The political process should represent the will of the people and find solutions that represent the will of the people. The free market is not necessarily the best solution because it is arguable that we don't really live in a free market; consumers aren't all that educated or rational. The problem is that companies will find ways to subvert their users into thinking privacy is not important. They already have a large captive audience and they can condition then to think as they please.
I do not share your faith in democracy :-) At best, the government represents the will of a voting majority and imposes it upon the rest of the population. So what you really have is minority rule.
Look at public funding for science, NASA budget, etc to see the "will of the people" in action on technical topics.
> consumers aren't all that educated or rational
Be that as it may, I would rather make decisions for myself than have them made on my behalf, "for my own good," by someone who doesn't know me and whom I will never meet.
An idealist to the end, eh? Without money to throw around, those forms of "participation" are - especially at the federal level - about as useful as earning participation trophies.
Less, even; since the latter at least get you free paperweights.
--
Besides which, arguing for them means you've effectively bought into class based discrimination, as many working poor wouldn't be able to afford anything but an email or letter. And if you think those form a reliable bedrock of democracy I'll stop humoring you as having anything useful to contribute to this discussion.
"...you've effectively bought into class based discrimination... And if you think..."
PS- That's actually pretty offensive. My friends worked on DREAM Act, expanding our local voting rights for Latinos (and everyone else), protections for sex workers, better conditions for migrant farm workers. I support as able (donations, petitions, warm body for hearings, etc). I see the effort involved AND their results. And, frankly, they're the only groups that are getting the job done these days. So I can't speak to what you think is and isn't possible. But maybe take a look around you, find your local heroes, lend a hand.
I encourage you to read the book The Waxman Report, to better understand how policy and legislation are forged. It's a lightweight, layperson intro. TLDR: It takes decades to research, build support, reach consensus. And then big changes apparently happen all at once.
People I know have been working on paid parental leave and domestic care legislation for EIGHTEEN YEARS. Last month, they were happy to report that their legislation was passed and signed.
Prior examples are marijuana legalization, marriage equality, background checks for gun purchases, education and healthcare for immigrant children. Etc.
--
What is privacy? What does it look like?
No one knows. There is no agreement. There is not even consensus on the questions, much less the answers. So imagining a technological solution (implementation) isn't even remotely possible.
This privacy policy stuff is wicked complicated. I've been working on voter privacy and protecting healthcare records since 2004. I'm still learning new things, causing me to revisit my positions.
And only now, some 12 years later, I've finally figured out what to ask for, a proposal on how to fix this mess.
Being the operative word. If you wish to pretend America's political process can approximate a hypothetical ideal on paper you're lying to yourself.
Until campaign finance regulations are back in place (the FECA amendments in the 70s would be a good starting point), until parties are wrested away from being the nigh-privatized dichotomy that led to the latest election's outcome, until the revolving door between government and the private sector is stopped, none of the rifts between that hypothetical and reality will be mended, because they are all symptoms of those key issues.
