Serendipity35

Privacy is a cornerstone of personal freedom, yet its meaning and importance have evolved over centuries.

Aristotle viewed the public sphere, or polis, as the space where true freedom and civic life were possible. For him, public life was about participating in politics and achieving lasting accomplishments, while private life was more concerned with household affairs and personal needs. This distinction meant that privacy was often seen as secondary to public engagement, but it also laid the groundwork for later debates about the value of personal space and autonomy. Even the Romans also drew a line between public and private spheres. Public life was where individuals could gain honor and recognition, while private life was associated with family, home, and personal matters.   Fast-forward a millennium or two, and thinkers like Rousseau saw privacy as a retreat from the pressures of society—a necessary space for self-reflection and authenticity. Hannah Arendt later argued that privacy is essential for forming personal identity and exercising political rights.In 1890 Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis published in the Harvard Law Review an essay on the right to privacy By the early part of the 20th century, courts began interpreting the U.S. Constitution to protect an expansion of privacy to include personal freedom and dignity.

The history of privacy reveals that it has always been closely tied to personal liberty and the boundaries between the individual and society. From ancient debates about public and private life to modern legal protections, the concept of privacy has continually evolved in response to new challenges. Privacy remains a vital issue today, shaping debates about technology, freedom, and the rights of individuals in a rapidly changing world. As concerns escalated, privacy was recognized as a fundamental human right,  and laws and regulations were created to address the concerns caused by the spread of computers and data collection and storage.

Then came Edward Snowden.

The scale and scope of government surveillance was exposed. The global debate about privacy was joined with personal data security.  A full five years after surveillance and data collection concerns were exposed, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation claimed to set a new global standard for data protection and user rights.  Even California, with its trove of data-driven companies, took the GDPR seriously and enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act.

Personal data has become a valuable commodity in the digital economy. Companies collect, analyze, and sell user information to drive advertising, product development, and business strategies.

This shift has made privacy a key economic issue, as individuals must navigate the trade-offs between convenience and control over their data. 

As surveillance and data collection become more widespread, concerns about personal liberty and autonomy have grown. When every action can be tracked, individuals may feel less free to express themselves or make independent choices. These issues are at the heart of modern privacy debates, reminding us that protecting privacy is essential for maintaining freedom in a digital society. Privacy in the modern era is shaped by rapid technological change, new legal frameworks, and the growing power of data. As personal information becomes more valuable and vulnerable, understanding how privacy has evolved is crucial for protecting autonomy and freedom.

Privacy is not just a right of the past—it’s a challenge for the future. We all must stay vigilant and informed. Freedom depends on it.

My posts on the blog are about education and technology and often about where those two topics cross. It is rare for politics to enter these posts, but obviously,y politics plays a role in education and technology.

In this ever-crazier federal administration, we find that the Department of State has recently declared a move away from so-called "woke" fonts.

WTF does this mean? The translation of "woke" in this context is  "accessible." Apparently, Times New Roman is the preferred "unwoke" font. 

The US government has long provided a whole suite of accessibility recommendations for its agencies. These include accessible design and universal design. They're all under Section508.gov. This past summer. The website said, "Accessibility is about more than compliance with standards. It’s about developing solutions to meet the needs of all users, with and without disabilities. Universal design, a concept now widely used in the private sector, provides a path for federal agencies to shift to this broader focus."

In December 2025, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a formal directive to revert the Department’s official font from Calibri back to Times New Roman.

While the "woke" terminology comes largely from media headlines and social commentary describing the move, Rubio's official memo explicitly linked the font change to the administration's broader push to dismantle DEIA (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility) programs.

In a memo titled "Return to Tradition: Times New Roman 14-Point Font Required for All Department Paper," the Department argued that the previous switch to Calibri was a "wasteful" and "radical" initiative. Rubio stated the change was necessary to "restore decorum and professionalism" to official work products, arguing that Calibri was too "informal" and clashed with official letterheads.

The memo cited statistics showing that the number of accessibility remediation cases remained nearly identical before and after the change. A spokesperson stated the return to a serif font aligns with "President Trump’s One Voice for America’s Foreign Relations directive," emphasizing a unified, traditional image for the U.S. government.

