Hi /g/, I don't know if you can console me or something,

I mean, I've taped my webcam and I don't do those buzzfeed tests for companies, but I know none of this matters. I can use facebook and report my location, it doesn't matter because I'm just one and the system works for all, they are collecting all of what my friends do. I could move to the forest and forget about my online life, but that doesn't change the fact that it's happening.

The other day I saw a video on youtube recs of a guy saying we should disconnect more and live life offline and outdoors. I wondered if that was aimed at me (and plenty of other people) to eject useless people out and diminish their reach.

The worst is that you are manipulated and you don't even have the tools to know that you are being manipulated. I'm positive they can make people kill themselves if only by showing depressive shit all day. You may say you'd quit facebook before any of that effect you, and you would be right in the first time, until the algorythm improves itself and become more subtle, on the limit of keeping you hooked and destroying your life.

Nah, you're fucked already kiddo.

Nah its pretty much useless desu senpai.

Use a VPN, Ghostery, shit like that. Don't go full Stallman there is no winning, the botnet is hardware level now, but at least you can confuse the trackers a bit.

>>57074033
>>57074044
Shit man, you were supposed to make me feel better.

I personally don't even care much about my own safety at this point, I don't intend to do anything weird enough to get me in trouble, I guess I could use vpn and confuse them a bit, but what for? I would like to hear something that could actually change this scenario somehow, but seems the battle is lost.

>>57074223

Sorry. I work in the space. When you try to "hide" you're just exposing more about your demographic. It's the little things that tip off the big data markets.

>>57074252
Game over.

I wish the world would end already.

I'm really not tech savvy, but is there a way to run random/arbitrary bots that could give them meaningless data, wrong associations, mistaken paths, as if it was a user going completely nuts online? Would that change anything? Could an army of hackers try something like this out? Gee I don't know.

>>57074359
Bots tend to be pretty predictable. And randomness isn't a human behavior. It's easy to tell what's automated and what isn't. It's possible, but it's hard.

>>57075724
If people put as much energy into subverting the surveillance system as those who enrich it, I could imagine ideas like intelligently programmed bots actually being able to be used effectively. Like a resistance of sorts.

>>57076380
Eh. I think it's become a resource game. Billion dollar companies vs rouge botnets. It's a valuable industry, but there's a side that is very clearly winning. I used to play around on the other side, but they catch you before you can execute.

https://tails.boum.org/

>>57076537
Except they know you're using tails. They know your IP, and the other sites that IP has used. You're not secure, unless you're always secure. And even then, if the other people in your demographic aren't, they already know enough about you to tag and analyze your behavior.

The issue with people touting these secure platforms is that nobody using them correctly, or entirely. Which is a gaping security hole in itself.

>>57074223
By that, he meant that Intel and AMD processors are backdoored since something like ~2006 and ~2011 respectively. If you're not doing illegal stuff (sorry, I know this makes me sound like a huge normie) then there shouldn't be anything to worry about. There are OS', web browsers and programs made from entirely FOSS, and you don't have to use google, facebook etc. I use startpage and ixquick, and have a protonmail email account. Some people run their own email server at home to be 100% sure nobody else is reading them

Privacy is alive and well since giving it up is completely optional. Even if I did use services like Google, the information that could be gathered from me would be pretty useless to anybody wanting to sell me something or make a profile of me. Stick to the basic safety rules - don't give out your real name or address, don't tell people the places you frequent or where you work etc.

The internet is just a way of sharing information, Facebook and the other mainstream sites might be hugely popular but there's nothing stopping you or me from hosting our own sites.

>>57073168
>My worst fear is that they can cross all that data and actually change the "landscape" of opinions.
This will happen, don't worry because there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop it. In fact they'll probably account for people like you and adjust accordingly. There's nothing to fear my child, you won't even realize how shameless the manipulation is in the future.

>>57076733
Not even close to what I meant.

Privacy is dead. You're welcome to believe otherwise, but about 70% of sites use some sort of tracking or analytics system. Which track your behavior across sites. Google, Facebook, and all the other companies people fear buy this data.

Assuming because you use some obscure site that claims it's secure doesn't make you secure. They're just forwarding that data on. Most of the big companies own all of the small companies you trust.

All of your data is out there, we know who you are. glhf.

>>57073168
https://ssd.eff.org

>>57076733
>there's nothing stopping you or me from hosting our own sites.
But there is if I want to start a business and compete with a bigger company, if my project is in someway not well seeing by the government and so on. It's not they will close my ridiculously small site, but I don't have any chance of expanding it because no one would be able to google it. And if I did, they would tune in their shit to draw people away from it. And if that didn't work and I still were able to grow, they would launch a similar platform that would somehow make mine unnecessary. And if that didn't work, then they would shut my website down with the help of some legal distortion.