Privacy/Security/Anonymity propaganda

Part of why megacorps like Google, Facebook, MS etc etc are so powerful is because of the amount of data they harvest. This is possible because normoids don't care about their privacy, or aren't aware that it's being disregarded to such lengths. However, normal people CAN be swayed to start caring about their rights - the counterculture movement of the 60s & the emergence of punk prove that anti-authority stances can proliferate in some parts of the masses, and hat they can lead to action. I think that something similar could happen with privacy if we put it on enough normal people's radars. For example, you could print stickers with links to normal person-friendly sites (like https://www.privacyguides.org/en/tools/ or something), and plaster them around your city. We should also make infographics or posters about privacy and why normal people should care (this is why I'm posting this here, on /vis/). Too tired to actually do anything right now so enjoy placeholder picrel.

Happy data privacy day, lain! (For real, that's today!) As a first step, I suggest getting your normal friends to install adblocker, privacy badger, and switch to encrypted messengers. Those are easy enough to do.

>>12093 >We should also make infographics or posters about privacy The problem is many people end up giving pointless, outdated, or outright harmful recommendations >>12094 >privacy badger No I wouldn't suggest piling on feel-good "privacy" extensions and calling it a day https://github.com/arkenfox/user.js/wiki/4.1-Extensions#-dont-bother https://grapheneos.org/usage#web-browsing

>>12095 >No I wouldn't suggest piling on feel-good "privacy" extensions and calling it a day key phrase here is "calling it a day." The suggestion is explicitly to do it as a first step for normal users who would otherwise do nothing and be too overwhelmed by a hardened privacy setup.

Sounds like pure autism not anything that does anything on a large scale. First and foremost you need to push for change to laws. Second you need to make programs that are good and easy to use so something more secure can become mainstream not because security alone but just overall functionality. It's common sense. Anything else is secondary because any protections you try to set up for yourself can be outlawed or compromised at any time and any attempt to push people into difficult to use tech nerdery won't do soykaf because no one they know will use it so you socially isolate them to a tiny niche of people further silencing their voices.

>>12097 If that's your idea of good advice to newcomers then woe betide whoever follows your "hardened privacy setup"

>>12098 >First and foremost you need to push for change to laws. How are you going to push for laws that are pro-privacy, if most people don't care about privacy? A handful of nerds don't have much voting power. However, if more people start caring, they will vote for pro-privacy candidates, who will pass pro-privacy legislation. >Second you need to make programs that are good and easy to use so something more secure can become mainstream not because security alone but just overall functionality. It's common sense. Agree, but even if those programs are made, normal people won't know about them if we don't promote them.

There's a fine line between privacy and unnecessarily isolating yourself for no reason. The more private stuff you use, the more inconvenient it is to use because it's by design. Most people will get by through the use of a proper ad blocker, such as uBlock Origin, and a respectable browser, such as Brave or a Firefox tweaked to be more private, but Brave makes it more convenient. Successful internet privacy to the masses requires that you set everything up for them, anyways. Mainly because they couldn't fathom going deep into the settings until some tech article slop tells them to, lmao.

>>12093 priavcyguides are privacy laxists (either intentionally misleading people or straight up incompetent), read up on the section i wrote about them in this one http://blog.nowherejezfoltodf4jiyl6r56jnzintap5vyjlia7fkirfsnfizflqd DOT onion/opsec/closedsource/index.html

>>12093 I used to be really into the whole infosec/privacy thing, to the point where I'd heavily handicap my computer before doing any work on it and when I told people about it I just couldn't understand how didn't they care. It's not that "people don't know", most do know, but they choose not to care. This was hard for me to understand as I have Aspergers but after I got burnt out and started using the computer like a tech geek with a slight interest in privacy and security rather than a schizophrenic everything got clear. Privacy is inconvenient, and somebody who just watches youtube and texts their friends on the computer isn't going to bother to face the inconvenience for something that's not rewarding in any way >>12104 I do agree with you on the fact that privacyguides is absolutely horrible but privacy IS a spectrum, take my example >site has google ads, cloudflare insights and all the other bullshit >you block everything that doesn't come from the first party >while not optimal, you did remove most of the spyware I'd also like to tackle >When you have Windows installed, you constantly have a 100 cameras pointed at you, no matter what you do on the OS. How about capping the domains that call back? Removing the bloat e.g Edge out of it? There are obviously ways to remove SOME "cameras", I do agree that it is not nearly the same as downloading a Libre OS but you can not say that this won't grant at least some privacy compared to the stock OS. >you will never have privacy until you remove ALL of the cameras in your bedroom, you do not have privacy when you have 75 cameras, nor when you have 1 camera remaining If we're talking about privacy as in "big corpos play around with your data for their own benefit" even an adblocker can help with privacy