How Privacy Changed

4 sept. 2020
188 024 Vues

What's really going on when Mark Zuckerberg reads your DMs?
Go to for 15% off your order! Brought to you by Raycon.
We all know our privacy is constantly being invaded by our internet overlords. But what does privacy mean in the first place? Let's find out in this Wisecrack Edition on Why Privacy Matters.

Subscribe to Wisecrack! ►
Support us on Patreon! ►
Big Data Was a Mistake ►
The Internet was a Mistake ►

=== Watch More Episodes! ===
Who is the Law? ROBOCOP vs JUDGE DREDD ►
How SPONGEBOB Raised a Generation ►
Eric Andre: Humanity is Gross ►
The Man Behind Starship Troopers and Showgirls ►
The Trouble with Political Predictions ►
Anti-Maskers: What Went Wrong? ►

Store ...........
Twitter .........
Facebook ....

Written by: Myles McDonough
Hosted by: Michael Burns
Directed by: Michael Luxemburg
Wisecrack Edition Title Card Design: Amanda Murphy
Motion Graphics by: Riley A
Original Illustrations by: JR Fleming
Editing and Additional Animation by: Brian M Kim
Produced by: Evan Yee

#markzuckerberg #bigbrother #privacy

© 2020 Wisecrack / Omnia Media, Inc.

  • Fahrenheit 451

    100101mint mint101001100101mint mint101001Il y a 21 heure
  • I’m taking Surveillance Society for my CRJ degree. Expect it to get worse, and be careful. Peace.

    J LupusJ LupusIl y a 7 jours
  • I'm listening to this on Raycons. Very nice.

    Alex J BrimmerAlex J BrimmerIl y a 10 jours
  • me *See the video title *Goes to incognito mode to watch it *Wonders if it's safe at all🙄 . . . . That's how I met NordVPN

    Mad SciMad SciIl y a 17 jours
  • I think we should force companies to change their privacy policies the same way we all made a movie production company change the character design of Sonic. We have the power to change the world and more of us have to realize that.

    QuietDude95QuietDude95Il y a 19 jours
  • Excellent video

    Jeromy ShaldJeromy ShaldIl y a 26 jours
  • Well, this all makes the laughable assumption that liberal "democracies" are places where the people govern themselves. They aren't, they never were, they never can be, and they were never even supposed to be. Society needs some radical rebuilding to get rid of the contradictions mentioned in this video.

    farts of doomfarts of doomIl y a 26 jours
  • How about having social apps but not publishing EVERY SINGLE DETAIL OF OUR LIVES? How about not having the god damned GPS on all the time and actually have a conversation with the person in the room and meeting in real life? I mean, Aristotle talked about balance people!!

    Abril HerreraAbril HerreraIl y a mois
  • A society that has freedom and privacy is always going to have those who abuse said freedoms. Doesn't mean it should be taken from society

    Mitchell LerichMitchell LerichIl y a mois
  • Balancing personal privacy with societal protections from damages done by individuals requires an anonymized oversight technology which flags deleterious activities to be sent to authorities while deleting harmless, sensitive personal information.

    Giordano BrunoGiordano BrunoIl y a mois
  • Data is more valuable then oil right now. As long is that is the case and we live under capitalism, the fight for privacy is not one we are likely to win. In order to have true democracy, there has to be political equity. Meaning that every vote counts the same, but also that every individual has the same amount of political influence. You cannot have political equity without economic equity. A state without privacy will drift away from true democracy even faster. If you have not seen "the great hack" on netflix, i should explain. Big data collection has led to the rise of companies that use targeted news feeds and such to manipulate swing voters through what is called microtargeting. They make psychological and political profiles of every person in a country and based on that data choose targets to manipulate into voting how they want. This mass manipulation of citizens through what is basically cyberwarfare has been called "weapons grade". Meaning that it should be considered an act of war. This particular company called cambridge analytica boasts amongst its successes the trump campaign and Brexit. But more impressively they have rendered paid for services to help over 17 fascist regimes get voted into power over a 2 year period. They got really rich doing it. It's all connected and it all exists in order to make money, to use that to gain power, to use that to make money. And Data is the big way to do that right now. You can't take that down with small measures and by making people disclose how shitty they are acting because the system is already in place and it will not stop. Because capitalism.

