|
|
|
|
|
|
by Liquix
2637 days ago
|
|
|
I think the root issue goes back to your second sentence: the average user doesn't want to be empowered when it comes to data harvesting. In fact, the average user would probably be firmly set against it. They have nothing to hide, no complaints about the current system, and see no value in having control over their data. Perhaps even negative value in taking time out of their busy schedule to manage it. The trick to turning the tide in the data privacy battle won't be finding the right argument or implementing the right policy - it'll be finding a way to communicate the magnitude and potential impact of this problem to the masses before it's too late. |
|
|
I think this is an extremely presumptuous statement that writes off how little empowerement the average user has by conflating the ignorance about data privacy and ownership, and the lack of user friendly options they have around understanding their data and how it can be owned/migrated and who has access to what, with carelessness or otherwise now in tech known as "consent" or "accept and agree with the fineprint or don't use this platform required for work, modern day life, etc" or "allow this app that is in no way shape or form related to pictures, social networks or social communication access to your pictures, phonecalls, all stored data on your phone and access to your contact otherwise don't download"
I think the news shows it's pretty clear most people are not happy about how companies like facebook and others are using it, now that they know. They have not known for a while, and furthermore what alternatives do they have?
This idea is very similar to telling a person because they never knew this was being done to them, and that because also in addition they have no other options currently if they do know about it, that this equates to consent or carelessness/lack of wanting to be empowered. This is just false, and furthermore, a dangerous trajectory of thought to apply to any situation.