zlacker

>>sschue+(OP)
Well, in the end there may only be one thing left we can collectively do, but which we surely won't collectively do, because too many of us are way too comfortable to accept any discomforts: We can avoid using services implementing shit, so that any business that singles out desktop users or disadvantages them, doesn't have much of a customer base. Voting with out feet.

I have very little hope, that the common user will make use of their own agency avoiding a dystopia, or even think about issues associated with their behavior. We can see this everywhere even today. The majority of people are clueless and just accept whatever bone is thrown their way. Need to buy a new phone every year now? OK. Pressured to accept digital surveillance by not even state agencies but private profit oriented companies, that want to sell your data or use it for nefarious purposes? OK. Giving all your communication data to big tech? OK. ... It is all just a big "auto-accept any digital rape" for most people, as they don't even want to think about the technical implications and implications for society. It's all so far above their technological understanding, that they just exit the bus, when it comes to discussing these things. That is the problem we face. How to make the normal person aware and interested in their own digital rights.

>>zelphi+in
Unless you can show a direct cause-and-effect relationship from clicking OK on some form to something negative happening in their real life that impacts them in actual physical real life, a real event at a particular time that they can observe with their eyes that relates to their real life (family, job, social life, going about their day), most people won't care. Otherwise it all blurs to some abstract words and theoretical tinfoil-like worries about the "government" and ufos and sovereign citizens.