    Evelien HeerensEvelien HeerensIl y a mois
  • Are you our new Jared? :(

    Mariya DimitrovaMariya DimitrovaIl y a mois
  • you can write it as oikos but u pronounce it ekos like saying hE shE Economy

    IceramanIceramanIl y a mois
  • Love these Wisecrack videos. Hate the lying ads about Christy Smith.

    Kimberly Moraes WalkerKimberly Moraes WalkerIl y a mois
  • In order to understand privacy you must understand its roots in responsibility and individualism. If you cannot be responsible you cannot have privacy, ownership, individualism, and authority. They are all interdependent upon each other. -Responsibility is not a reaction and does not come from the involuntary-intelligence side of ourselves / (the subconscious). -Responsibility can only be gained through voluntarily taking upon yourself the action of doing something or the failing to do something you should have done while you were conscious to make the right decisions. Q: Do you think that we are responsible for our actions? Being responsible for our actions means governing yourself, ownership of your own life, and authority over yourself. Responsibility is ownership and authority. Responsibility is a choice that can only be made voluntarily by the individual. If you fail to make the choice to govern yourself then an external-government will sometimes try to help you or contain you so you do not endanger yourself or others. You lose ownership, authority, and responsibility to the external governing of others. Your parents had to govern you until you did it yourself. Your government has the responsibility to control dangerous criminals because that person doesn't do it themselves. Religion tries to govern those who follow their teachings. But ultimately the individual should take responsibility for everything they are today and govern themselves according to living a happy life while allowing other people to the same. When we blame others what we are actually doing is giving them responsibility over that part of ourselves. We loose ownership and authority and become prisoners and victims to them. But if we take the blame we then own that situation and have authority over it. When you drive a vehicle you are in control. You have taken responsibility and own that situation. You have the authority to create or destroy as you see fit. You have true freedom. The same goes for all your actions. But if you destroy or interfere with others trying to live a happy life also then it is likely that someone will start governing your actions for you. Responsibility is taken. You can try to force others to take responsibility but it never works. They must do it themselves upon their own judgement and free-will. If a person doesn't see a reason to do something they won't do it. Understanding creates hope. Confusion creates fear. Each can be a motivation to act. But only hope gives a lasting good result to empower the individual to govern themselves correctly.

    Grue FeathermoonGrue FeathermoonIl y a mois
  • I think the lack of diversity is hurting this channel. I really miss Greg, not just as the Thug Notes guy, but as a MEMBER of YOUR TEAM. These deep-dive style videos are amazing, but I can’t help but feel, as a black person, that I want a black person to tell me things. We are critically underrepresented in the philosophical/scientific communities and I think a channel like Wisecrack, which used to have some level of ostensible inclusion, would benefit greatly and be able to put their money where their mouth is on issues. Just because you got Helen to talk about women’s rights doesn’t mean you actually did anything.

    LingonberrychutneyLingonberrychutneyIl y a mois
  • If you still don't know AlvaChat, you are at risk already ⚠️ . No promo, use your discretion 👉

    vdo provdo proIl y a mois
  • Honestly, the way this video is edited reminds the times you find a really beautiful porn, but then for some reason they show a guy's face so close up and for so long, you can count every hair in his mustache.

    DrZZZeeDrZZZeeIl y a mois
  • Could you please pull the camera away from yourself at least a little bit? Feels like every couple minutes your sudden giant face invades my private spa.... wait, was it deliberate???

    DrZZZeeDrZZZeeIl y a mois
  • He's Pickle Mick!

    demdemIl y a mois
  • What's a "tick tock" ?

