Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by keybored 442 days ago
Not all are naive on some kind of layer. That would imply sticking your neck out and proposing solutions. There are also the fatalists. They are immune to being wrong because they think it is hopeless. That means never being able to be called an idiot, a very important protection for some.[1] They also literally don’t care so there’s that too.

[1] There’s so much surveillance that it is very easy to fall into the trap of being a naive idiot. Not to worry. We can be fatalist and not have to worry about that charge.

1 comments

You can get hung up on the "attitude" like most people, or realize that the first step to a solution is facing the facts. I'm not being blunt to be condescending, but its tedious how we're constantly sold half-baked "solutions." "Just use Signal!" No I'm not handing all my data over to yet another company because made a super duper promise to respect privacy. I'm still waiting to hear an actual solution except for the obvious: don't use the internet. And even then the world is still full of cameras, microphones and satellites.
Now you care? One comment ago you personally didn’t care. And I’m responding to someone who said that “there's nothing you can do about it”. Where was the in for anyone to take the “first step”? No, I’m not taking the first step towards facing the solution since you already said that’s off the table.[1]

Now you can get hung up on someone pointing out that this fatalism is intellectually a three-feet deep pond and trying to pivot to someone else having their feelings hurt by your badass attitude. But it’s clearly all heat and no light.

[1] For the first step I would ask someone serious about the subject.

You're really desperate to get this dunk, but you don't have to try so hard. Its really simple: prove me wrong.
Prove what wrong? You keep changing what your message is.

I’m not a fatalist because I believe there’s always a way to remove oppressive measures. The world got to this point through a series of events that favored certain groups. It’s possible to make a world that serves everyone.

You've confused absence of comprehension for absence of argument, but your lack of counter point is abundantly clear as you've resorted to projecting a lot of hot air. Do YOU even care about privacy? I think you're just self righteous contrarian, arguing from feelings, not facts.

My message is clear and consistent, here is your chewed food:

I care about privacy. I don't care for privacy enthusiasm, which means using products like VPNs and Signal that pretend to give you privacy but really don't. It is impossible to have a modern internet experience and real privacy at the same time, and I don't pretend otherwise. I have yet to see a real solution - not a made up hope-based idealism - to this problem. You either use internet and accept it (when i say i don't really care) or stop using the internet and go live in the woods.