More likely, the reverals has more to do with the fact that the Biden Administration in 2023 made the change because sans-serif fonts (Arial, Helvetica, Calibri et al) are generally easier for people with dyslexia or low vision to read on screens.

The current State Dept. labels the Biden change as a "wasteful DEIA program. Supporters of the reversal argue that government communications should look formal and authoritative, and that the previous administration's focus on "inclusive typography" was performative bureaucracy.

Critics (including disability advocates and typography experts) argue that the move ignores the technical benefits of sans-serif fonts for digital accessibility and that labeling a typeface as "woke" is an unnecessary politicization of basic office tools.

I care far less about what the default font might be, but I do care that in the time of war in the Ukraine, Israel and Gaza battles and other hotspots getting hotter around the globe, mass shootings, ICE raids on imigrants, and the U.S. economy continuing to fall, that the administration has the time and budget to care about fonts and reversing almost everything done by the previous aministration. 

 

Australia implemented a world-first nationwide ban on social media access for children under 16, effective December 10, 2025. The law, passed in November 2024 under the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill, requires major platforms to take "reasonable steps" to prevent users under 16 from creating or maintaining accounts. This includes age verification methods like behavioral inference (analyzing online activity), facial age estimation (e.g., via selfies), ID uploads, or linking bank details.

Millions of accounts are expected to be affected as companies, such as TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, YouTube, and X, face fines of up to $33M for serious or repeated noncompliance. The law places responsibility on companies rather than families, and platforms must demonstrate that they have taken “reasonable steps,” such as implementing age checks and removing suspected underage accounts.

The measure is cast as a child-protection and mental health safeguard, citing research showing 96% of 10- to 15-year-olds use social media, with many encountering harmful content, grooming, or cyberbullying. Critics say the law is difficult to enforce. It may even push teens onto harder-to-monitor platforms. Another criticism is that it may pose privacy risks.

Read the research from Australia used to create this ban
https://www.esafety.gov.au/research/the-online-experiences-of-children-in-australia/report-digital-use-and-risk-among-children-aged-10-to-15

Other countries have taken similar steps, such as strict youth modes or time limits.
https://studyinternational.com/news/countries-social-media-ban-children/

OpenAI, maker of the world’s most popular chatbot, ChatGPT, launched a web browser, Atlas, this week. Will it make surfing the Internet smarter?

Atlas is available only for computers that run Apple’s MacOS operating system. The company plans to introduce a version for Microsoft Windows and mobile operating systems, including Google’s Android and Apple’s iOS.

I tried it out on my iPad. It doesn't have a traditional address bar. You type the address into the chat window. That essentially removes competing search engines from the process. Google did something similar more than a decade ago with Chrome by integrating the browser and their search engine.

Atlas is very light on using your device's resources because all the heavy lifting is done in the cloud. 

The biggest criticism, or maybe it's a fear, that I've seen early on is that Atlas allows OpenAI to directly gather all user data that can train their future AI technologies. Microsoft (who clearly have a horse in this race) cautions that in exchange for this AI and lighter load, ChatGPT wants permission to watch and remember everything you do online. They say it "out-surveils even Google Chrome, and that’s saying something."

It not only keeps track of which websites you visit. It also stores “memories” of what you look at and do on those sites. It can even control your mouse and browse for you. It could complete an online order for you. (more on that tomorrow)

It is still early to evaluate whether Atlas’s AI capabilities outweigh its data gathering, but the privacy concerns are real and huge. Does OpenAI offer sufficient controls for managing what Atlas remembers? That's unclear. 

This has been the appeal of other browsers, especially DuckDuckGo, which emphasizes its privacy and is also a lighter browser than Chrome or Opera. (I consider Firefox to be somewhere between.) After all, your default browser is your entry point to almost all of your online surfing. (Yes, apps can bypass it.) But Duck Duck Go has a small percentage of the browser market.

Adding AI to browsers is not a new thing that OpenAI invented. Another lesser-known search engine, Perplexity, makes a browser called Comet. Google has added its Gemini bot to Chrome and will soon add "agent" capabilities that let AI do tasks for you, and Atlas has an“Ask ChatGPT” button that lets you chat with the bot about pages you’re viewing. You can ask it to summarize an article, analyze data, or revise your email draft.

OpenAI's response to concerns about privacy and data collection? So far, just a shrug.