    AMD phoneAMD phoneIl y a mois
  • nobody have privacy nowadays for as long as u got a phone, a pc etc... ur government and major firms are constantly watching u

    Abel LAbel LIl y a mois
  • Lady at 6:59 does not know how to guitar and it hurts my brain

    Jeff HarteJeff HarteIl y a mois

    Akash ChopraAkash ChopraIl y a mois
  • We are fucked. That's the state of things. Our society is morally decrepit and our schools pump out morons so it's no surprise that when the President rightly wants to ban tik tok because China is completely untrustworthy people throw a fit because they'll have to find some other vehicle for internet likes.

    Hermaeus MoraHermaeus MoraIl y a mois
  • In Jefferson's third term as president he changed the Declaration of Independence from the words of John Lott (Life, liberty, and property) to (Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.) I think that change had an effect on the people's right to privacy. It's hard to be sure because current interpretations of how the people of that time interpreted the definitions of these words are becoming a bit eccentric and esoteric.

    dystopian dissidentdystopian dissidentIl y a mois
    • Nice. I was able to sound, pretentious, pompous, and priggish in two paragraphs.

      dystopian dissidentdystopian dissidentIl y a mois
  • When america declared "Clean network" alliance, i spit my coffee out laughing.

    mrlassotoolmrlassotoolIl y a mois
  • Fk raycon ear buds!!

    Admiral DAdmiral DIl y a mois
  • We live in a twilight world

    Obi Wan KenobiObi Wan KenobiIl y a mois
  • Ain’t raycon, ray-j’s business?

    WesdonWesdonIl y a mois
  • Was that...Paul John Adams?

    BisquickBisquickIl y a mois
  • Everyone watch this video and share it along it shares important info regarding Covid-19

    The TruthThe TruthIl y a mois
  • I am failing to see the inversion from 9:53-10:13 both examples are about women not being included in the decision making process. What am I missing?

    1 !1 !Il y a mois
  • In a post-democracy, there is no privacy. sure, nobody cares about your eating habits. but what you buy, who you vote for, and your medical record - that you have to share to exist.

    Chris AChris AIl y a mois
  • What’s privacy?

    Def ProofDef ProofIl y a mois
  • 10:04 That's easy. Watch both

    UltimantisUltimantisIl y a mois
  • Privacy for the sake of "security".

    Doug FryDoug FryIl y a mois
  • I treat privacy the same way as everything else, by following the Golden Rule, treat others the way you want others to treat yourself. If the government wants to abolish privacy in the name of security, it must be prepared to apply the same rule to itself, this way any corruption or mismanagement within the government has no way to hide & thus the people can punish the government if necessary. Proponents of privacy must be willing to take this both ways also, if they want to keep secrets from the gornment, they can't be mad if the government in turn keep secrets from them. Whether those secrets are bad or for the good.

    ThinkerThinkerIl y a mois
  • Doesn't matter whether you want privacy or not. Privacy never meant anything to begin with. Unless you hole yourself off somewhere nobody could ever find, someone will always be able to see you without you seeing them.

    Joshua ErridgeJoshua ErridgeIl y a mois
  • What a lost opportunity to feature VPN Shark as a sponsor :D PD @wisecrack: It would be nice (and thorough) of you to include your sources in the description. Loving your content tho!

    Paul HillPaul HillIl y a mois
  • Privacy. What a concept! Lol!

    Brenda B.Brenda B.Il y a mois
  • I try to combat my invasion of privacy by searching for stuff i have no interest in and searching for messed up stuff: I am I planning an anniversary dinner with my wife or am I trying to kill her?

    Doug HarrisDoug HarrisIl y a mois
  • does anyone else feel violated by the number of raycon ads they get? PS: Ray Jay, you stole the "beats" by Dre logo

    Patrick AndersonPatrick AndersonIl y a mois
  • looking back isn't the answer. we need to ask the right question, which is "is the internet a public, or a private place" this question still hasn't been answered.

    LuciferLuciferIl y a mois
  • XKCD did a comic on this subject and resolved the situation in less words then every prior thinker combined. Basically: - Privacy is a meaningless phrase and always has been. - Its not like anyone has anything worth hiding or worth finding anyway. - Privacy is imaginary but this bagel isn't and i'm hungry so go away.

