I try to make my relatives understand that this is something important, to put forward rational arguments, but they refuse me, saying that it would only complicate their lives, so it’s useless. I’m seen as the paranoid of the gang. So how would you convince your friends?
Glenn Greenwald has a good anecdote for this:
“If you think privacy isn’t all that important, here’s my email, I want you to email me all of your social media, bank account, online shopping, and email logins, so I can go through and learn all about you, your preferences, buying habits, etc. I won’t share them with anyone… No one has taken me up on that offer.”
Yet when you log into facebook, or amazon, or anything else, its even worse than emailing someone you’ve met your logins, because you’re giving all of that personal info to a faceless corporation whose incentive is to figure out how to wrangle more profit based on your data.
I think that’s the correct way to make them understand. “Can I browse right now your Facebook account? Or can I read your emails? Right now.” “How about you give me your codes. I swear I won’t use it badly.”
This imo:
- don’t expect too much from them at once, many people don’t want to hurt animals but few are vegan
- live the example. Not just in a perfectionist kind of sense, but also find tools that not just work for you but also don’t require too much effort etc. There will always be tradeoffs for security vs. effort etc. The best mobile messenger can’t be better than whispering in someones ear etc.
- you can discuss the arguments as well, but don’t have it be the only thing you do, I believe that many people do care about their privacy, that’s why many people have curtains.
We can achieve a lot by giving people easy incremental steps to improve their privacy (some people just browse and email and can thus totally use linux without knowing much ab out computers, others can try out a new messenger for their family group chat). This doesn’t end up with everyone in a secure way of doing things, but it opens up the possibility to get these people on your side - not by telling them that they should to this this this and this but aren’t and they are dumb. Once people have tried a better messenger or grandma uses linux they understand that all the good stuff of technology would be possible without the big tech companies and then they’ll be on our side once legislation is decided. You see, the goal isn’t just for everyone to switch software, but also to have unethical practices outlawed, this is an effective strategy as well.
Yeah, I think this is the best strategy to adopt. I will first try to get the family chat group on a better messenger and see how they feel about it.
Well, some people just flat out won’t care. You can shove Snowden and Cambridge Analytica in their faces, but all you’ll get are strange looks. I would say make a case and let them decide. Most of the time, they won’t break their internet browsing habits. But some might!
I feel that the absolute worst you can do is be pushy and make people resent the concept of internet privacy before even fully understanding it. I feel like @fidibus@lemmy.161.social got it right: use privacy-friendly software yourself and if the topic comes up, casually show them that using it is not that big a deal.
yeah I got some of the people around me to use element instead of hangouts when google said they were shutting it down and with spotify integration everyone seems to like it.
Maybe that’s my problem, I must have been a little too insistent on the subject. I’ll try to be a bit more passive and just show (by my daily use) that it’s really not complicated and inconvenient.
If the government announced they would be installing surveillance equipment in everyone’s home and on their person, they would riot in the street. However if people are told they can play video games on the device, they will camp in front of the store in the dead of winter to spend an entire month’s wage so they can install it themselves. Then they’ll even compulsively take it into the bathroom and bedroom also. That’s the mentality we’re up against.
it’s also the mentality we were up against the last 3000 years: panem et circenses
you’re absolutely right of course
deleted by creator
I don’t understand what you mean by any of that. Your post basically has no value to me because you don’t specify what my “sacred cow” is, why you think you “touched a nerve” and what the “dynamics of the industry and it’s track record” is.
I also dislike the surveillance state and I despise the surveillance corporate fascism even more.
deleted by creator
no worries mate :)
And that’s really sad
It’s also potentially an opportunity. If developers want privacy centric technologies to catch on with the general public, they need to use this psychology to their advantage. Otherwise it will always remain a fringe phenomenon too convoluted and esoteric to compel the average cardi-b nasty ass cooch enthusiast to buy in.
