Not GP, but to me it is also disappointing because it’s just the old “if seatbelts don’t prevent car accidents, why wear them?” argument.
On the one hand you have systems where anyone at any company in the value chain can inspect your data ad hoc , with no auditing or notification.
On the other hand, you have systems that prevent casual security / privacy violations but could still be subverted by a state actor or the company that has the root of trust.
Neither is perfect. But it’s cynical and nihilistic to profess to see no difference.
Risk reduction should be celebrated. Those who see no value in it come across as zealots.
Comments
Why do you find it disappointing? It seems quite appropriate to me.
Not GP, but to me it is also disappointing because it’s just the old “if seatbelts don’t prevent car accidents, why wear them?” argument.
On the one hand you have systems where anyone at any company in the value chain can inspect your data ad hoc , with no auditing or notification.
On the other hand, you have systems that prevent casual security / privacy violations but could still be subverted by a state actor or the company that has the root of trust.
Neither is perfect. But it’s cynical and nihilistic to profess to see no difference.
Risk reduction should be celebrated. Those who see no value in it come across as zealots.