Quote:
Originally Posted by MGlitch
I’d say your own arguments prove you have a choice. [...]
But as Dd pointed out it’s going to be work for you (general you).
|
I also submit that availability of choices demonstrates that in at least some contexts exploitation of privacy is not a necessary component of the service being offered. In those contexts it is not actually a choice between privacy and convenience, but between offering control and not offering it. And the larger providers do not offer control because their users do not demand it, not because it is not practicable.
And to look further, I submit that with more research and investment even more privacy friendly capabilities are possible - more things can be done while retaining convenience but without exploiting privacy - but these will be slow to happen without demand. Which brings us back to my earlier discussion with DiapDealer and the reason why people who do value their privacy would like to persuade others to do likewise. The extra work and cost required to retain privacy now is significantly increased because there is not enough support to drive the market to create it. The reverse is not true. People will still be free to broadcast their data as widely as they want and obtain whatever advantage* that that offers them.
* I suspect, but cannot prove, that some companies have been reluctant to improve privacy controls not only because they profit from the way they are now, but also because they fear that users will learn how little advantage privacy exploitation actually offers them.