- 13,866
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Not dismissive. I just found it excessive and recommended that if one does have secrets, to keep them away from the internet.
It's 2019. "Just stay off the internet" is no longer valid advice. I'm not going back to the days when we had to walk into a physical bank to do all our banking, and neither are you.
What is the hypocritical part?
That you understand that information security is desirable and necessary, yet it's somehow worthy of derision if someone chooses to be more secure than you choose to be.
A non-hypocritical position would be that security isn't necessary. That'd be wrong, but not hypocritical. You know that security is valuable, yet you attempt to draw an arbitrary line as to what security is reasonable and what would only be used by criminals. Which is amusing, because the line is constantly shifting with technology and the passage of time. What is secure today would have been considered ridiculous overkill ten years ago, and is also very unlikely to be secure at all in ten years from now.
I already explained that the comparison is completely flawed.
No, you attempted to strawman me as saying that being burgled and having targeted ads pointed at you were the same. Technically you're right, those two specific things are not really the same unless someone is stealing a flower or two from your garden. But it in no way addresses the actual point that physical and informational theft are both theft and depending on what is stolen can have a wide range of consequences. Having my watch stolen, having my phone number put on a spam list, having my car stolen and having my identifying financial information stolen covers a wide range of awfulness across both physical and information theft.
Wanna have another go at explaining how information theft is always trivial compared to physical theft? Or is that not what you were trying to establish?
I only adressed it, because changing to Linux and staying away from alexa and google home, for the sake of privacy does suggest someone takes abnormal measures to protect their privacy.
How is that even an abnormal measure? Do not have always-on microphones in your house if you don't want to be listened in upon seems completely reasonable, and it's not like giving up these devices is a major hardship or anything. Having a Linux live USB or a second boot partition on your computer is pretty trivial for anyone technically competent enough to use Microsoft Office. I have a Linux boot on a spare laptop for when I want to use e-banking or other stuff where I'm actually concerned about the security of my information.
We're not talking about going full Edward Snowden here. It's about as simple and unintrusive as "don't walk down dark alleys in bad neighbourhoods". Yeah, technically there may be a little inconvenience but not really considering the increase in safety that you afford yourself.
I therefore assumed he had something to hide. Dennisch adressed this later that it personally wasnt about hiding anything, but seeing privacy as a property he wants to protect. That cleared it up for me.
Why did I ask that? Because there are many people that want to hide their activity for various sometimes criminal reasons. Do you think my suggestion or question was out of line?
A question would not have been. The assumption of criminal behaviour that needed to be concealed was out of line, yes. Remember, you started with this:
Unless a person has nothing to hide.
@BobK was the first to point out that privacy might have some value, three posts under yours. Several more people said similar things, but you leaned hard into the idea that only people with something to hide would want to protect their privacy. Then, finally, on page three, we start to find that actually you do take some care with your own personal information, and really, it's more a question of scale between you and others like @Dennisch or myself.
And honestly, yeah, some of us work in industries where information security is taken seriously both and work and in your personal life. So yes, we have things that we are expected and professionally obligated to hide.
You said earlier that you are professionally obligated to take care of private data for your business, are you not? I'd think that you might understand that people might have some non-criminal information that they would have good reason to make more than a token effort to protect, because you sure seem to be one of them. Are you gonna sit next to an Alexa while you have detailed discussions about your customers private data? I hardly think so, because that would be staggeringly negligent.