Talk about digital privacy like you talk about physical health.
I don’t decide to consign myself to a life of fast food and video games because I’m a currently a bit flabby and sedentary. That’s called defeatism. If we thought about our health this way we’d all be better off dead. Rather, I recognise I’m at a particular point on a spectrum due to neglect, and take conscious action to move towards the optimal state: I walk to the shops. I take the stairs. I get in more greens.
Normie has to be shown a new perspective on a domain of his life he thinks he has filed away for good (no doubt due to discomfort). His privacy is not a balloon that becomes a discardable bit of plastic once popped; in fact it’s something he can tend and hone, as diligently as he does his ab or skincare routines.
He doesn’t care now because the issues surrounding digital privacy aren’t relevant to him. They are not relevant because the structures and technologies posing the issues are inscrutable, and condition individuals into believing they have zero agency. That’s why he’ll cede virtually anything for the sake of achieving a BAU task five minutes faster on $ProprietaryApp - he assigns nil value to those personal properties he’s convinced he cannot personally secure. He won’t reappraise his values until doubt over that comfortable certainty has crept in.
It’s going to take charitable people modelling the change they want to see, explaining in social settings why they’re paying cash at this venue or not using Chrome or aren’t contactable on WhatsApp. And the foundation of that is suitable language. My good health is a product of my routines, my knowledge of what is harmful and beneficial to it, my awareness of the various threat vectors, and my social circle’s recognition and encouragement of healthy living. The same applies for privacy.
Talk about digital privacy like you talk about physical health.
I don’t decide to consign myself to a life of fast food and video games because I’m a currently a bit flabby and sedentary. That’s called defeatism. If we thought about our health this way we’d all be better off dead. Rather, I recognise I’m at a particular point on a spectrum due to neglect, and take conscious action to move towards the optimal state: I walk to the shops. I take the stairs. I get in more greens.
Normie has to be shown a new perspective on a domain of his life he thinks he has filed away for good (no doubt due to discomfort). His privacy is not a balloon that becomes a discardable bit of plastic once popped; in fact it’s something he can tend and hone, as diligently as he does his ab or skincare routines.
He doesn’t care now because the issues surrounding digital privacy aren’t relevant to him. They are not relevant because the structures and technologies posing the issues are inscrutable, and condition individuals into believing they have zero agency. That’s why he’ll cede virtually anything for the sake of achieving a BAU task five minutes faster on $ProprietaryApp - he assigns nil value to those personal properties he’s convinced he cannot personally secure. He won’t reappraise his values until doubt over that comfortable certainty has crept in.
It’s going to take charitable people modelling the change they want to see, explaining in social settings why they’re paying cash at this venue or not using Chrome or aren’t contactable on WhatsApp. And the foundation of that is suitable language. My good health is a product of my routines, my knowledge of what is harmful and beneficial to it, my awareness of the various threat vectors, and my social circle’s recognition and encouragement of healthy living. The same applies for privacy.