Your privacy is not a thing in and of itself, that you either have or don't. Privacy is your ability, and capacity, to choose for yourself what you share about yourself, and when, and with who. And the other word we have for that is "dignity".
Privacy is the agency you have over your dignity.
"A private social network" only makes sense in through this lens, of people wanting a social environment where they have agency over what they share, when, and with who.
It's a reasonable thing to want.
@mhoye THIS is what I keep trying to explain to other privacy nerds. It isn't about whether I knowingly use a service that violates my own privacy (and only that).
It's about my ability to choose whether or not I do so, to know I am doing it if I do choose it, and to not inadvertently be choosing it for others if I do.
@grrrr_shark @mhoye OWNERSHIP OF PEOPLE BY STATE?
Hmm this is a good point, often it's only a "choice" only when allowed a choice (like both options are good for state gov's) otherwise you must do what empire says when it comes down to it with penalties and it's ever advancing rules like fencing animals to say 'this' is your options as a one-size fits way of 'system' and doing it's way with people as finely detailed as possible
(State's perspective is perhaps that it owns people when they are born into and when comes down to it for anything serious?).... that's scary !
HMM... birth 'certificate'...
property 'certificate',
shares/bonds ...
ownership of land certificate...
