> Cherish these moments while they last, and if you want to help mitigate the governments reach, support our lobbying power through the EFF (https://www.eff.org/) and FSF (https://www.fsf.org/).
I want reasonable restrictions on the governments AND the businesses in this case... To protect my digital freedom. Regulation isn't always evil.
But realistically, I think the consumers are the most at fault for many of the issues that have been coming up lately (apathy towards privacy, lack of skepticism towards social media bots and advertising, willingness to put all their eggs in one basket, etc). I'm just not sure how we should address those issues.
>I think the consumers are the most at fault for many of the issues that have been coming up lately (apathy towards privacy, lack of skepticism towards social media bots and advertising, willingness to put all their eggs in one basket, etc).
Blaming consumers is the least helpful way to think of this and is, intentionally or not, blatant intellectual dishonesty that saves people from a deeper examination or taking action. It's lazy, scapegoats the people, and helps ensure the situation persists.
It's like blaming the American people for the Iraq war, p-hacking, or climate change denialism.
Humans have a limited capacity for knowledge. The greater our expertise in one subject, the more other subjects we must sacrifice. Therefore we must rely on the expertise of others _most of the time_ making us very susceptible to influence.
I am certain both you and I (or all) are equally guilty of ignorance and apathy of several other societal ills.
> Blaming consumers is the least helpful way to think of this and is, intentionally or not, blatant intellectual dishonesty that saves people from a deeper examination or taking action.
And always using government and corporations as a scapegoat seems equally intellectually dishonest, imo.
Are you suggesting that the people are just innocent pawns being manipulated to vote, buy, and consume a certain way?
I wasn't proposing that the solution is merely to blame the consumers. But in a capitalist democracy the buyers and the voters do actually play a large role in the direction that these issues take.
It seems, to me, to be a problem of education (regarding the issues) and motivation. Perhaps recent events will function as a public notice and help to realign priorities.
> I am certain both you and I (or all) are equally guilty of ignorance and apathy of several other societal ills.
Agreed. And I believe that it's our responsibility to make an effort to focus on our own ignorance and apathy. And to put thought into what we contribute to our peers.
I'm not saying that we're solely responsible. But we collectively share a large portion of the responsibility.
> "I'm just not sure how we should address those issues"
Neither is anyone else imo but I do think a good starting point might be creating actual awareness about said issues. And I don't mean issuing out public memos - which, imo, has been the approach so far. It might be better to use standard commercial/marketing tactics toward a different goal, i.e raising awareness. Create fud about privacy. Sure, it'll involve a bit of ingenuity and disingenuousness but the awareness will get raised. Make up lifelike examples and have them worked into the stories in popular sitcoms/movies. No guarantees it'll work, but I do believe it'll work better than simple blogs and informational videos, which imo might be too dull and dry for the average user.
I want reasonable restrictions on the governments AND the businesses in this case... To protect my digital freedom. Regulation isn't always evil.
But realistically, I think the consumers are the most at fault for many of the issues that have been coming up lately (apathy towards privacy, lack of skepticism towards social media bots and advertising, willingness to put all their eggs in one basket, etc). I'm just not sure how we should address those issues.