• MagicShel@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    There are objectively worse people than the us govt buying my data, that’s true, however I don’t give a fuck about Iran or Russia because they can’t/won’t do anything to me. I’ll never be subject to their laws nor of any interest to them. They can’t use my work from home status nor porn habits against me. The us govt is another matter, though. If they suddenly decide an interest in knobby ankles means I’m more likely to rob a convenience store so I constantly get visits just to check whether it’s possible I am involved in a robbery, that directly effects my life.

    So I get where you’re coming from, but federal and state governments are likely to be the most immediately dangerous people who could have access to that information.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      however I don’t give a fuck about Iran or Russia because they can’t/won’t do anything to me.

      you, uh, sure about that? but.

      China is operating police agencies inside the US (1, 2, 3), India is targeting Sihks who advocate for an independent state for Sihks, (1), India has probably learned it from Russia, whose become increasingly willing to poison or otherwise kill people stirring up trouble back home;

      Most state sponsored espionage is actually in the corporate sector (1,); with China being a leader there. If you have access to any sort of confidential information, you’re potentially of interest. And part of what makes “Tik Tok bad” is that it’s app is much more intrusive, including sniffing devices on your network. They- and I don’t just mean China here- hoover up all they data they can so that they can then perform more targeted operations so as to compromise new sources.

      and yes. One of the things they look for in a potential asset is their porn. Because one of the ways you can recruit an asset is shame.

      all of this is besides my original point. You’re not going to convince a judge to tell them they have to gimp themselves and get a warrant for this data, because it’s being openly sold. and, technically speaking, you’re literally just giving it to the people that are collecting it, in exchange for reduced-cost (or free) services.