Conversation

Notices

1. Meredith Whittaker (mer__edith@mastodon.world)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Jan-2023 03:27:59 JST Meredith Whittaker

   OK let’s talk about That Op-ed. The one that insisted not only that privacy is dangerous, but that not affirmatively building surveillance into communication tools is a radical ideological position.

   Dunking on the op-ed’s arguments is easy. They’re SHALLOW. And dunk many have, often with the gentleness of a professor grading a draft essay from a student they didn’t want to completely discourage. I’ll direct you to the great threads from others... 1/

   https://web.archive.org/web/20230101194846/https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/28/opinion/jack-dorseys-twitter-signal-privacy.html

   • Aral Balkan repeated this.
   • Aral Balkan (aral@mastodon.ar.al)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Jan-2023 03:27:43 JST Aral Balkan

     in reply to

     @Mer__edith Yep, it worked. And thanks.

   • Meredith Whittaker (mer__edith@mastodon.world)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Jan-2023 03:27:53 JST Meredith Whittaker

     in reply to

     (This is supposed to be a thread, but I'm going to be new to Mastodon for a long time so, maybe it worked?)

   • Meredith Whittaker (mer__edith@mastodon.world)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Jan-2023 03:27:54 JST Meredith Whittaker

     in reply to

     In short, we are right, our arguments are robust, and we have done the reading. But if we want to defend privacy, we’ll need to be coordinated and bold, and not make the mistake of assuming being correct is in itself a strategy. We have a lot of work ahead in 2023! FIN

   • Meredith Whittaker (mer__edith@mastodon.world)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Jan-2023 03:27:55 JST Meredith Whittaker

     in reply to

     Particularly because these laws would, in effect, prevent people developing tech from NOT building mass surveillance and censorship capabilities. Which, while extremely poorly argued, is effectively the main thrust of the op-ed. 5/

     Aral Balkan repeated this.
   • Meredith Whittaker (mer__edith@mastodon.world)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Jan-2023 03:27:56 JST Meredith Whittaker

     in reply to

     What laws? What political platforms? I don’t know. But the age ID requirement passed in CA this week and the regulations that would require communications apps to scan and police content currently moving forward in the EU and the UK give us some clues. 4/

     Aral Balkan repeated this.
   • Meredith Whittaker (mer__edith@mastodon.world)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Jan-2023 03:27:57 JST Meredith Whittaker

     in reply to

     The op-ed functions to create the appearance of a “debate” on a more or less settled issue. And this is a powerful function, bolstered by its placement in the NYT. Through this, it can serve as a “Potemkin citation,” providing a seemingly credible reference in support of bad privacy laws and platforms. 3/

     Aral Balkan repeated this.
   • Meredith Whittaker (mer__edith@mastodon.world)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Jan-2023 03:27:58 JST Meredith Whittaker

     in reply to

     But what’s going on here isn’t substance. And that’s what I want to focus on. Those of us invested in defending privacy need to understand that this op-ed wasn’t written for people with expertise, and its purpose won’t be perturbed by expert rebuttal. We’re not the audience. 2/

     Aral Balkan repeated this.