[FoRK] Apple collecting, sharing iPhone users' precise locations
jbone at place.org
Mon Jun 21 20:50:24 PDT 2010
On Jun 21, 2010, at 10:19 PM, "Ken Ganshirt @ Yahoo" <ken_ganshirt at yahoo.ca> wrote:
> --- On Mon, 6/21/10, Jeff Bone <jbone at place.org> wrote:
>> Loss of privacy isn't just inevitable, it seems a fait
>> accompli and quite possibly irreversible sans massive loss
>> of technology base. If you make that assumption, then
>> it's a matter of protecting what you can and ensuring that
>> the transparency is as totally symmetrical as we can
> Sort of like all parties having equal access to necessary information in free markets, eh? Probability of that happening is .... what?? Roughly the same as free markets happening?
Yawn... We're headed THERE again, Ken? This is your version of what Apple is for Tom.
It's not that I even necessarily disagree with you, but there are so many probably vague assumptions and necessary definitions there, and today has made me WEARY. For starters, give some thought to what you mean by "equal," "access," "necessary," "information," "free," and "markets."
This is rhetorical, not an invitation to an interactive exercise.
I would assert that you are absolutely correct, those are all necessary conditions. We try to ensure that these conditions hold today. Intentional attempts to violate them are, in most cases, criminal.
Question for you: do you correspondingly believe that as long as the general crime rate is above zero, we do not therefore live in a "free" society, and so need more extremes of authoritarianism? (Or the converse, I.e. that as long as there are laws at all, that we do not live in a free society, and therefore require complete anarchy?)
Tired, going to bed.
PS - completely agreed with the point you were addressing while rekindling that torch you carry: the likelihood of a wholesale tech base replacement approximates zero, IMHO.
More information about the FoRK