World Wide Web creator, Tim Berners-Lee, sad to see his invention being used for evil, hatches plan to take it back

Did they never tell you to not begin sentences with "but" or "and" in your writing classes?

Writing and language are constantly changing. Even words, and other methods taught-though incorrectly used-may be used due to the rules of said journalistic institution and whatever shit teacher you may have had q.v. plural of data

https://www.thoughtco.com/is-it-wrong-to-begin-a-sentence-with-and-or-but-1691025#:~:text=If you are trying for an effect which,effective if you begin the sentence with it.

What? You never watched Finding Forrester?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
think that now is the time to look a bit farther.

Companies spying at you when you go and buy something from the shop and pay with your credit card - they know what you paid for.
Companies gift you electronic cards for 'discount' and with them they made statistics what you buy - food, medicine etc.

So 'they' know what you:
eat, medicine, think, do

So, yeah they know more about us than us. And that help them to trying control us in many different ways.

No matter which way you look at it, they will mine and sell your data. It is so out of hand: https://www.wsj.com/articles/cvs-wa...reward-from-covid-19-vaccinations-11614681180
 
just goes to show you that the man who created the internetz is an idiot. Only an idiot would not think there is a possibility for things to be miss-used... Only an idiot would try to get the internet back lol...
 
No matter which way you look at it, they will mine and sell your data. It is so out of hand: https://www.wsj.com/articles/cvs-wa...reward-from-covid-19-vaccinations-11614681180
I do not use smart phone ( I just don't need it).
I do not use google services (this that I know).
I know enough for this so called "cov-19 vaccines" to know that I must run far from them (some things from first hand) in this case it include ID2020.

So, yeah you can hide "some things" but yeah, not everything.
 
I do not use smart phone ( I just don't need it).
I do not use google services (this that I know).
I know enough for this so called "cov-19 vaccines" to know that I must run far from them (some things from first hand) in this case it include ID2020.

So, yeah you can hide "some things" but yeah, not everything.
/Facepalm
 
Even a shikami-clock is correct twice a day. He makes a valid point but yet makes no sense. How many of you guys use social media using your real identity? Hands up?
As long as you do, why do you even begin to worry about your privacy? You already sold it to see cat videos and puppy pictures. Oh and all the faked holiday photos of your "friends".
 
Because there is scripts that can connect your mouse movement with your photos and with all things that your write in the web/messengers.
 
"invention being used for evil"......
What's that Rin Tin, stuff being used for evil!? Oh snap!

Gee, can I borrow a few million hands so I can count how many good intention inventions been used for bad?
 
companies around using your stuff without your consent.

you are giving it to them by using their stuff. nearly everything running on software is just licensed to you and in using it you have agreed to give them everything they want.

privacy only exists when all parties involved in the interaction trust eachother. so how much of what you use did you create yourself? how many of the entities involved in everything you didn't create do you know enough to trust? that is going to exist to matter what version of the internet exists.

the more removed you are from the things you use the more trust you have to have or the less you have to care about what a bad actor can do with what access you are giving them.

just let privacy die. it is going to die anyway since everyone isn't going to be a one person god of tech and we're not going back to pre-technological times willingly. we're all going to either be forced to trust what we don't know or not care.
 
Hmm... well, I would tend to agree that we're all probably being tracked and have almost no privacy anymore. But I guess what I don't understand is the moral outrage about it. Isn't it human nature to want as much information about the people around us as we can get? Our customers, our friends, our family, etc. Why is that suddenly evil when a big company is doing it? The humans that work for big companies are self-interested and don't like to turn down a good opportunity, just like all the people outside those big companies. Every business you buy something from tends to want to know your address and your phone number so they can do marketing. Here are a few uncomfortable truths that I think might leave people feeling like the situation kind of sucks, but it's really hard to fix, it's a product of human nature and doesn't require a lot of active malicious intent on the part of anyone for things to be like this.

People complain about advertising and tracking. How do most sites pay the bills? They pay them by running ads. This has been a problem since the days of television. The PBS approach of begging for money didn't work out too well, so realistically running advertisements is generally accepted as the best way to provide a free service short of raising taxes. And in general, the average person has shown that they are willing to tolerate ads to get a free service rather than donate to keep a service free, or else pay for a paid service so they don't have to run ads. That's because people as individuals are self-interested, focus on their own bottom line, and don't want to spend a dime they don't have to spend. When people were given the choice, they chose sitting through ads. Another thing worth noting is that information about consumer attitudes and preference is so valuable that some sites will actually pay you a small amount of money to sit down and provide that information in a bunch of long surveys.

