You're actually suggesting that because it happens on phones it doesn't happen on computers? To me that's a very limited way of thinking. We even said earlier in the thread that Zuckerberg tapes over his own laptop camera:

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...phone-facebook

The list goes on:

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...acebook-google

Yes, the above article mentions Macs but Linux is not immure.

The EFF even sell laptop webcam stickers.

https://supporters.eff.org/shop/eff-sticker-pack

no. I am not suggesting that.
What I am suggesting is that whether or not people feel the need to cover the camera on their Linux laptops is a different topic to why modern operating systems were created to spy on people. And that whether some people don't care whether their webcam allows the world to see them naked is not the same as a CEO not wanting people to see a whiteboard full of corporate secrets.

Glad you found it interesting, and it most definitely has bearing on this thread as the technology is the same, only difference is the size of the device. Your webcam, security cam, nanny cam, cell phone cam, can very easily be used to spy on you; whether its video, audio, location, chat/text log, phone call list, app preferences etc...

Having a wifi connected or internet connected camera or microphone in the post Snowden/Assange world is just plain hazardous. Also, it does not matter what OS you are running its the hardware/device that is the problem. That's why the FSF used to pass these out at conferences: https://shop.fsf.org/stickers/antisu...ebcam-stickers

I highly recommend those stickers as they serve a dual purpose of blocking the damn camera and advertising for FSF.

PS: ever wonder why "we" were encouraged to ditch our point and shoots for smart phones with cameras? Funny how the progression is always from freedom towards tyranny and spying in the name of convenience, security, or any other catchphrase that makes us feel all warm and tidy at night.

Its not only about corporate secrets. What is the percentage of non CEO/Politician types using smartphones compared to CEO/Politician types? Its about mass/macro surveillance not micro surveillance.

I hope we have not lost track of the reason phones, tablets, laptops, and desktop computers come into the same conversation and appear to be confused at times: they are ALL computers. The distinctions between them are function and purpose. They share many vulnerabilites and features because they are all closely related. I do not think that any important purpose is serverd by picking nits on the common factors.

My point was that the fact smarty phones may be created as spy devices has no bearing upon whether somebody would or should cover thir laptop webcam. I wouldn't cover my laptop webcam if I were walking or driving somewhere I should not, for example, but I may well power off my phone and seek to put it in a faraday cage if I took it along at all.
Similarly, just because my phobe is pinpointing my location does not mean I need to cover my webcam.
Personally, my laptop is witness to so little that any "untellegence" gained from the webcam would be worthless. I suspect the same is tru for many people. This isn't "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" by the way, just an awareness that webcam surveillance has to capture something other than somebvody picking their nose to be useful.

Sometimes, depends on how parnoid I am. It isn't like I have anything to hide, they might even feel sorry for me after seeing my surroundings. It is just the thought of someone spying on me.

I absolutely "get" that. I don't like the ide of being spied upon either and, yes, go through periods when my behavior is more "anti-spying" than others.
I just feel that Tying Zuckerberg into some conspiracy theory about every device spying is not really in line with identifying what the actual risks are with not covering a webcam. Webcam may see passwords beng typed in, for example, and may be easier to subvert than the keyboard driver or X11.

The "conspiracy theory" ship sailed a long time ago when those theories were proven to be a fact. Why are you so adamant that the conversations/topics are not the same?

On this subject there is no answer that is right or wrong. What you do about your laptop camera depends upon your personal behavior and risk assessment. There is no point to criticizing the decision of someone who does not live the same life or with the same risks and information you live with.

It make as little sense, and is just as incorrect, to say "Anyone who covers their camera is a paranoid idiot" and it does to say "anyone who does not cover their camera is being stupid and ignoring the facts"! Both are the fallacy "if anyone does it differently than 'I' do they are wrong" that we should all have long since outgrown.

Because people cover laptop cameras and prevent the microphones from recording so that their information, passwords and the like, do not leak.
If some virtual panopticon does exist that's not why the likes of Zuckerberg cover their cameras. It makes actual, real-world-without-any-conspiracy-sense to cover a camera on a laptop in some circumstances. Whether or not you subscribe to the opinion that the likes of Gates and Zuckerberg are in some kind of conspiracy is irrelevant to that primary concern.
I wish to separate the topics because it is fact that covering a webcam is a good idea in certain circumstances but it is only speculation that spying is taking place in the ways mentioned above.
Everyone should be aware that a webcam, ought to be covered. Parents should be aware that their kids could be filmed, for example. That is a separate issue from our mistrust of technology and binding the two together makes it too easy for people to brand those covering webcams as paranoid.

It's not only speculation.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...internet-yahoo

https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/y...ry-proven-true

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...of-yahoo-users

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbin...chool_District

Methinks you doth protest too much.

You needn't worry about people drawing natural and obvious connections between CLOSELY related topics as part of a conversation on privacy.

If covering your cameras on your devices isn't about privacy, I defy you to say what it is.

I would also defy you to explain how government surveillance is a separate topic from privacy, except that you have tried over and over and will only try again.

Everyone nitpicks, especially online, but I don't know why you need to try so hard. If someone wants to reductio ad absurdum this thread to mere paranoia, they can do it with or without the parts you claim are irrelevant.

The spying is not hypothetical or speculation-- the problem with closely and obviously related subtopics in this thread is. I can tell you which of the two problems I think is the larger one.

The reason I wish to separate the two topics is because, as we have already seen in this thread don't care "if some perv wants to see us naked" and a lot of us don't do anything in front of a laptop which would be in any way useful to anyone*. However, some of us do things like use VPNs, clear browser caches, use encrypted messaging apps and other privacy protection methods. Each thing is done for a specific purpose and to address a specific threat. So, OK, if this thread is about protecting privacy in general, then so be it. But I find the general "The Government, Google and Facebook are spying on us all and we're all under threat, cover your webcam!" is conflating a few issues.
The school spying above, for example, is a good reason why you should never treat a device you don't own and didn't install the OS on (kind of includes mobile phones here, doesn't it? Which, yes, does connect things a little). However, a standard laptop which you, yourself, have installed the OS on is going to be relatively trustworthy and, if it isn't, then the fact that the people who control it can see through your webcam is the least of your worries. Well, apart from the fact that if the governments of this world were spying on everyone all the time they'd not have time to do anything about the information gathered anyhow. OK, I know I'm rambling a bit now, but this is getting back to my point that any surveillance will be targeted and for a specific reason so, for example, for a single, childless, wage-slave middle-aged man such as myself the threat from a webcam left uncovered is a lot less than for a person with young kids or a CEO who worries about the whiteboard behind them having secrets on it. However, what I do have to worry about, due to my demographic, is things like my bank details being stolen or a conversation with a friend about my employer's lax security being seen by my employer. Thinking about it, I'd rather a picture of me naked be on the internet somewhere than a picture of the back of my bank card with the CRC -- now that's a reason for my to cover my webcam if I'm using a bank card online and has nothing to do with Google, Facebook or the government.





*Baring some very weird fetishists who we don't care about.

fair enough, but speak for yourself.

I for one I'm sure that Internet is used for spying purposes (among other useful purposes) .

It's just a global information network and this information is not only what you read, watch or find on Internet, but also what you share, even unknowingly.