* You don't have to care about privacy if you didn't do anything illegal.
* If you do care about it, you can just choose not to share your information.
* If you don't share but your data is still leaked, it didn't affect your life anyway.
The point is an average person is incapable of having boundaries with these corporations who have all their data and benefit from it, and we have no way of predicting how all this data about us will affect us.
The point is that these privacy claims are nearly exclusively theoretical. Privacy advocates constantly tell anyone who will listen about the complete destruction of privacy in modern society, and yet nothing even resembling the consequences they claim will occur is actually happening.
Probably not, but that doesn’t mean you’re comfortable with it being shared.
We don’t wait for a pedestrian to be run over by a car to decide that a specific road is too unsafe for a specific speed, we tend to implement appropriate speed limits to prevent such irreversible things like death from happening.
Same applies with privacy. Once a person’s data is out there, you can’t take it back anymore, so if someone every finds a way to make money out of it to the detriment of this person, it’s too late. You can arrest this someone, then the next one will pop up and do the same with the same data.
If this is such a big issue, why hasn't more happened already? Why don't we see massive insurance denials based on Facebook posts? Where are the droves of people denied loans because it's leaked they use crypto? There was a huge Ashley Madison data dump some years ago, yet there were no mass firings or even divorces as a result.
Honestly, if nothing big comes out of this DNA leak, I think the idea that privacy is critically important is dead. If someone's DNA being leaked out into the world doesn't matter in a meaningful and systemic way, then there's nothing here.
DNA was not leaked. ancestry only.
>someone dying by getting hit by a car is more serious than someone's SSN getting leaked.
yes, I don't see why the analogy is not valid anymore though. Analogy was about preemption, not gravity of the issue.
>If that's such a big issue, why hasn't more happened already?
Don't know, but we are running circles, my point is, we shouldn't wait for more to happen. I thought you got that.
I'm talking about prevention. Like "don't walk at night in this area alone".
I know what you’re talking about, I just don’t think you realize how such things become rules. We very rarely, if ever, create preventative rules, and when we do the rules are terrible because we don’t know the issue well enough.
Absent that, the argument holds that screeching declarations about privacy tend to be overblown.