So let's say you're fine with advertisements but don't like being tracked. The purpose of tracking is to target advertisements to people who are interested in the products. Well, people also hate seeing ads that aren't relevant to them, having to wade through ads for stuff they'd never buy in a million years, and overall it's a waste of your time and that of the advertiser. Targeted advertising is, in all ways other than privacy, a win for advertisers who don't have to waste advertising dollars on showing ads to people who aren't interested in their products, and a win for customers who find irrelevant or pointless ads annoying and would prefer that if they get an offer, it's for something they're potentially interested in.

Customers like it when businesses cater to their needs and anticipate their needs correctly rather than guessing wrong and making something people hate, right? They tend to reward businesses that do this more effectively. One of the tools businesses can use to do this more effectively is, well... tracking. Customers may not like the idea of being tracked, but the fact of the matter is they like the results of tracking. They like the decisions companies make when they have more information about consumer behavior, and effectively reward companies that use tracking data to tailor their offerings to consumer preference better with more money in practice, while complaining about it at a conceptual level. The fact is, consumers don't tend to reward companies who don't track. They complain about how generic their offerings are and say that the companies who avoid tracking don't understand their needs as well as the companies that do, even if they probably don't realize that's the reason why there's a difference.

And as for the insurance situation, well, the goal of an insurance company has always been to try and charge a certain amount to you for coverage based on your risk profile. Tracking allows them to assess that profile better and protect their interests against people who know they have issues and want cheap insurance that they'll wind up using enough that it will wind up losing the company money. Sure, you could say the insurance company is selfish, but you could also say it's selfish to expect an insurance company to accept a bad risk. From their perspective, they probably see people trying to engage in insurance scams all the time. They know people are greedy and will try to screw them out of money, so they do what they can to screen customers and protect themselves from such practices. Which is ultimately, not that different from what we're talking about here, with noting companies are greedy and wondering how we can protect our assets and avoid being screwed. We're all a lot more alike than different in that regard, I think, whether we want to admit it or not.

Also, whenever there's a leak from inside one of these big tech companies, everyone hails the person who leaked as a hero, and they get mad if the company complains about the risk to their employees or that it's giving their competitors an unfair advantage. The fact is, everyone from their customers to their competitors wants as much information about these companies as possible, and don't really care about the interests of the companies... the only people looking out for their interests are the ones that work there. At the end of the day, all of us are trying to do exactly the same thing... gather as much information about potential opportunities and threats as possible, while having other people know as little about us as possible.

The only real problem is that the sheer interconnectedness and scale of all this reveals and magnifies a certain degree of ugliness in human nature that we are tempted to blame on big companies. However, even invoking these moral arguments to condemn big companies is rooted in our own desire for leverage and power. We see an imbalance of power, we see that the companies have more leverage than we do, and so we start invoking morality. You'll see smaller companies use similar rhetoric and tactics against larger companies that have more resources. Consciously we think it's about right and wrong, it's about fairness... but subconsciously, what it's really about is realizing that those people over there have more than us, and we're in a weaker position, and so we want to rally all these weaker people together in order to gain some of that leverage back, get some of those resources they've amassed. And how do we do it? We rationalize that they've done something bad, that they somehow deserve to have their resources taken from them and given to us or a rival that will protect us somehow, that way we're the good guys righting a wrong.

Another reality is that probably even the people that work for these big companies probably didn't foresee some of the worst excesses of what the technology would be used for, or can rationalize it happens so rarely that it's not worth completely throwing away something they've invested years of work into improving and making safer. You're not talking about an empty logo, you're talking about people who've invested years of their life developing something they believed was profitable and useful, and are tempted to see mostly the good things about what they've built rather than the evil side of it. People are naturally invested in things that benefit them and especially things that they've worked hard to create. People don't like admitting that they're wrong, especially when there's a cost associated with doing so for themselves and the people they care about. That applies even when you work for a big company. It's just all these normal, everyday, small-time tendencies of humanity, loom very large and are so much more visible at scale. We're all guilty of them, probably, but it's easier to point fingers at the worst offenders than to look inwards and realize that we're probably not that different from what we're condemning at the end of the day.

Does this mean that the consequences of this stuff aren't bad, that we have to accept it? Of course not. But the world doesn't require pure evil or some kind of moral commentary to make sense. I can easily see a world where what we're all going through is just the natural back and forth of various groups of humans being greedy, opportunistic, short-sighted, protecting themselves from the greed of others, playing these weird mind-games with each other to try and get ahead, and generally being afraid of losing a sunk cost. It's just how we're wired, and it doesn't work well at the scales enabled by modern technology.
 
>>They ALL lie, and sell your data. They all collect, gather, and become lucrative with your data and have been for a long, long, long time.

This. YOU are the product... never forget this.

You are the product, but you are a commodity. Basically indistinguishable from the next person.

It's only a problem if you are, say, trying to get healthcare and various states are banning people like you from obtaining it.

The data is not a problem, its individuals being in a position where corporations or states can leverage it against you. Having no data doesn't help either, they punish you extra for that, look at how credit scores work.

