We need to protect uninformed people. You do this by informing them. If they know the risks and still decide they don’t care it’s their problem, not ours.
Comment on Amazon Ring Cashes in on Techno-Authoritarianism and Mass Surveillance
drmoose@lemmy.world 2 months agoWe still need to protect the idiots. Thats why we’re banning asbestos and have safety codes. How is this any different?
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 2 months ago
Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Not if they are willingly bringing this inside their homes. I think it’s very different from substances that you might not be aware are there and are highly toxic.
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
IT is new and too abstract for the old farts in ruling and judging.
drmoose@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Isn’t roofing too abstract either? 100% majority of people dont know how prevalent asbestos was in roofing material and what even asbestos does but yet if you tell anyone thay their shit has asbestos in it they’ll be quick to rush to alternatives. Sometimes people just need to be told what to do.
jjlinux@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
That’s right. But how detrimental asbestos is took time to be made abundantly clear and known, plus “authorities” got involved, so the sheep listened. With surveillance, the same “authorities” want the public to be ignorant so that they can keep it going without us countering it.
Similar situations, but certainly not equal.
jjlinux@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
This is the right approach. Normies won’t pay attention to any “your privacy is at risk” argument. But showing them examples (plural, as 1 instance won’t do shit either and will just be dismissed) of people getting fucked by all the surveillance COULD make some of them take it into consideration (no guarantees).
I do not agree that people that allow these devices into their homes are idiots. I see them more as “ignorantly lazy”.