Can sleep. Clowns will eat me.
I liken these comments to the discussions I sometimes have at work. Explaining the intangible hidden costs of a bad security or DR decision is tough. Everyone tends to frame unfamiliar situations into ones that aren’t. This logical fallacy is what gets people into trouble and I’m as guilty of it as everyone else. I know that someone who spends a lot more time in psychology can school me on at least five things I’ve gotten wrong in my last statement. Yet it’s an observation I’ll stand-by. Why? It’s what I know. (I also know *THAT* and try to use that bit of insight to try and properly weigh my own conclusions against expert facts presented to me.) The thing is that there’s a highly vocal kneejerk reaction to extremes on both sides of the privacy argument. Both tend to, in a rush to out shout the other, be misinformed, argumentative, or simply wrong. The issue is that, generally, people don’t understand just how valuable their data is. The sort of information that a lot of people think nothing of sharing is absolute gold. To those who think this isn’t important: why is Facebook so valuable?
Even if you don’t have an account FB already has one for you, based on data (metadata is probably more misused than the word ‘cyber’), and as soon as you sign up it’s linked back to you. On almost every site that renders a FB button widget of some sort, that’s a data point for them. I don’t need a name to track you and ultimately it’s rarely important. All I need is a unique identification method. That’s what this is and don’t forget that countless times throughout history lists like this have determined who was put up against a wall. Before it was someone pointing a finger at you now I can just start running MapReduce queries against massive datasets and select millions for anything I want.