| This old problem. It's the word "win" that bothers me in this context. Until one sees that conflicting models can make "security" a zero sum
game, in which your security is my insecurity and vice versa, there is
only psychological splitting, posturing and clamour for the "moral
high ground". Indeed, even using the word "security" as a bare noun is a mark of
presumptuousness. One must always ask; Security for whom? Security
against whom or what? Security to what end? Unilaterally imposing a harm (leaking of data) upon others is
disdainful, but then offering "security" as your reason/excuse, is
condescending, since you do not know what my security needs are and
how they are prioritised. When it comes to messing with my data or devices "for my own good" the
only proper response is "I'll be the judge of that!" Many then respond that "people are too stupid and need a firm hand",
which is not a good look, and frankly cuts to the core of so many
problems in technology today. Companies like Google need a better moral, sociological and
psychological map of reality before putting on their boots and
marching off down the road of good intentions in the direction of
Hell. |