    Wisdom PenWisdom PenIl y a mois
  • Ray J is really working double time for his company, I’ve been seeing his company sponsoring so many videos

    masseiymasseiyIl y a mois
  • Violating privacy is violating unreasonable search and seizure and doing so without a warrant

    rick rossrick rossIl y a mois
    • That only applies to the government. The other problem is that when you voluntarily use Facebook/Google/Amazon/...... you agree to let them collect your data and do whatever they want with it.

      Doug HarrisDoug HarrisIl y a mois
  • Really not agreeing with this take.

    Michael PoormanMichael PoormanIl y a mois
  • I have 3 areas I want to protect my privacy from: - Employees - I don't want to lose opportunity to earn money or get fired because of my political views or hobbies. - Family - there's no way to restart relationships with them. I have hobbies that some members of my family might find childish and their political views oppose mine. There's no need to break family over that if privacy allows me to get both. - Government - again, political views. As long as my data doesn't reach directly or indirectly those 3, I don't care who gets it because for them I'm a number at worst and nobody in the crowd at best.

    GnidelGnidelIl y a mois
  • One of the most interesting videos you've done so far, and all you've done is really interesting. Brian K. Vaughan writes in the graphic novel "Private Eye" that the end of the world would come the day browsers history come public. I completely agree to that idea.

    Pablo AndreuPablo AndreuIl y a mois
  • 🤡🌎

    Lost all hopeLost all hopeIl y a mois
  • Video on privacy. Advertises privacy infringing earbuds. My thoughts on privacy are not that it is an unambiguous good, but rather that it is necessary so that governments don't just strike down dissidents.

    John UndefinedJohn UndefinedIl y a mois
  • Ooo that first joke got me boiling

    Bryson FisherBryson FisherIl y a mois
  • Just because you tell a company to remove your public profile, doesn't mean they'll delete the data contained in it as well. Just saying, not gonna happen. *Once it's on the net,* _it will remain forever on the net..._

    SmallTownGamerSmallTownGamerIl y a mois
  • I vastly prefer Jared's genuine dead-pan to Michael's feigned over-excitement.

    Scott KScott KIl y a mois
  • I'm not sure that giving up data would limit my ability to become a fully functioning adult. I don't feel that what they use it for, in any way, keeps me from experimenting with who I am. There is no threat of public scrutiny or humilation. I'm not sure if losing this kind of privacy results in not actualizing personal subjectivity. If they post my search history on Twitter, then yes, that could have an effect it but corporations analyzing it in "private" doesn't really, imo.

