[TeMPOraL]

> Maybe we don’t need AV because most files aren’t viruses?

Since you used that example...

How would you feel if everyone in their neighborhood got assigned a private security officer that sits in their apartment doorway all day and notes who comes and goes? The company argues that it's to protect from the thieves and fraudsters, and indeed there are always some break-ins or grandparents scammed somewhere. Oh, and everyone gets an officer free of charge - it's paid for by the ads they wear on their vests and that play regularly on their walkie-talkies. Would you trust the security company that all the notes, taken by a person in the privileged position of observing everything in your home, will only be used to prevent crime and nothing else, ever?

Back to your example - AV companies are quite shady these days, and their products not all that useful relative to costs/damage and snooping they do.

[gretch]

This is a weird example you posed because it's a real thing. It's called a doorman and it's very popular in new york (it's considered a luxury to have one)

[salawat]

Indeed. Except in that poster's example, imagine the doorman isn't merely looking over the building. Every door in the building has a doorman. The doorman to the building is more palatable because it's beyond their capacity to monitor all activity and movement through the building.

The League of Meticulously Documenting Doormen on the other hand is a much greater threat to privacy. We're increasingly in jeopardy with regards to implementing that. The more we don't push back against unnecessary logging, the bigger the problem we're building socio-technically.