[cube13]

>This is a false trade-off. Why should people have to make sacrifices to gain privacy? If people believe it's important then they'll advocate for it but that doesn't mean they should become digital hermits to prove a point.

But why would a privacy minded person even be willing to give third parties their information? Once it's out of your hands, it's out of your control. Forget the sale of information by Facebook or Twitter. What if they get hacked, and their entire database gets exposed to the world? You can't control that.

This is why, even before the internet, those who wanted complete privacy turned into literal hermits.

If one is truly concerned about privacy, they shouldn't make that information available at all. So no Facebook, Twitter, or use of Google services.

[gress]

It's only out of your control because we don't have any cultural standards or laws on what is considered to be acceptable.

[cube13]

Privacy is like cryptography. You're private/secure until you're not, and there's nothing you can do once it's been broken. So cultural or legal agreements or frameworks might provide some recompense, they will not stop the initial problem, which is the revealing of the information.

The best way to remain private is to ensure that you don't tell anyone else the information you wish to be private at all.

[gress]

That is an absolutist view. It's strictly true, but doesn't mean we can't change the incentives using laws.

We can worry less about the information we reveal if corporations are restrained from using it.

[cube13]

But corporations aren't the only problem with privacy. There are social problems, governmental problems. The author's uncle sent a public message saying that she's pregnant on Facebook. That's not Facebook's fault at all, and it can still be a problem.

Non-out GBLT people have problems with this stuff constantly, not only with Facebook screwing up and accidentally reveling information that was set to private, but with others publicly getting outed by well-meaning friends or family before they're ready to out themselves.

Again, the damage is done when the information is revealed. You have to remember, for a lot of people the stakes aren't just avoiding a pile of baby-related coupons and spam in their e-mail. It is literally life and death for some people. While yes, we can punish the release of the information, it does not stop the damage from happening when the information is released. We should have stricter privacy protections, but at the same time, we need to have a conversation about what privacy actually means, and what the risks are for revealing information to someone else.

[gress]

Some damage is done when the information is revealed. A great deal of damage can be done later.