this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2024
1001 points (95.1% liked)

linuxmemes

21281 readers
1138 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

  • Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
     
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    First, when you get into these arguments, always start from the viewpoint that these people do not see any worth in their data. Their convenience is worth way more than any privacy breach. That's why your goal is usually to convince them that privacy breaches can be a huge innconvenience for them, use their selfishness to advocate for their self-interest.

    Quick example, what defines something that needs to be hidden changes constantly with different governments and regulatory bodies. There's no telling if your current data won't be illegal or something in the future, causing you problems. That's why it's important to have protections for your data to begin with so a future government can't just unilaterally decide to trample all over your rights.

    Basically, see what they care about and try advocating from that viewpoint, not your personal viewpoint. There's a good chance you'll have a line of argument.

    I find that I have more success convincing people if I put their self-interest first and foremost instead of trying to explain some grand ideology. People want something tangible, not a hazy ideal. It's only when something affects them that they may change their views.