    Crispy PicklesCrispy PicklesIl y a mois
  • The problem doesn't necessarily lie with data collection itself. By having a free service, we exchange our data. This business model is fair since the companies offer the service cannot do so without a means of remuneration for the services the rendered to their users. The problem is what the data is used for and how much centralized power exists. In the ideal world of free markets, we could pressure these companies not to do questionable things with our data, such as political campaign targeting (see Cambridge Analytica). This issue is that by definition, to have a large social network, we centralize gathering on the same platform which ultimately gives it much power. This becomes a feedback loop which synthesizes a single platform ran by a single company or few companies who have the capability to do as they please with our data. How? They give an implicit ultimatum: 'give us your data or leave the platform'. This effectively forces us to distance ourselves from the already valuable services and information economy of a social network or any other content rich platform. Changing platforms is not as easy since the content ecosystem is not as rich as Facebook or Instagram or FRworld. This leads to multiple problems where we wish to have a rich content ecosystem while still regulating the data economy. Once again, the issue isn't with data collection, it is with the asymmetric power dynamics. Even if we had to leave all the data processing to algorithms, we still have an issue with the bias that exists in them (see Algorithm Bias in the Computer Science literature). Furthermore, how effective are we at lobbying the companies that control these data when say, the highest bidder (not necessarily ethical), seeks our data? Cambridge Analytica is a dark reminder of how effective data collection is. We can even look to China where censorship can be done through the use of data. By involving governments we gain the benefit of security but lose the privacy of individuality. Who is to say the government in power will not use this data to begin targeting and silencing dissenters? If there is an explicit protocol for which governmental and corporate abuses are mitigated while maintaining the benefits of security and value exchange, then data collection is not that big of a deal. The feasibility of this constrained optimization will ultimately move the debate forward. What 'value exchange'? If we use free services, and refuse to pay a premium, then we ought to exchange something of value. In the premium model, our direct compensation is grounds for full privacy as we are paying for the service. To keep the service running, we may need to pay $1000.00 per year, which is nothing compare to server costs. If we decide to pay this hypothetical figure netted by the number of paying consumers, the value is direct and thus grounds for dismissing the data collection for that direct compensation. If we refuse to pay the premium, how else do we pay? With another means of value. Which is? Data! Why? Data collection is necessary for advertisers who wish to target their audiences. Here we establish an indirect method of compensation. In this situation, the platform receives value for the services rendered, we get the service for free and the advertiser boosts their conversion by accessing the consumers they are designed for. Everyone wins, right? Well, it is not that easy. Targeted advertising is its own can of worms. Are you using my data to optimize my life or make me consume more at my expense? What about the advertisers who are manipulating and using my mental profile against me - Cambridge Analytica et al.? Does the platform has the incentive to protect what it does with my data if there is a high bidder? Furthermore, the lack of privacy does make it easier for algorithms to detect 'dissenters'. If we have social discourse against the platform, would it allow this discussion to be free? What about at the state level, referring back to government surveillance? These are interesting questions. There are still many more to consider. There is nothing wrong with data collection as a means of value exchange. It becomes problematic when the profiling becomes a weapon by advertisers or political candidates. Target advertising works only if I am being nudged with utility. Who is to decide what is good for me? The algorithm? It has an incentive to make as much money as possible off of me by keeping me on the platform to produce more valuable data (see Tristan Harris and the 'slot machine of social media'). Would that not be a conflict of interest given that it has a psychological profile of me due to the treasure trove of data I give it? Rinse and repeat for politics. Who is being favored here - the advertiser or me, the government or me, the data broker or me? Is it a fair balance of power or can by profile be used against me since it lacks privacy to these algorithms? There are many more questions and further discussions on this matter. Like with many things, this is a grey area. Privacy, security and value need to be balanced carefully in this information economy.

    ant0n _xpant0n _xpIl y a mois
  • Where is Jerry?

    marco antinomarco antinoIl y a mois
  • At 10:10 - I mean, one is 13 episodes (and maybe a movie mixed in); the other is 80-ish episodes (depending on how you count them), a handful of movies and a spinoff series that could be included too... Not really apples to apples here. (Besides, unless you're binging, why not just do one (series) then the other?)

    Jeremy OwensJeremy OwensIl y a mois
  • Just a small tip from a Greek; 'Oikos' is actually pronounced 'Eekos' (the 'O' is not taken into account)

    TheMoviesCultTheMoviesCultIl y a mois
  • I just noticed the gradual rocking back and forth of the graphics for the first time and now I can't unsee it.

    OddballlOddballlIl y a mois
  • This dude in particular needs to stop talking politics. Ya'll mentioned Raciere a few times, but i dont think yall read the shit. frfr.

    Evan PayneEvan PayneIl y a mois
  • It’s eroding. If it’s ever the case that privacy is the cost of societal participation, we’ve reached a threshold where regulation is necessary to preserve privacy

    SerDaveOfRindyarSerDaveOfRindyarIl y a mois
  • I thought this show was sponsored by raid shadow legends

    Khaled AKhaled AIl y a mois
  • Private companies can take my privacy. I give it to them. And sign off on it. The gov't should not. That's the just of American thought. Apple. Ok. NSA. Not Ok. And companies shouldn't hand it over either.

    KC MichelsonKC MichelsonIl y a mois
  • Facebook is bad Ummmkay

    Essy ChilcutteEssy ChilcutteIl y a mois
  • good video...of course the feminist wants to get in your personal business and make everything political like an authoritarian...