You can't vanish, if you want to be paranoid you have to generate a shit load of generic looking noise. We almost need bots that replicate recordings of some generic persons browsing, but you could filter that out. Basically Jamming rather than stealth is my point. For the most part they are jamming themselves by collecting far too much data.
 
>>They ALL lie, and sell your data. They all collect, gather, and become lucrative with your data and have been for a long, long, long time.

This. YOU are the product... never forget this.

Having a VPN today is darned near essential. Having NoScript + PrivacyBadger covers at least 98% of most data mining issues. DuckDuckGo is decent (but still relies to a certain extent on Google), but safer than the alternatives. I've been hearing a bit lately about the Brave browser, but I'm not ready to give up my Firefox just yet - too many semi-essential plugins I'd hate to lose.

Basically, do everything you can to remain private, as much as is possible. I do not use a VPN because my performance is cut in half. However, I use Ubuntu Linux exclusively now and Windows only for gaming. (On my personal computer, anyways.) I use Duckduckgo and us Brave Browser as well. I use Google just for Youtube and not much else. I have nothing on the cloud, except email, of course.

It is not perfect but far more private than I was just a few months ago.
 
Hmm... well, I would tend to agree that we're all probably being tracked and have almost no privacy anymore. But I guess what I don't understand is the moral outrage about it. Isn't it human nature to want as much information about the people around us as we can get? Our customers, our friends, our family, etc. Why is that suddenly evil when a big company is doing it? The humans that work for big companies are self-interested and don't like to turn down a good opportunity, just like all the people outside those big companies. Every business you buy something from tends to want to know your address and your phone number so they can do marketing. Here are a few uncomfortable truths that I think might leave people feeling like the situation kind of sucks, but it's really hard to fix, it's a product of human nature and doesn't require a lot of active malicious intent on the part of anyone for things to be like this.

Because personal information is under our own rights and we didn't want to give it to everyone ?
If you are agree everyone to sniff you everywhere - go to live in China.
There is enough cameras and rating system that will control every things in your life.
 
just goes to show you that the man who created the internetz is an idiot. Only an idiot would not think there is a possibility for things to be miss-used... Only an idiot would try to get the internet back lol...
Almost every inventor in history never sees how their invention can be misused, read up why the Nobel prize was created. They are so focused / obsessed with their creation they get tunnel vision.
 
I have said it before and I will say it again, George Orwell was so right yet so wrong. Big Brother is here but it is more Big Tech than Big Government.
 
Interesting idea...

As for recommendations given by original poster.

Duckduckgo? You serious? Better stick with really private searx.

Win10? You must be joking. Linux (not ubuntu or mint) or Windows 7 x64 esu.

ProtonMail? Oh God. I better be silent.

iPhone? It's data mining hw machine. Better use smth custom android stuff like lineageos.

Cloudfire is no better than ugly G.
Better go with randomly chosen Dutch dns.

Glad that you are not pointing at chrome as secure and private browser.
 
Interesting idea...

As for recommendations given by original poster.

Duckduckgo? You serious? Better stick with really private searx.

Win10? You must be joking. Linux (not ubuntu or mint) or Windows 7 x64 esu.

ProtonMail? Oh God. I better be silent.

iPhone? It's data mining hw machine. Better use smth custom android stuff like lineageos.

Cloudfire is no better than ugly G.
Better go with randomly chosen Dutch dns.

Glad that you are not pointing at chrome as secure and private browser.

Are you able to back all of that dismissiveness up?

DuckDuckGo... why do you naysay their privacy claims?

Windows 10 - if a person is going to use it (and most people do use it, and many need to), they should use the versions which afford people to be able to minimize the data it collects. That would be the Enterprise and LTSC versions.

ProtonMail uses end-to-end encryption and their inboxes are also encrypted so that not even PM can see their contents or help you out if you forget your password - if you forget your password, you permanently lose your access to your inbox.

https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/what-is-encrypted/
All messages in your ProtonMail mailbox are stored with zero-access encryption. This means we cannot read any of your messages or hand them over to third parties. This includes messages sent to you by non-ProtonMail users, although keep in mind if an email is sent to you from Gmail, Gmail likely retains a copy of that message as well.

While an iPhone is not perfectly immune to data-mining, it has an inbuilt option to prevent trackers while browsing online - which prevents a huge amount of tracking. If there was a single action which ends all tracking, I wouldn't have given a list of things a person can do to increase their privacy.

Cloudflare submits itself to audits:
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/ne...1-dns-passes-privacy-audit-some-issues-found/
https://www.theregister.com/2020/03/31/cloudflare_dns/


None of these are presented as the be-all-end-all solution to regaining one's privacy. They are all steps people can take to protect parts of it. And employing as many of these recommendations as possible will make a large difference in the amount of data-tracking that is happening and in the number of parties a person's data is making its way into the hands of.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top