互聯網時代還存在隱私嗎?_風聞

【來源龍騰網】

正文原創翻譯：

Is Internet privacy dead?

互聯網時代還存在隱私嗎?

評論翻譯

Ankitha Kalyankumar, Student at Ramaiah Institute of Technology (2017-present)

No, I don’’t think Internet privacy is dead. With sites like Facebook, it is up to the user to determine the privacy of their profile. Their profile could be as public or private as they make it. I think it is this way with more other sites too. It’’s up to the user to find the privacy settings and adjust them to their liking.

People should be wise enough when using social media and also get to know secured means to have a good experience

我認為互聯網中依然存在隱私.像Facebook這樣的網站,由用户決定他們個人資料的隱私.他們的個人資料可以是公開的,也可以是保密的.我認為其他網站也是這樣.用户可以根據自己的喜好並調整隱私設置.

人們在使用社交媒體時應該足夠明智,也應該知道使用安全的方法從而獲得良好的體驗

June Marshal, Blogger at Computer Security (2015-present)

No. But we are not careful right now, it may be in the near future.

Even though it seems that very internet giant is after our data, Government wants to use our data in its favor, advertisers wants to use our data to sell their products to us, and hackers want to steal our data because they want to sell it to vendors, there is still a hope and a chance to save ourselves.

How?

By being careful and attentive towards our private life. If we’ll keep using Instagram and Snapchat to share our personal pictures, Facebook to share our personal stories, and Whatsapp to share our private conversations, how can we believe that we’ll ever be private?

These are the very names that often comes in news because of data breach or privacy violations. We still don’t get over them and want to use them.

We may never get rid of these platforms purely, but we can take some measures to ensure our privacy is secure. (Well secure than most)

We can use Tor browser, VPNs, proxies and private tabs in browsers to give the hackers, data stealers and Governments a hard time to use our data. We can connect to a VPN and it’ll give us a suitable amount of privacy. Or we can use a Tor browser and it’ll give us a good amount of anonymity.

This way, not only our data is safe, but we are also able to browse internet more freely. This way, we don’t have to worry about anyone monitoring or recording our data. This way, we can make sure that we are safe from illegal surveillance.

現在互聯網時代不存在隱私.但主要因為我們沒有保護個人信息的意識,可能在不久的將來,人們會更加註重隱私.

儘管看起來互聯網巨頭掌握着我們的個人信息,政府希望使用我們的數據獲利,廣告商想使用我們的數據對我們銷售他們的產品,黑客想要竊取我們的數據,然後把它賣給供應商,但是我們仍然有保護自己隱私的可能性.

那要怎麼做呢？

我們應該更加留意自己私人生活.如果我們繼續用Instagram和Snapchat來分享我們的個人照片,用Facebook來分享我們的個人故事,用Whatsapp來分享我們的私人對話,我們怎麼能相信隱私不被泄露的呢?

由於數據泄露或侵犯隱私,這些公司經常出現在新聞中.但我們仍然無法放棄使用它們.

我們可能永遠不會完全放棄這些平台,但我們可以採取一些措施更大限度的來確保我們的隱私是安全的.

我們可以使用Tor瀏覽器、vpn、代理和瀏覽器中的隱私設置,讓黑客、數據竊取者和政府很難使用我們的數據.我們可以連接到VPN,它會保護我們隱私.或者我們可以使用Tor瀏覽器,它可以讓我們匿名訪問.

這樣,不僅我們的個人信息是安全的,而且我們也可以更自由地瀏覽互聯網.我們就不必擔心任何人監視或記錄我們的數據.這樣,我們可以確保我們是安全的,不受非法監視.

原創翻譯：龍騰網 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻譯：偷吃月亮的狗 轉載請註明出處

Ronen Menipaz, CEO and Founder at M51 Entrepreneur Labs

Mostly yes because the type of privacy you mention (government tracking), so to speak, is something out of both your and mine hands, and possibly even those we hand over our information.

On the other hand, there’s no privacy on the Internet in the first place.

I’m highly irritated by the people who cry about the lack of privacy. Privacy this, privacy that, when the fact is they willingly surrender it to anyone, indiscriminately, in order to reap the benefits. If someone wants a faster commute to work or a cheaper plane ticket, than that someone automatically loses the right to privacy because it’s a trade off. It’s a transaction: you are the product. The Internet is a great system because it works on that principle: we, the users, are crowdsourcing the information. Google would suck if it didn’t have us

And another thing: how come all of this talk about online privacy spiked with smart speakers listening in on to people? What, suddenly there’s a microphone in your living room or your bedroom and it’s a problem? Who put it there in the first place? You. What’’s more, I’m willing to bet there were far more incriminating things typed into Google search or handed over to Facebook but that’s apparently ok because you need them more than you need your privacy.

