Thread · 5 tweets · 23 Dec 2019

"It is a federal crime to open a piece of junk mail that’s addressed to someone else." That's one thing I like about The Times's Editorial Board position on surveillance: it cuts right through digital exceptionalism. nytimes.com/interactive/20…

People's attitudes towards privacy have not changed, and there is no reason that they should. But there's this weird insistence from some that the digital realm is different, apart. It's completely unfounded. Like a bad plot device, things that harm you online harm you for real.

For every online surveillance case you can come up with an offline equivalent. For instance, just replace third-party trackers with videosurveillance. In almost all cases, there's no debate as to whether it's appropriate or not.

Online surveillance is covert and the digital world is opaque. Remove those factors and these internet-wide tracking-based business models fall apart. They're already cracking at the seams.

We need more comprehensive solutions than can be outlined in an editorial of course, but this is a good start. I look forward to seeing what comes next! Have some great holidays!