[Pirate Party] Rick Falkvinge has concluded his 21-post series on analog-equivalent privacy rights. Almost everything that was taken for granted by previous generations regarding privacy has been completely eliminated for the young generations coming up. The series of posts discusses how essential civil liberties have suffered catastrophic erosion in the world's transition to online, digital interaction.
It's going to be a long uphill battle to win back the liberties that were slowly won by our ancestors over about six generations, and which have been all but abolished in a decade.
It's not rocket science that our children should have at least the same set of civil liberties in their digital environment, as our parents had in their analog environment. And yet, this is not happening.
Our children are right to demand Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights — the civil liberties our parents not just enjoyed, but took for granted.
Below the fold are all 21 posts from the last few months:
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights: Our children should have the same rights as our parents
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (2/21): The analog, anonymous letter
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (3/21): Posting an Anonymous Public Message
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (4/21): Our children have lost Privacy of Location
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (5/21): Where did Freedom of Assembly go?
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (6/21): Everything you do, say, or think today will be used against you in the future
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (7/21): Analog Libraries Were Private Searches for Information
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (8/21): Using Third-Party Services Should Not Void Expectation of Privacy
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (9/21): When the government knows what news you read, in what order, and for how long
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (10/21): Analog journalism was protected; digital journalism isn't
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (11/21): Our parents used anonymous cash
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (12/21): Our parents bought things untracked, their footsteps in store weren't recorded
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (13/21): Our digital children are tracked not just in everything they buy, but in what they DON'T buy
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (14/21): Our analog parents' dating preferences weren't tracked, recorded, and catalogued
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (15/21): Our digital children's conversations are muted on a per-topic basis
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (16/21): Our children's privacy and Data Retention
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (17/21): The Previous Inviolability of Diaries
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (18/21): Our analog parents had private conversations, both in public and at home
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (19/21): Telescreens in our Living Rooms
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (20/21): Your analog boss couldn't read your mail, ever
- Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights (21/21): Conclusion, privacy has been all but eliminated from the digital environment
Earlier on SN : A 21-Part Series on Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights.
Related Stories
Rick Falkvinge, founder of the original Pirate Party, now living in Germany, has published four parts so far of series on analog equivalent privacy rights. He plans to have 21 parts in all. The series starts out early on with the point that there is no reason for the offline liberties of our parents to not be carried over into the same online liberties for our children and examines this point from different directions. So far he has posted in detail on the following topics over at Private Internet Access' blog:
- Our children should have the same rights as our parents
- The analog, anonymous letter
- Posting an Anonymous Public Message
- Our children have lost Privacy of Location
Rick will post more over the next few weeks. The current batch of adults and teenagers are likely the last generation to have any choice in the matter. Apathy and ignorance abound and deciding not to decide is still, sadly, a choice.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @12:56AM (5 children)
I'm glad someone put together a comprehensive set of examples to easily clue in anyone about digital privacy.
Now, will people listen? Will links to his material be downgraded so they don't appear in anyone's feed?
I think we'll need a bit more pain than this rather high level shit going on now. Most people are going to need to feel that noose around their neck before they start freaking out. Oh who am I kidding, the noose is already there but people don't believe it. Not sure what will open their eyes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @01:37AM (4 children)
What is this "feed" thing you speak of?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @03:03AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSS [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @05:33AM (2 children)
Tech literate: RSS
Tech illiterate: facebook
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @03:45PM (1 child)
^ why most people don't like nerds, such petty superiority complexes.
Try: illiterate, can't RTFA
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 05 2018, @07:41AM
He's still right how ever angry you might be. And it's a very meaningful distinction.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fishybell on Tuesday April 03 2018, @01:36AM (18 children)
So, the Tl;Dr is...don't give your information out and expect it to be private?
Our parents and grandparents didn't have the same issues because very few people/companies had access to the kinds of personal information currently being shared freely by the masses.
The war is only lost if people care about the outcome. People clearly are okay with sharing their data, so the outrage will always be spotty and minimal (ie. the current issue with Facebook & Cambridge Analytica).
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday April 03 2018, @02:04AM (17 children)
Sorry, your tl/dr misses the mark.
Your parents and grandparents didn't cope with the intrusive surveillance that your children and grandchildren cope with.
Facial recognition cameras? License plate scanners? Cookies in their newspapers, books, magazines?
A child today, growing up in an apartment complex, with Alexa/Siri/whoever in the apartment, and camera surveillance all around the complex, with additional police surveillance outside the property has zero privacy. Zero. That child may be off camera when he uses the bathroom - but various sensors can report whatever they can sense, and deduce what that kid is doing. There is no privacy.
Imagine, kid arrives at school, he's sent to a guidance counselor. S/he sits down, and the guidance counselor cuts right to the chase. "Susan, it has come to our attention that your personal hygiene needs attention. You are using too may (or not enough) squares of bathroom tissue to wipe yourself after relieving yourself. Is there some reason for this?"