大多數情況下是的,因為你提到的隱私的含義(政府追蹤),可以説,是你、我甚至那些科技巨頭都無法控制的.

另外,在互聯網上沒有隱私.

我很反感那些抱怨沒有隱私的人.是他們為了獲得利益從而不加考慮地自願把隱私交給他人,結果天天喊着這個隱私,那個隱私.如果有人想要快速打車去工作或更便宜的機票,那他就必須自動地把隱私交出去,因為這是一種權衡.這是一個交易:你就是產品.互聯網是一個偉大的系統,因為它遵循這樣的原則:我們,即用户,提供巨大的數據信息.如果沒有我們,那谷歌的處境就會很糟糕

還有一件事:為什麼所有關於互聯網隱私的討論都要提及智能音箱偷聽人們的聲音?什麼,你的客廳或卧室裏有了麥克風,這是個問題嗎?是誰先放的?你.更重要的是,我敢打賭,在人們使用谷歌搜索或Facebook的頻率要遠遠多於智能音箱,但這顯然是可以接受的,因為相較於隱私,你更需要谷歌或Facebook.

Dan Tynan, I have been living on the Interwebs for many many years now…

No, but it was coughing up blood last night.

Internet privacy is as dead as you want it to be. If you don’t share your information on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, Tumblr, Quora, et al, you stand a much better chance of retaining some notion of privacy.

It also helps if you don’t use your legal name online, mask your IP address using a VPN or TOR server, turn your phone off when you’re not using it, and turn location data off on all services. You probably also shouldn’t shop at Amazon, use any Google services, or talk to any Amazon Alexa or Google Assistant or Apple Home gadgets.

This won’t stop the NSA from tapping your overseas calls or the FBI from knocking on your door and requesting all your records from your bank, employer, etc., assuming they can persuade a judge to let them. But it will thwart private companies from hoovering up your information, building a profile of you, and running it against AI models to predict what you’re likely to buy, say, think, or do.

互聯網中還是存在隱私的,只不過所剩不多.

如果你不在Facebook、Twitter、Instagram、Snapchat、Pinterest、Tumblr、Quora等網站上分享你的信息,你就還有可能保留一些隱私.

如果你在網上不使用你的真實姓名、使用VPN或TOR服務器屏蔽你的IP地址、不使用手機時關機、關閉所有服務上的定位,這也會有幫助.你也許也不能在亞馬遜購物,使用任何谷歌服務,或使用亞馬遜Alexa或谷歌助手或蘋果家用設備進行交流.

如果能説服法官,國安局依舊可以竊聽你的電話,或者聯邦調查局上門調查,要求銀行、僱主等提供你的所有記錄,.但以上方法可以阻止私人公司獲取你的信息、建立你的個人資料、以及利用人工智能模型來預測你可能會買什麼、説什麼、想什麼或做什麼.

Steven Arbitman, I may not know who I am, but I don’’t want anyone else to know either.

No, internet privacy is not quite dead, but you must be careful and knowledgeable.

You can still browse the web, provided you use a non-tracking search engine like Duck Duck Go. You can still visit websites provided you use an ad-blocker program like Noscxt. 

Do not ever login anywhere, especially into Google (including Gmail and YouTube), and Facebook. All social networking is public, including Quora, so know what you are getting into ahead of time.

Also never carry a cell phone. Or keep it with the battery removed and make all calls (when you do use it) using the Signal app.

Always have good anti-virus software, use a VPN, and maybe Tor and Tails.

You can be private online, but it takes work, and just making the effort may bring you to the attention of the NSA. They say that all encrypted conversations are saved forever, in case some day they can be decrypted. 

The current situation is an electronic arms race, with the government increasing its spying activities as much as possible and the privacy advocates creating new technologies as quickly as possible to counter the spying.

Since you are correct that apparently most people don’’t care, and our “representatives” are supporting the government instead of the people, it is important that those of us who do care make it our business to continue this arms race in favor of privacy. Learning to use the available privacy tools takes work. Look into those tools I have named.

互聯網中還是存在隱私的,但前提是你必須謹慎並且懂得一些知識.

如果你使用像Duck Duck Go這樣的非跟蹤搜索引擎或者像Noscxt這樣的廣告攔截軟件,你仍然可以瀏覽網頁.

