We shouldn’t refrain from admitting where we’ve lost ground or find ourselves on the losing side. It is something that may be obvious but is seldom formally voiced: spyware has been normalized. There was once a time where raising caution on the dangers of trusting centralization would yeild a degree of receptivity, or at least an understanding of the implicit consequences being raised. When the introduction of some new tracking method was once worth devoted attention from relatively mainstream publications.
Today, it is not uncommon to instead be met with an apathetic response. “Well, they’ll get my data anyway so we’ll just use XYZ.” Especially among those who have grown up submersed in surveillance capitalism. Apathy is also expressed in those who find themselves wanting out but feel so much has been profiled about them that any effort to recitfy this would be rendered futile. And those who do take initiative to reclaim digital privacy often face soft ostracization for not simply going along.
If you’re the one in a group to decline an event group photo being uploaded to Facebook, you’re harangued for being “difficult”. If a representative inquires for your email address, anything other than a @gmail.com domain will elicit “I’m sorry, what? Can you spell that please?” and repitition. Refusing to use an organization’s “app” gets reactions as though you’re a bum. Many of us have squarely lost territory in organizing anything digitally with relatives or friends. The least qualified individuals to be making technical decisions on behalf of a group are often the ones who end up doing so.
So surviellance capitalists and ad network psychopaths may not have succeeded in reeducating you, dear ninja hacker, they certainly have done so with the general population. They have won that battle. Having recognized this, we should respect this fact when building and implementing solutions. Are you targeting your solutions at other techies? Or at the general population? I’m beginning to think it cannot be both.