    Poetical GorePoetical GoreIl y a mois
  • Those against privacy often use the flawed argument of "If you have nothing to hide you shouldn't you shouldn't need privacy." And then point to all sorts of criminal acts that could be "hidden with privacy". Those who push for social change have historically be oppressed as their ideas are not part of the current popular main stream. These groups often had to meet in secret to organize rallies, sit ins, and other various forms of protest. If their actions were public knowledge they would find it difficult to organize and lose support as often times people are afraid to stand up on their own but if they know others feel the same it can give them the courage to push for change. Authoritarian governments do away to privacy by using the very arguments of it being for the public good as it helps prevent crime as a smoke screen. Their real goal is to ensure no one speaks out about the current government and any who do are quickly silenced as a warning to others. Thus hoping to prevent any rebellious movements from gaining any traction.

    PyroMancer2kPyroMancer2kIl y a mois
  • I still don’t fully understand how situated selves are the starting point for democracy

    Benjamin ChenBenjamin ChenIl y a mois
    • I was with you until that point, at which you take a giant leap from privacy from corporations to privacy vs government surveillance. I’m not convinced that democracies necessitate privacy. Not that privacy is bad, just through that reasoning

      Benjamin ChenBenjamin ChenIl y a mois
  • Holy Fuck! Raycons! Thats what those furry little bitches are Julian, that are fucking me over.. Fuckin' Raycons!

    Kick DicksonKick DicksonIl y a mois
  • *Our* data

    BrainlightsBrainlightsIl y a mois
  • Great vid.

    iComment87iComment87Il y a mois
  • jerry arc in season 4

    Mask ToonMask ToonIl y a mois
  • Could i get paid. I mean I'm streaming my life 24/7 thanks to big brother. Were is my paycheck.

    Jorge ApolloJorge ApolloIl y a mois
  • I love that ending. As though we have any actual say in this.

    Rakinjo2Rakinjo2Il y a mois
  • I don't think anyone is against data collection in the abstract. Some amount of data collection is totally fine and necessary for certain services. I think people are opposed to intrusive and needless data collection. What counts as intrusive and needless varies with each app/service. And the real problem is that software vendors go to a lot of effort to obfuscate what data they are collecting. Software vendors can't be trusted to accurately report what they are doing. And without good information about what data is actually being collected by each service, the public can't make informed choices on which services to support. The only sollution I see here is a move in the direction of "free software". If it was illegal to sell or licence software without giving access to the source code for that software, then third party groups could do the job of determining what data is being collected and act to inform the public permitting us to make good decisions in this space. Without reliable third party sources of information and transparency, I don't see the sollution here. More abstractly, I'm making a value judgement here. I'm claiming that the privacy concerns of the public outweigh the privacy concerns of app/service developers when it comes to code. Do you agree/disagree?

    Nolan HartwickNolan HartwickIl y a mois
  • Wisecrack didn't cover the single BIGGEST reason we even have a problem with online privacy: companies aren't just taking your data for fun. They're doing it because it makes them BILLIONS of dollars and they don't compensate you in any way. As a collective, the data we create is priceless, but they're trying to convince you that you that they have a right to it for nothing. If there's no such thing as a free lunch, how come there's such a thing as free data that we have no control over giving if we want to keep up in an online world?

    Stephen AtwoodStephen AtwoodIl y a mois
  • how exactly is your ride share app tracking you without you using it? Location access is forbidden to inactive apps now on both Android and iOS. Or is that just lies from Apple and Google? Is Wisecrack buying into conspiracy theories now?

    V YV YIl y a mois
  • No offence to this dude. Or that chick. But no Jared narration just sounds weird.

    tigerkill420tigerkill420Il y a mois
  • I think that as society as a whole gets less judgmental, we’ll value our privacy less. B/c if there’s less blackmailable or other “shameful” activities we’re engaged w/ online, there’s less reason to keep them private. That said, is there inherent value to not feeling like you are being watched? Absolutely. But I understand government’s duty to keep us safe, which might mean re-assessing what we think of as our own private sphere.

