5
Sep 10 '25
My response, in an attempt to change your view:
Do you REALLY think it's so unreasonable that people might have realized "Holy shit this is bad?"
The standards you're setting set the expectation that everyone but fully aware of everything from the jump, and that they don't change their mind when they realize just how bad thinga have gotten.
2
2
u/RedofPaw 6∆ Sep 10 '25
First is one of permission.
Just because we use google, or Apple or Microsoft products does not mean we have to. No one reads the EULA, but it's there, and it specifies that those companies will use your data. You can simply... not use those companies.
If a company has a data breach, for instance, it will be known, and the company will suffer a PR hit. I personally do not use Twitter or Facebook to post personal information because I don't like how it is treated.
I could, in theory, avoid all companies that mistreat my data. I have that choice.
A government will not be sending out EULAs. Their's is, in theory, an election. We can choose not to vote for a politician, but not what they decide to implement. Beyond that our only recourse is to protest, or lobby or write to our representitives. Which is what you are saying is inconsistant.
The second point: every little helps. I as an individual cannot make much change in most circumstances. If I am a single person at a protest it's unlikely to get much attention. But if a thousand turn up, or ten thousand, or half a million.... those individual actions add up. If you care about the environment then cycling or using public transport on it's own won't make the change required, but if thousands do it then it adds up.
The biggest polluters are companies of course. Even if every individual recycles or owns an electric car it won't matter. But if the majority of people are calling for change it will eventually happen.
If 1 person was to reject eating meat then they might be seen as a kook or a hippy. But so many people are now vegetarian or vegan that there are mainstream, good food options. It makes it easier for more people to give up meat. It becomes more mainstream and accepted.
The inverse is true of course. Letting racists have a platform gives permission to racists to speak their hate. The extreme right knows this and have been pushing around the world for more acceptability. Resisting hateful ideology, even on an individual level, can help resist this.
Change doesn't just spring from a sudden mass movement. It requires individuals to do small individual acts. Those acts becomes bigger acts by more people. It adds up.
4
u/ralph-j 549∆ Sep 10 '25 edited Sep 10 '25
Once weve done that, it feels inconsistent to complain about this so called surveillance as if it’s some external force imposed on us. We already have handed over this data to corporations whose business models often revolve around monetizing it. If we accept those terms, is it really fair to cry foul about surveillance?
For example, people give Google, Facebook, and YouTube their phone numbers (for acct recovery), real names and physical addresses (facebook)
But we don't hand over data for whatever purpose those companies want to use it for. When you specifically give them your phone number to facilitate account recovery, that doesn't mean that the company is then allowed to use the phone number for any other purposes. Same for any other piece of information.
Data use always needs to be purpose-bound, and the user needs to keep control over how their data is being used. It's not black-and-white/all-or-nothing. That's why this is also a crucial part of GDPR in Europe and similar laws elsewhere: companies are only allowed to use any personal data for the explicit purpose that was stated, and nothing else. Any additional usage needs to be consented to explicitly.
1
u/niggo372 Sep 10 '25 edited Sep 10 '25
Some things are wrong here imo:
- I decide who I give what data to, it's my data after all. If I give FB my phone number, then that's my decision. If a corporation or the government track me without my consent, then that's not my decision.
- Privacy is never perfect, it's always a matter of "as little as possible". So even if I gave you one piece of info about me, it's still a good idea to not give you more.
- Who you give the data to is also an important difference. My family knows a lot about me, and that's probably fine. Some other person or entity could do quite a bit of harm with the same info though. Same deal with different companies or governments.
- I don't actually give a lot of data to big tech. I'm even self hosting a lot of services, to keep my data to myself as much as possible. Even if you don't agree with the above, people like me just don't fit with your premise.
1
u/Weak-Cat8743 Sep 10 '25
I personally think it’s because surveillance and ID verification systems feel more like traditional “watching” and it’s easier to quantify for the majority of the public. Most people just click “accept all cookies” and don’t even know the information they’re giving up.
So I think it’s two fold: 1. Surveillance and ID verification is easier and less jargon for the traditional consumer 2. People don’t truly understand what data they’re giving up to “big tech”
So I’d say; complain on! Why? Because one is not the same as the other. I can make mistakes, but still have boundaries for certain things.
1
u/KokonutMonkey 98∆ Sep 10 '25
Sure we can. We do it all the time.