Maybe its a good idea to give an example. The Cambridge analytica scandal shows how:
- When someone has your data it becomes easier to manipulate you into acting against your own interests (Brexit/Trump).
- Even if you think you are giving your data to one entity (Facebook/an online quiz) there is a good chance this data will be shared with other entities (Cambridge analytica). If you give your data to multiple entities there is a very high chance it will be shared with an other entity.
- Even if you think advertising does not influence you, giving away your data can still be harmful. In the case of Cambridge analytica, giving permission to use your data also gave data on your friends.
People usually think they are special and don’t get affected by propaganda/advertising. One thing to point out is that two of the most valuable companies in the world are Google/Facebook which are advertising companies. The techniques used in modern advertising are obviously extremely effective at influencing the vast majority of people. People who think they are immune to advertising are often the most susceptible.
Show them the issues, such as Snowden revelations and the applications for it and how it can be used against them
I think this is the crux of it. “How it will be used against them” people find that hard to imagine, and so do I.
What are we afraid of?
- targeted ads, playing on our secret weaknesses/fears
- targeted scams
- a credit rating system, where people with bad opinions can’t get a job or a mortgage
- personalised pricing where the seller knows how much you are willing to pay
- blackmail using knowledge (or very good guesses) about people’s secrets.
People think “targets ads are harmless i don’t care” and they’re right. But i think there are much more frightening dangers out there, that would make people act if they only knew about them.
I think you are actually on to something here. If the “much more frightening dangers” could be articulated and some examples could be added it will make for a very persuasive argument indeed. The “I don’t mind targeted ads” is the most common push back along with people not getting how their metadata being collected could be used to scam them and the fact that no one likes to think they will be gullible enough to become victim of a scam.
I wouldn’t go for illegal things people can do with my data (like scams) because criminals may use illegals ways to get my data as well. We should care more about the legal ways of acquiring data and using it against our interests.
It could still help limit people’s use of sites or sharing too much data. Just think of the “security question” often they ask you. For example Name of your first pet? Don’t have that information on social media.
Another angle is your contacts. Maybe you are clever enough to not be influenced by targeted ads but is everyone in your contact list? Many apps upload that data and obviously Facebook is using it in (arguably) good ways: “Do you know Emma?” (She just uploaded her contact list and you were on there)
You can’t convince them, this is a situation where they’re going to learn the hard way, when their data is stolen.
But the analogy is using nowadays is with how the safety of people in cars wasn’t a priority a few decades ago both by ignorance and saving costs. Today it’s unthinkable to have a vehicles without seat belt, airbags, ABS, etc, and in a few decades it’s going to be common sense to protect your data.
My manager, who is American, once made a comparison that completely blew my mind: we laugh at native Americans handing over their land without really understanding that they’re getting screwed in the transaction, and yet we just hand over our personal data to Google and Facebook without a second thought. We barely even have a concept of data ownership. –u/henrebotha
Not sure I would personally make that comparison but maybe that could help some people. I suppose it depends how bad you think things can get without privacy…
I think there are better ways to make them unserstand. Just check every individual independently and avoid group policies.
There was a great ad on television about how much someone knew about somebody else thanks to social media. It was portrayed as somebody going in for a like pitch with some witch or whatever and they give their names/DOB/address and then the “witch” would just give them as much information as her team got from reading that person’s facebook. I was shocked by the amount of information: holidays, job, boyfriend, kids, best friends, hobbies, parents dead, etc. It kind of helped me understand quite simply why I shouldn’t share too much on social media. I worked, I share little about my life. You would need to really dig to get more than the basics I think (hope!). Only had Facebook then and have never created an Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok etc with my real name. Even on Facebook, I’ve only shared like a couple of photos in the last decade, compared to a couple a month back then.
If anybody can find that tv ad I would love to see it again.
Oh yeah I remember that !
I think that’s it:
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xx06es (it’s the only link I could find)Thank you!
Yep the facts seem to go over most folks’ heads - probably find The Social Network movie is a lot more effective ;-)
