<div dir="ltr"><div>These are all excellent points. <br></div><div><br></div><div>BTW, you might remember there was much debate over whether the list should be private or public, but the decision was made to make it public because otherwise it would have granted an illusion of privacy that would not have protected vulnerable populations from adversaries seeking to hack the list.</div><div><br></div><div>Things have changed since then, and there are now apps available like Signal that could be used for this purpose. Are any of these set up to function as large "mailing" lists?<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 4:34 PM Marc Sunet <<a href="mailto:msunet@shellblade.net">msunet@shellblade.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>It's a good one, here is a related one that talks about the
social effects:</p>
<p><a href="https://www.socialcooling.com/" target="_blank">https://www.socialcooling.com/</a></p>
<p>To me, part of the problem is that online communications are
constantly creating a permanent record, like Snowden puts it. This
list, for example, should really be regarded as private, a
conversation with the liberation folks. But it's actually public
by virtue of having an eternal record of everything said here made
available on a discoverable part the Web. Any joke, criticism or
statement can then be taken out of context and copy-pasted
somewhere else; in the worst case, this results in a public
lynching of the author. The lack of privacy then leads to a
chilling effect, to self-censorship; every word must be carefully
measured, even the email address you send this from and other
metadata must be considered.<br>
</p>
<p>On the other hand, if the mailing list record just
self-destructed after a while (Signal does this with messages),
then the problem would not be as bad. Copy-pasting something out
of context and lynching the author would now have to be a targeted
attack as opposed to something you can do retroactively any day
and any time. Most people would not bother unless you were a
high-profile target. The same arguments Snowden makes about the
NSA collecting a permanent record to then retroactively find crime
as opposed to looking for evidence for an existing investigation
apply to online social communication just as well.<br>
</p>
<p>There is of course value in making the list publicly available to
build community, provide a learning resource and so on, so
automated self-destruction seems like a good balance and default
to me. Things become semi-private, or semi-public; words are
written on sand instead of stone.<br>
</p>
<div>On 10/2/20 8:57 AM, Yosem Companys
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><a href="https://inre.me/why-privacy-is-the-most-important-concept-of-our-time/" target="_blank">https://inre.me/why-privacy-is-the-most-important-concept-of-our-time/</a></div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
</blockquote>
<pre cols="72"></pre>
</div>
-- <br>
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable from any major commercial search engine. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: <a href="https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt</a>. Unsubscribe, change to digest mode, or change password by emailing <a href="mailto:lt-owner@lists.liberationtech.org" target="_blank">lt-owner@lists.liberationtech.org</a>.</blockquote></div>