What’s the point of lumping private phone calls in with things you post publicly to the internet?
Like even someone who posts to IG and TikTok still probably wants to have a private conversation. I think the issue in tech circles is that people outside of them don’t necessarily seek “mathematically private” conversations. My conversations on FB, Hangouts, phone calls, email, etc. aren’t literally mathematically probably private but neither is any IRL conversation.
And ultimately the point is that I don’t particularly care that FB in theory can see my conversations because my threat model doesn’t include Google and Facebook — it includes my friends, family, peers.
It’s not a lack of caring. It’s a misunderstanding about what people’s threat models actually are.
The people at Facebook are peers you don’t know. Not figuring them into the model, but figuring everyone you do, is poor threat modeling.
People’s threat model is to protect their physical/literal life. Without it, as far as we know, emergent emotional ideas of threats is nothing to be bothered with.
Death isn’t to be feared. I’ve been medically dead. It’s just blank. It’s pressure humans bring at scale to have their work externalized into easy to use tools that freak me out. How easily they seem to be willing to dismiss threats of human behavior
So long as society stays stable they’re the least of my concern while billions are destroying the environment. But they are part of a real threat at scale.
The pandemic response in action right here: this thing that will grow into a problem isn’t a problem. My stable neighbors, when measured by their activity of routinely going to a job, are the real threat.
Yeah that’s true but not at the scale you’re imagining it.
Pretending we should, at scale, explicitly model protectionism for all those private customization is a fools errand.
Let’s customize social protection for shared biological traits, and let people wank their specialness in private. Oh, but we have to live like the romantic stories old people carry forward. Where external social pressures rule us.
What’s the point of carving up data into pools generated by any one person except when scientifically interesting? Oh right to build my custom little emotional castle.
It’s people like us, instigating others to give their special details to our DBs over empty false promises of something special occurring at scale if they do.
How anyone smart doesn’t see the obvious parallel to religion there, I don’t know.
You’re not owed a cool tech job while someone else grows your potatoes. You should include the pressure you put on people that don’t owe you personally in your threat model
> my threat model doesn’t include Google and Facebook
Who does it include? Does it include the government if Facebook develops a sentiment model trained on public and private data that governments can use only public input to estimate [dissent|radicalism|political affiliation|etc]?
Do not underestimate how companies can abuse your privacy without direct disclosure.
I think he means that he doesn't care if Google and Facebook or even the government finds out his aunt sue's Apple pie recipe that she posted on his wall.
If he was throwing an overthrow the government party, then he would put in some thought as to which tool to use and probable stick to verifiable, open source utilities.
Like even someone who posts to IG and TikTok still probably wants to have a private conversation. I think the issue in tech circles is that people outside of them don’t necessarily seek “mathematically private” conversations. My conversations on FB, Hangouts, phone calls, email, etc. aren’t literally mathematically probably private but neither is any IRL conversation.
And ultimately the point is that I don’t particularly care that FB in theory can see my conversations because my threat model doesn’t include Google and Facebook — it includes my friends, family, peers.
It’s not a lack of caring. It’s a misunderstanding about what people’s threat models actually are.