Although government doesn't *directly* collect *all* of this data, government is very happy to pass laws that require data collectors to report this data to government. Many of us have been complaining, and warning of this government/corporate collusion for a long time. Alas, no one wants to listen. Instead, you attempt to boil it down to a simple, snide comment that misses the mark.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Tuesday April 03 2018, @04:01AM (2 children)
All of the protections on analog media still exist though (unless I missed something).
So a child today can still live a perfectly anonymous analog life. Well, it's not perfect; they'll probably be filmed in public. But they can use cash, pen and paper, ditch the smartphone, not use Facebook, etc.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @06:18AM
How can you avoid the NSA's mass surveillance of the populace without using the Internet? How can you avoid facial recognition? In both cases, you have to go to extremes to do so. It is not sufficient to simply tell people to use cash and such.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @06:24AM
Retailers track you throughout the store and link your name to it all when you checkout. Using cash means they have the rely on face recognition to link you. More and more stores are doing that. Some start tracking you as soon as your car pulls into the parking lot, so they even get your license plate. To avoid this you'll need to walk/bike to the store and wear a mask.
If you have a smart phone or other listening device your TV and radio habits can be recorded even if you don't have a smart TV. The devices listen for specific audio cues from shows and ads to help track viewership.
To live an anonymous life you have to start from the beginning. Almost all kids don't get that chance because their parents post baby pictures. Schools require photo ids and fingerprinting in case the kid is stolen. You'll change a lot during your life so you'll grow out of whatever your parents posted about you, but it all takes time and you can never remove the known data.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @06:55AM (12 children)
Well, the simple fact is that there is no privacy outside your house. Do people really believe the law can block every camera, microphone, and key logger out there? Our only solution is to technically depreciate the data, find a way to make it worthless, because it will be collected no matter what. Crippling our tech is an unacceptable idea.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @07:21AM (1 child)
No, but we could, for example, punish those who conduct mass surveillance. Those are far larger and therefore more visible targets than an individual person who violates someone else's privacy. I'm thinking about supermarkets using facial recognition and so on.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 06 2018, @05:30AM
punish those who conduct mass surveillance
Nope, because then the authorities will accuse anybody with a camera of conducting "mass surveillance"
You gotta take the profit out of data collection, otherwise you will get nowhere.. The suggested restrictions will only create a black market, which is probably the intention, as with most prohibitions.
(Score: 2) by romlok on Tuesday April 03 2018, @11:54AM (1 child)
Do people really believe the law can block every murder and theft? No, but a socially agreed set of punishments can and does serve as a deterrent.
Unacceptable to you perhaps, but not to many people - especially those with money and a stake in the status quo. Most photocopiers will refuse to copy cash. Many (most?) TVs will refuse to play unencrypted content. Many ISPs will block access to illegal websites.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @02:01PM
tvs don't play encrypted content?
wow i havent bought a tv in years and years... still use a VCR and DVDs and ripped movies played via an old computer over a vga cable to a projector when being fancy (no 4k, in other words).
i guess people don't buy albums anymore either and just stream from a cloud, too huh.
i guess subscription as a service came with a padlock the customer doesn't have access to, and yet people keep buying these locks. except me i guess. i cant watch 4k but i don't really feel like I am missing it. i only say 4k because i dont know what resolution most of my stuff is since im limited to output of what is essentially a monitor or project accepting the limits of the vcr, dvd player, or old computer playing rips. i dont even have any hdmi cables. super video is the highest end along with gold plated rcas/component cables.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday April 03 2018, @01:50PM (7 children)
Taking that statement at face value, I can agree with it. However, you are not presenting that statement at face value. Instead, you are using technology as an excuse to be an intrusive SOB. The technology will still work, whether you are prying into my life, or not. The technology is there, ready to be used in sensible ways. The technology is not "crippled" if laws are passed to prevent Amazon, Facebook, Walmart, Target, and the myriad other corporations spying on us.
The crippling at issue here, are the morals of government, corporations, and the ruling class. We, the people, and technology, are perfectly fine. It is you who is crippled. More, you rely on technology, because you are so crippled.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @03:28PM (6 children)
What I'm telling you is that I have a right to point my camera and record where and what I want. If you don't want to be in the picture, get out of the way. You have every right to prevent the state from doing so because they exist to serve, and you have the right to prohibit anything recorded from being used against you in any way, but that's as far as it goes. My camera, you don't touch unless it obstructs your path, view, whatever.
Now, if I have a website, I have the right to record whatever any visitor does there. It is up to that visitor to assume everything is being recorded and either stay or go. It's very simple.
