Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I’m sure the protocol is fully privacy preserving, now. But if we give an inch, the government will take a mile. This is about normalizing self-surveillance and isolating ourselves in response to notifications on our phone. Sure, the tech is privacy-preserving now. But who’s to say an emphasis will remain on privacy in future iterations of the technology?

Personally, I will not opt-in to this technology, and if forced to use it, I will leave my phone at home. It’s a small act of civil disobedience but it’s a necessary one IMO.

It’s alarming to me how so many in tech seem welcoming of, even excited for, this technology. I say this as someone who wrote my senior thesis on a subject related to privacy enhancing technology, so I’m familiar with the ideas.



> It’s alarming to me how so many in tech seem welcoming of, even excited for, this technology.

It gets contact tracing right by accomplishing the goal while yielding almost no ground on privacy and remaining almost entirely offline. In an ideal world, all new technologies would be implemented in such a focused manner without regard for turning a profit.

I'm puzzled by your concern about normalization of self-surveillance; everyone I know has already voluntarily made drastic alterations to their behaviors due to current circumstances. I really don't see what introduction of this technology changes.

> who’s to say an emphasis will remain on privacy in future iterations of the technology?

If people don't object to widespread state surveillance later, would they have objected now? I don't see why a decentralized technology specifically built to prevent surveillance should lead to an increase in acceptance of it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: