Quote:
Originally Posted by MGlitch
[...] GMW however had on several posts in this thread stated or implied those who disagree with him to be at best nieve, or intentionally ignorant. Ignoring several people pointing out they were aware of the potential risks and considered the convenience to outweigh those risks.
|
I think that's an unfair characterisation, for example my very first post on this thread started:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
On a personal, it's all about me level, I can appreciate the argument, and even agree that too often the opposing arguments assume too much. Not everyone is ignorant of their lack of privacy. [...]
|
Yes, I have been guilty of a few gross generalisations ... although as generalisations go I think they hold up pretty well. It's not a huge surprise that some people are making a reasonably well informed choice, but what do you suppose the percentage is? If I ignored some posts it's mostly been to try and avoid repeating myself.
With some security situations any failure is a complete failure, but this need not be the case with privacy. This is not an all-or-nothing situation. Doing better, without necessarily offering a panacea, is possible, to which end I've offered examples that do just that. If the demand existed then the situation would improve - but as I've already noted, it seems apparent that the demand does not exist, and whether that's through ignorance or not caring is largely irrelevant.