Privacy

49339 readers

772 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

Is there a term (akin to "privacy") which encompasses collection of personal data, regardless of the "expectation of privacy" demoralization applying? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by PierceTheBubble@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

And if not, its existence is highly overdue.

Where tracking of privacy-sensitive activities of individuals in public, traditionally required exhaustible resources (as in agents physically shadowing targets); cameras and other sensors can (and will) track said activities of any individual in public, regardless of being targeted (not that targeting individuals is possible to begin with: only after collection, one can pinky swear not to look at, or discard information regarding non-targets).

The main difference being, one traditionally having effective "expectation of privacy" in public (unless specifically targeted by authorities: having sufficient reason to allocate resources to the individual), but in the context of modern technology we lost the benefit of the doubt. And unless never setting a foot outside again, any arguably more incriminating personal data (naked in the shower versus protesting an oppressive government) should be "expected" to be collected.

So because "privacy" is historically tainted with said demoralization, any efforts to defend "privacy" in "public" (where one can truly no longer have expectation thereof) are doomed to fail. Therefore I wish to have a term, without ambiguity introduced by any subjective matter (that is "expectancy": the individual's versus a typically biassed judge's); one that makes no distinction between personal data being collected in private, or in public.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] whatiswrongwithyou@lemmy.ml 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Your best bet is to start reading up on privacy and fourth amendment cases. Privacy is a right legally enshrined with very precise boundaries. Anonymity is not.

That distinction is extremely important because the things you’re describing are not violations of your privacy. Except when you describe coercion which is a different crime.

I want to be as clear as possible: I am not trying to have the philosophical conversation you are trying to have. I am trying to bring your concerns into the real world (which they’re about, tbf) and into the real realm of understanding of that world that the law corresponds to. Because ultimately that’s the lines you need to color inside and out whose geometry you need to be aware of.

Aside from actually answering the question: What are you trying to accomplish and where? Which no one will do, that’s the most help I can offer.

[–] PierceTheBubble@lemmy.ml 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

The discussion was about "effective privacy" in public: your every move not meticulously being monitored in it, and therefore effectively remaining unknown; despite technically falling under public "knowledge". I understand how "privacy" is typically interpreted in context of legal cases and law, and how it doesn't, or inadequately accounts for advances in technology: leading to formerly hidden public activities, possibly becoming uncovered as a result. If anything, I think we've clearly demonstrated the usefulness of a catch-all term, that generally doesn't discern between context, in which personal data is being collected; which was ultimately the intent of this post.

[–] whatiswrongwithyou@lemmy.ml 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Actions in public are not “technically” public knowledge, they are public knowledge.

If you dont want to be observed, figure out how to avoid observation when in public.

Public activities are not hidden, they were simply not observed.

[–] PierceTheBubble@lemmy.ml 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

We can keep falling over these minor differences, but as far as I'm concerned it's a distinction without a difference, practically speaking. You seem to disagree, which is completely fine too. Have a good one! :)

[–] whatiswrongwithyou@lemmy.ml 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

The distinction has an explicitly defined difference with hundreds of years of history behind it in the us alone and severe consequences for misunderstanding it.

I don’t mind to disengage but these are not abstract concepts we’re discussing and treating them as such does more harm than good to anyone who reads what you say.

[–] PierceTheBubble@lemmy.ml 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I think it's clear I can't convince you, you can't convince me, and that the only thing left is to respectfully disagree.

[–] whatiswrongwithyou@lemmy.ml 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I am not trying to convince you of something. I am trying to help you to understand why using the word privacy as a stand in for what you mean (which is anonymity, btw) is a bad idea.

[–] PierceTheBubble@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago

Anonymity might actually be a reasonable fit here: if data couldn't, in any way, shape or form and without measurable confidence, be attributed to a person (or context related to them: a car, or a specific shirt worn that day, being examples); then details about one's private life couldn't be inferred, based on publicly available information.

If for example: a surveillance system logged a person frequently moving from one house to another, while confident in the identity of the person departing from home, and a track record of the persons present in the house of destination on arrival, it can be inferred the person in question, has some relationship with the other persons.

So because this person has no choice, other than to be subjected to public surveillance, it is physically impossible to keep such details to oneself (private if you will). Similarly, if every other started wearing spywearables ("smart" glasses, pendant, pin, etc.) or (unknowingly) bugging their houses (a home surveillance system, robot vacuum, or any other "smart" appliance with listening devices); how are you going to keep anything private, and when is in no context "expectation of privacy" "reasonable"?