed those repeat armed robbery and homicide law offenders a long time ago for a long time, with harsh conditions of labor until reintegration at the cheapest level of wage labour. A sensible norm would also have reviewed methods of application of collectively democratically deliberationed norms developed in France circa 1789, for example, where 3% of the population (mostly capital owners and members of clergy) owned more than 90% of national capital, and near 97% of the population had no significant ability to read basic texts.
A SENSIBLE NORM would express DISSATISFACTION ABOUT NOT FIGHTING FEUDALIST MONOPOLISM BACK TO GROUND AND UNDER, decomposing that matter until re-usable in the form of compost for feeding plants for food.
