Yep, that's the problem. As a general rule, driving without a seatbelt is also pretty safe.. until it's not. The question is whether the advantage you get from something is bigger than the potential consequences.
I'd say, given the historical track record of governments during the last 100 years, that it's very gullible to believe that whatever future problems our current data sharing will cause will somehow be "fixed" and not have consequences just as long as it affects a critical mass of the population.
"I'd say, given the historical track record of governments during the last 100 years, that it's very gullible to believe that whatever future problems our current data sharing will cause will somehow be "fixed" and not have consequences just as long as it affects a critical mass of the population."
For that matter, parts of our government like the NSA and the DEA consider the over-sharing of personal data on Facebook to be a useful source of exploitable information. They'd probably quietly lobby against any legislation to scale it back.
Exatly. A major argument used in the debate about new data retention laws in Europe was just this: That in face of changing subscription types like prepaid cards, the police needed data retention to still have access to the same data as before.
Personally I do want to push them to be fixed if possible. I don't like real name policies, but I do consider anonymity only a workaround most of the time.
I'd say, given the historical track record of governments during the last 100 years, that it's very gullible to believe that whatever future problems our current data sharing will cause will somehow be "fixed" and not have consequences just as long as it affects a critical mass of the population.