The solution is always to constrain every level of government with more aggressive privacy laws. As long as they are allowed to do it then some private contractors will take the money to help make it ... or government will make their own in house tech teams. Relying on the morals of the general public to limit state surveillance is not a good strategy, but it is of course good when companies take a stand and the tech community creates tools to push back.

▲

throwaway173738 16 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It should be prohibited outright. If you allow a loophole for corporations then they will just sell it as a service and we will never be free of it.

▲

taurath 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Companies create the environment - the government is supposed to be “small” - and it must remain small so the US “consumer” can be leeched from

▲

dmix 12 hours ago | parent [-]

The US government is very far from small. That said, I'd be open to rules on the data broker industry though considering it's scale and how the foreign governments can buy/hack them bypassing all of Tiktok-esque national security handwaving.

▲

fc417fc802 11 hours ago | parent [-]

> Tiktok-esque national security handwaving.

Algorithmic feeds are propaganda tools. A foreign government being able to propagandize your citizens is a legitimate threat, not handwaving.

▲

Nasrudith 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Think for a nanosecond about how exploitable that is. Imagine for a moment that a foreign nation had obtained proof that say ICE was engaged in sex trafficking and publishing it only for it to be blocked as 'destabilizing propaganda'.

If anybody says that propaganda is a valid reason for censorship I say, censor thyself first.

	▲	fc417fc802 18 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		No one said anything about censorship. There are many things that would pose a threat if controlled by a foreign adversary. Communications platforms with algorithmic feeds are one of them.