    John BuckeyeJohn BuckeyeIl y a mois
  • So privacy is needed for an individual to thrive so they have autonomy and can think for themselves. However, agreeing to live in a society requires us to fork over an amount of privacy to get things like healthcare, plumbers, electricians. However, we don't have the education required to police ourselves. We not only give up our privacy, but our autonomy so average humans can have extreme amounts of power to do the thinking for us. Not only that, but those of us who disagree with it have no choice but to watch as human beings with too much power act like they are infallible.

    Jack NookJack NookIl y a mois
  • It’s heading to one world government , microchip implants , cryptocurrency will replace the dollar.

    Coyote BongwaterCoyote BongwaterIl y a mois
  • "Do we uninstall tik-tok???" Is that even a question?

    erubin100erubin100Il y a mois
  • I never use my likeness on line FB thinks I look like st. Benedict

    Robert PalumboRobert PalumboIl y a mois
  • 9:00 "We live in a society... ... and we society in a life." - Aristotle

    ][][Il y a mois
  • hey wisecrack! How about getting the African-American guy that you had doing the 'black history' which was sort of 'problemmatic' for a variety of reasons (no other plp of color on the channel? ) and give him a job doing what the other hosts do on your channel? Thanks ! Your videos make me feel smart.

    Should_A_ Sed_DisShould_A_ Sed_DisIl y a mois
  • The rights you give away now, will demand the blood of a future revolution to win back. 50 years into the future, surveillance and AI will be synonymous, imagine how that will be...

    Slowp0wSlowp0wIl y a mois
  • It would be fairly easy to move internet privacy tons more manageable level. We simply need to require companies to pay individuals for the use of their private data.

    Chris MurrillChris MurrillIl y a mois
  • 2:30 It is written as oikos but it is pronounced as ikos or ecos. It is the root for words like ecology (oikologia in greek), economy (oikonomia in greek), etc.

    Jim BellosJim BellosIl y a mois
  • Your videos have been so appropriate A quick escape that ties back into current day issues in an encouraging way. Thanks so much guys 🙏♥️

    UrBrainOnSportsUrBrainOnSportsIl y a mois
  • It’s pronounced e-cos not oy-cos. There is also an ancient quote about it, “τα εν οικω μη εν δημω” which means what happens in your house(oikos) should not get in public(dimos)

    Tom BachxoglouTom BachxoglouIl y a mois
  • Feminists only want privacy when it benefits themselves not others

    Rob StrRob StrIl y a mois
  • We care about privacy because we do trust our governments (for good reason).

    Francis Srečko FabianFrancis Srečko FabianIl y a mois
  • We don't really have a choice when it comes to giving up our data. If you want to be on the internet at all, it's a requirement.

    jlotus100jlotus100Il y a mois
  • Guys, dont buy Raycon earbuds. Its a ripoff

    Doc VaderDoc VaderIl y a mois
  • I don't have anything interesting going on on my life so who would give a rat's ass what I do?

    Águila701Águila701Il y a mois
  • The privacy is on a good level, the problem is that we have to give it away for work and education (at least in my case); fb is _de facto_ required for university and work. You have no Facebook and go to uni? Too bad, you won't get the quizzes and extra materials from the professors. You have no Facebook and go to work? Too bad, you won't be able to see your shifts on your own. It really blurries the line between your personal and professional lives. On the other hand privacy is sometimes taken for good reasons, who would board a plane that doesn't check the other passengers' bags at the gate?

    Eris SocratouEris SocratouIl y a mois
  • I had to have facebook for university. Now I have to have facebook for work. Damn I hate this world.

    Eris SocratouEris SocratouIl y a mois
  • such a shame the founding fathers could see the importance of privacy/personal stuff and all that jazz but couldnt imagine that the natives felt the same way.

    StoicSwordsmanStoicSwordsmanIl y a mois
  • Nowadays, one should decide for oneself if to exchange one's privacy for the services or not to. Nothing is for free.

    Jane EfremovaJane EfremovaIl y a mois