As I have said before, I am willing to be the person who draws a line here, against the calls for "nuance".
There is no room for nuance, because nuance thinks surveillance systems can be built such that they can only used only for good or to only target bad people.
This isn't a trivialization of the situation, it *is* the situation.
There has never been a surveillance system in the history of humanity that remained static, unable to grow to the whims of power.
It is our duty to oppose all such system *before* they become entrenched!
Not to work out how to entrench them with the least possible public outrage at their very existence by shielding their true nature with a sprinkling of mathematics.
I don't need to do the whole "what if" dance because I have seen it, and live it.
Surveillance is already here, but unevenly distributed.
I co-founded @OpenPriv so that I could work against it, every day.
There is a never ending stream of intentional surveillance flowing towards your right to privacy. It isn't just Apple. It isn't just corporations.
There are many large groups fighting tooth and nail to ensure you have less privacy today than you did yesterday.
The work that we do @OpenPriv is only made possible by the many small donations we receive each year from individuals like you.
I'm happy if you donate to any organization building privacy tech, but please consider checking out our work.
Here is the thing...since it has come up...we do "focus on real world harms". It is all we do. It is why we are so firmly, absolutely against the concept of surveillance.
There are plenty of terrors in this world, and most of them are forced on us by people with good intentions.
You can follow @SarahJamieLewis.
Tip: mention @threader on a Twitter thread with the keyword “compile” to get a link to it.