This whole issue is a simple matter of buyer beware. Either way, if you want to change the law, then vote for the people that will do it. If you're in the minority, well, I guess life sucks, doesn't it?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday April 03 2018, @03:56PM (5 children)
While YOU may have such a right, corporations do not.
And you also believe in "might makes right", I suppose.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @09:25PM (4 children)
While YOU may have such a right, corporations do not.
Why? Everybody has the right. It is you that has no right to stop me. The technology is protecting my rights and helps prevent you from interfering. This is how we protect ourselves from rogue authority that gets in our way.
And you also believe in "might makes right", I suppose.
Dude! That's all there is.. You're only fooling yourself if you think the species lives under a different set of rules than everything else. Or didn't your first spanking teach you anything? You can only differentiate yourself by degree, not by character. And every dollar you make and spend is blood money. So, please, save your breath on the philosophical masturbation. We live in a material world. Our rights cannot be protected without might. We actually have to force people to leave us in peace when they won't do it voluntarily. Without an irresistible force, Europe and the rest of the world would still be at war. There can only be one.
Like it or not, might does make right... whether by ballot or by bullets, it makes no difference. In fact it takes bullets to protect and enforce the ballot. Round and round we go...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday April 04 2018, @01:38AM (3 children)
So, you'll have no objection when the villagers arrive at your house and/or your place of employment with the torches and pitchforks. Because might makes right.
Your attitude is contemptible.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 04 2018, @02:40AM (2 children)
If the villagers have a badge, what should I do? What difference does it make if they do or don't? Might makes right is the law of the universe, and you enable it just like the rest of us.
Your self righteous indignation and hypocrisy are duly noted. Accept and embrace your own evil before calling anybody else out on theirs.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday April 04 2018, @02:42PM (1 child)
You must be new here. I'm the asocial asshole. Someone, in the early days of Soylent, made a comment about me not being a nice guy. I told that person in clear terms that I'm NOT a "nice guy". Yes, I can be kinda evil, although I'm actually more neutral. And, your attitude is still contemptible. When the commoners corner you and the rest of the aristocracy, and demand that you sign the New Magna Charta, I'll be the asshole who stole all the pens. You can sign in blood, or not at all. Fuck you, you douche.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 04 2018, @08:07PM
The commoners, and you will be in for a surprise. It's not wise to attack a person with nothing to lose and who has his own pen, for stabbing the invaders, no, wait, it's one of those exploding James Bond pens, yeah, that's it.
Oh, and back at ya!
(Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Tuesday April 03 2018, @07:43AM
I have a bunch they'd love some (analog) cookies with their daily newspaper, but alas... the times weren't fully baked then.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 5, Interesting) by quixote on Tuesday April 03 2018, @03:27AM (2 children)
(Waitaminute! I'm not previous! Those old people are.)
Where was I? I was old enough when the new intrusions started that they were shocking. Well, I said to myself in my la-la way, soon people will see the need to get this back in compliance with old stuff like reasonable expectations of privacy and control over your own data and all the rest of it. Not having Amazon wipe out your copy of 1984 for the thought crime of reading a book twice. That kind of thing.
Hysterical laughter.
The part I missed was that governments loved it even more than megacorps. In hindsight, duh. Then I thought I'd just wait for ethical, open source social media to join. No doubt there'd be something along any minute in the nature of a public utility (because that's what they are).
More hysterical laughter.
The weirdest thing about being one of the olds is knowing that people and business and government survived just fine without cannibalizing everybody's privacy and rights. (Sure, it's harder in an analog world, but it wasn't done even to the level the tech allowed. It was Bad. There were laws against it.) It's knowing that world is possible, and seeing it become inconceivable, seeing it become an unknown, unimagined, apparently impossible place.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 03 2018, @09:41AM (1 child)
They have all this data collected, but it is overwhelming for them, they don't have reliable way of using it for their purposes.
It may be that they didn't even decided on a definition of purpose.
It may be that they can't define what they want good enough without too much vagueness but without leaving too much "ham" out - perhaps data sets for any damn purpose is not classifiable enough.
I am certain that people having access to these "instruments of darkness" are brought up to not be content with creating some sort of obvious totalitarian dystopia, and they see that all they can do with what they have now is to actually create one. That probably wouldn't bother some other people who actually think that it is a good idea, when the technology inevitably proliferates. However, in dystopia, none is shielded from its bad sides, and more or less everyone knows from history (or will eventually realize, or find out) that.
With all the fuss, we still don't see major changes in the world around us.
(Score: 2) by quixote on Tuesday April 03 2018, @03:35PM
I agree that it sure wasn't by design that privacy evaporated. Part of it was clever people solving interesting problems, which is actually a good thing. But right after them came the usual mass of vultures hunting money and power who can't be bothered to look ahead to what they destroy to get it.
So, as Zeynep Tufekci brilliantly puts it "We're building a dystopia to make people click on ads."