Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

>It's insane that people spend time and energy on keeping secrets from their relatives and friends (which everyone does) and yet can't see that a third party that actively seeks your information is more likely to cause you harm than people you know.

You're more likely to get murdered by your spouse than by a stranger. Your kid is more likely to get kidnapped by its parent than a stranger. Statistically speaking, it's the people who fear the unknown bogeyman who are irrational, not those who fear their friend, relative or neighbour.




This reasoning works when you want to determine whether it's safe to interact with a (single) random person on the street. It does not work when reasoning about privacy, because:

1) Issues resulting from privacy loss mostly have nothing to do with murder and kidnapping statistics. Far more relevant would be the note that as of 2019 identity theft affected 23% of all US internet users [1]. And that's just one way to misuse your information. There are countless others.

2) Loss of privacy means loss of control over who interacts with your data and when that happens. I don't understand why this simple fact is so hard to grasp.

If your information ends up on sale or in a public data dump, anyone who wants to misuse it will have an opportunity to do so, probably forever. It's up to them to decide whether your info is "worth it" or how to use it.

Something you consider trivial today can be used in an elaborate scam tomorrow. Or it could be used for a social media stink campaign by your unhappy ex. Or something else.

The point is, "I am not important enough to be spied on" is a stupid statement, because whether you are important is determined by context. When you loose your privacy, you lose control over that context.

--

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/763130/internet-identity...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: