That is true. A lot of what makes smart phones invasive is built into the structures and networks; to interface with that system necessitates giving up privacy. The end user can mitigate it, but so long as the network exists in it’s present form, it will always be a partial mitigation with diminishing returns the more you try.
I think it’s also true that we should have these conversations about what could be. Especially with computers. These machines can be configured in practically endless ways, so it’s pretty damn frustrating to see the scope of what is actually done with them get narrower and narrower.
Right. Like every thing that comes out that’s an alternative seems to be revealed at some point to be piggy backing off some system built by Google/whatever or just has some kind of backdoor for the cia (tor, signal).
I have my system pretty locked down on my computer but I think it’s at best naive to expect average users to jump through so many hoops with this thing. It’s like capitalism and everything else, the whole system needs retooling
I don’t think there’s technically any evidence of tor or signal being compromised. signal is just speculation based on some early funding by a cia cutout, but it’s solid except for the architectural limitations (using phone numbers as identifiers still, some limited metadata they could theoretically collect). Tor might be worse idk, iirc a bunch of the exit nodes are run by some 3 letter agency? but that doesn’t necessarily mean the whole system is compromised.
Depending on who you ask tor is compromised enough to make it iffy to full on honey pot, either way my point is that as long as the systems exist as they are it’s gonna be difficult to evade it and always gonna be significantly too involved for average people going about their lives. Paranoid tech enthusiasts being able to navigate this stuff doesn’t translate broadly. Capitalism and big techs strangle hold on tech has to be dismantled before this kind of thing won’t be a concern anymore.
That is true. A lot of what makes smart phones invasive is built into the structures and networks; to interface with that system necessitates giving up privacy. The end user can mitigate it, but so long as the network exists in it’s present form, it will always be a partial mitigation with diminishing returns the more you try.
I think it’s also true that we should have these conversations about what could be. Especially with computers. These machines can be configured in practically endless ways, so it’s pretty damn frustrating to see the scope of what is actually done with them get narrower and narrower.
Right. Like every thing that comes out that’s an alternative seems to be revealed at some point to be piggy backing off some system built by Google/whatever or just has some kind of backdoor for the cia (tor, signal).
I have my system pretty locked down on my computer but I think it’s at best naive to expect average users to jump through so many hoops with this thing. It’s like capitalism and everything else, the whole system needs retooling
I don’t think there’s technically any evidence of tor or signal being compromised. signal is just speculation based on some early funding by a cia cutout, but it’s solid except for the architectural limitations (using phone numbers as identifiers still, some limited metadata they could theoretically collect). Tor might be worse idk, iirc a bunch of the exit nodes are run by some 3 letter agency? but that doesn’t necessarily mean the whole system is compromised.
Depending on who you ask tor is compromised enough to make it iffy to full on honey pot, either way my point is that as long as the systems exist as they are it’s gonna be difficult to evade it and always gonna be significantly too involved for average people going about their lives. Paranoid tech enthusiasts being able to navigate this stuff doesn’t translate broadly. Capitalism and big techs strangle hold on tech has to be dismantled before this kind of thing won’t be a concern anymore.