|
|
|
|
|
|
by rich_sasha
1800 days ago
|
|
|
I want privacy. I also sort-of buy the "nothing to hide" argument - as another comment below says, for most people risk-adjusted cost of privacy loss is greater than the cost of maintaining it. But this article writes about the very people who have plenty to hide (for good reason!). I think it's a bit misleading to say investigative journalists have "nothing to hide" - confidential sources, on-going stories, contacts, whereabouts etc. Mixing this up, in my eyes, is not helping the "privacy for the masses" adoption. |
|
|
However as the cost of exploits and ease of mass surveillance becoming cheaper . That statement has made less true for more and more people.
In the NSO target list for India I am seeing all sorts of people like virologists and journalists I wouldn't have thought were doing important enough to be tapped. More than the tapping that surprised me.
Sooner or later either we will be worth slightly more than cost or costs will become cheap enough.
However at that point it will be too late. Like the infamous quote goes " first they came for communists/Jews"