|
|
|
|
|
|
by clippyplz
448 days ago
|
|
|
I agree with what you're saying, but don't understand the point - if police officers in the US (about a million adult professionals) are abusing this data, wouldn't opening it up to ~300 million random people result in far more abuse than we're already seeing? |
|
|
1. Don’t build systems that can be abused to start with, because they will be abused, but if we must build one then see point 2:
2. Put access to this sensitive information behind a judge’s signature. Because see point 3:
3. When it comes to this kind of data: There are no “good guys” and “bad guys” - we should assume that everyone is a potential bad guy.
Whenever you hear the “good guys” justification, immediately remind yourself of the ways the “good guys” have been found to be “bad guys” in sheep’s clothing.
Whenever you hear someone use the “nothing to hide” argument, remind yourself that none of the victims in these stories had anything to hide, nor had they done anything wrong. (Much like the thousands of women who die from partner abuse every year.)