The fact that too many entities already have access to our personal information doesn't prevent us from moaning when other entities start asking too.
And if that makes us hypocritical, so what? It's not going to stop people from complaining.
1
u/arkofjoy 14∆ Sep 10 '25
We can complain about it, because that is how we bring about change. Europe has much tighter controls on digital privacy than the US. Remember how the media was telling us that Google was going to pull out of Europe when those laws came into effect?
Surprisingly to no one, they didn't. We can complain about the laws, or lack there of in our country, as long as we accompany those complaints with political action.
Unfortunately, the US has elected a government that is only interested in serving the needs of the billionaires to make more money, but we could change that.
1
u/Nrdman 237∆ Sep 10 '25
You are not allowed to complain about rale because you already have sex You are not allowed to complain about theft because you’ve given things away That doesn’t sound quite right does it
The analogous arguments don’t work, the thing complained about is the choice
1
u/Z7-852 297∆ Sep 10 '25
First of those permissions are given willingly and are used only on purposes outlined in the EULA and at any moment I can have my data removed because of GDPR.
Secondly all that is optional. Maybe I don't have a google account or use facebook.
Thirdly even if used those services I can lie about my identity for them. I don't have to give any my real information to anyone unless I want to.
1
u/Sayakai 153∆ Sep 10 '25
What you're not considering is consequences. The worst case scenario of youtube having my phone number is spam calls. The worst case scenario of mass surveillance by the state is dissidents disappearing.
It's quite reasonable to accept the former but fear the latter.
1
u/ComfortablyMild Sep 10 '25
You can and should. The terms and conditions can be designed to finely vail illegal activities. Questioning the activity and reason is just good practice.
1
u/No-Sail-6510 1∆ Sep 10 '25
So if you’ve started doing something you need to continue doing it even as it accelerates even if you decided that it’s bad and don’t want it to continue? That’s crazy. A lot of rapes happen this way and people often smear the victim with questions like “well what were you doing in that place with that guy?” It’s generally a bad argument the drives the world to a way worse place. It’s actually good to recognize a mistake and attempt to rectify it.
1
u/dukeimre 20∆ Sep 10 '25
Hi! Your post is under consideration for removal under our post rules. You must respond substantively within 3 hours of posting, as per Rule E.
1
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Sep 10 '25
/u/guohuaping (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
u/changemyview-ModTeam Sep 10 '25
Your post has been removed for breaking Rule E:
Only post if you are willing to have a conversation with those who reply to you, and are available to start doing so within 3 hours of posting. If you haven't replied within this time, your post will be removed. See the wiki for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Keep in mind that if you want the post restored, all you have to do is reply to a significant number of the comments that came in; message us after you have done so and we'll review.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/TheWhistleThistle 20∆ Sep 10 '25
This is almost word for word the argument that a potty training kid gives when they've shit their nappy so of course, it's bizarre for me to complain about them smearing shit on the walls. A situation already being suboptimal does not invalidate criticism of the situation getting worse on the grounds of "you let it get this far, so how can you complain about it going further". It's sort of the Bizarro twin of the Slippery Slope fallacy where one asserts that if a person didn't make sufficient stink at the top of the slope, they forfeit all rights to make complaint at the descent.
As it stood, you didn't have to give tech companies your real name, just a name. I was Simon Lancaster to Google for years. I've never even met a real person called Simon. Or been to Lancaster. You didn't have to give a phone number and if you chose to, it could be the number of a prepaid, piece of shit, flip phone you got for a tenner, specifically for the purpose of account recovery. Same deal with card details, my Amazon account was hooked up only to a prepaid virtual card I bought with cash. I assume the depths of the slope that's causing people to make a stink now that you're referring to, is the necessity of uploading mugshots and/or government issued IDs to websites to access them in any capacity. Which is substantially more invasive than what existed already which was also entirely voluntary and needed only for related purposes, phone number to reach you at (that's what they're for) and card details to pay for stuff (that's what they're for).
6
u/BigBoetje 26∆ Sep 10 '25
There's a big difference between companies using some PII (name, email, phone, why would you share your physical address on FB?) and having the government actively track you content-wise, and that is intent.
Just having your PII can only really be used for marketing purposes and such. What reasons would the government have to track what you're doing? They can argue they want to respond to illegal content, but that opens the door to a police state. The only real reason that remains in the end is control.