不要在任何地方登錄賬號,尤其是谷歌(包括Gmail和YouTube)和Facebook.所有的社交網絡都是公開的,包括Quora,所以要提前瞭解你進入的網站.

也不要帶手機.或者把電池摳掉,用Signal應用撥打電話(當你使用它時)

總是使用優秀的殺毒軟件,或使用VPN,比如Tor和Tails.

你可以在網上保持隱私,但這有點麻煩,而且只要你這樣做,就可能引起美國國家安全局的注意.他們表示永久保存所有加密的對話,因為將來某一天或許會被解密.

目前就是一場電子軍備競賽,政府儘可能地增加其間諜活動,隱私倡導者儘快創造新技術來對抗間諜活動.

確實你是對的,很明顯大多數人並不重視他們的隱私,而我們的"代表”支持的是政府而不是人民,因此我們這些重視隱私的人應該把繼續把這場軍備競賽作為我們的事業.學會使用隱私保護工具.仔細看看我提到的那些工具.

原創翻譯：龍騰網 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻譯：偷吃月亮的狗 轉載請註明出處

Bob Anderson, Advocate for digital privacy for over 25 years

The internet has been at the center of a staggering social transformation over the last 30 years, and the single most amazing part is that few have noticed how severely it has mutated privacy norms.

If you wanted to communicate something to someone in 1988, you could call them on the phone or write them a letter. Both forms of communication enjoyed strong legal privacy protections.

All of that is now history. The internet, GPS and mobile phone technology have changed the entire game, and lawmakers have been virtually silent on the topic of protecting people’s digital privacy.

Ask yourself these simple questions…

It’s illegal to wiretap people’s phones, so why don’t we have the same laws to protect their VoIP calls? (things such as Skype, for example).

It’s illegal to intercept and open people’s physical first-class mail, so why don’t we have the same laws to protect their email?

It’s illegal to place bugs in people’s homes, so why don’t we have laws that tightly regulate what systems such as Alexa, Siri or Cortana can transmit back to their respective companies for permanent archiving?

Although it’s legal to watch people or photograph/film them in public, it’s illegal to stalk them from place to place. So why don’t we have laws to prevent facial recognition technology from being used across networked video surveillance systems from doing exactly that: stalking everyone they see, identifying them.

It’s also illegal to stalk people physically, so why don’t we have laws to tightly restrict digital stalking by the collection of GPS data from people’s phones? This is being done on a massive scale, and used to analyze not only where you go, but also who you are with (by matching up GPS tracks).

Think about it folks… We have strong laws to protect the physical implementation of these things, but virtually no protection now that it can all be done digitally.

The digital world is a vital representation of the physical one; it deserves exactly the same legal protections. Probably more.

在過去的30年裏,互聯網一直處於一場驚人的社會變革的中心,而最令人驚訝的是,幾乎沒有人注意到它是如何嚴重地改變了隱私規範.

如果你在1988年想和某人交流,你可以給他們打電話或寫信.這兩種交流方式都受到了強大的法律隱私保護.

而現在所有這些都成為了歷史.互聯網、全球定位系統和移動電話技術改變了所有,議員們在保護人們互聯網隱私的話題上幾乎一直保持沉默.

問問自己這些簡單的問題……

竊聽別人的電話是違法的,那麼我們為什麼沒有類似的法律來保護人們的VoIP通話呢?(比如Skype).

攔截和打開人們的郵件是違法的,那我們為什麼沒有法律來保護人們的郵件呢?

在人們家中放置竊聽器是違法的,那為什麼我們沒有法律來嚴格規定像Alexa、Siri或Cortana這樣的軟件可以將哪些信息傳輸回各自的公司進行永久存檔呢?

雖然在公共場合觀察他人或拍攝他們是合法的,但跟蹤他們從一個地方到另一個地方是非法的.那麼,為什麼我們沒有法律來阻止面部識別技術在網絡視頻監控系統中的應用呢?它的作用是:跟蹤看到的每一個人,識別他們的身份.

現實中跟蹤別人也是違法的,那為什麼沒有法律來嚴格限制通過收集人們手機上的GPS數據來進行數字跟蹤呢?這是大規模的跟蹤,不僅可以分析你去哪裏,還可以分析你和誰在一起(通過匹配GPS軌跡).

想想看,現實中我們有強大的法律來保護這些隱私,但現在在網絡世界幾乎什麼都沒有.

數字世界也是現實世界的一部分;理應得到完全相同的法律保護.或許更多.