Mixer restrictions

[examplens]

That being said, nothing is going to stop regulators if they want to seize and stop some service.

And that started to be bypassed. The most critical point is the clearnet domain and site.
I saw on one forum that mixing is widely offered in direct exchange, as a service. No clearnet link, some don't even have tor page. Greater regulatory pressure can only make such a service more expensive and potentially riskier.

Privacy is mostly long gone now.  It only gets 'better' for us who care as in some intelligent people are making tools that never existed before and in a future Orwellian society they will come in VERY handy for us.  See Bitcoin, Mixers, Tor, Tails et cetera.  I do not know how much longer we will have the Internet for with out having to beg for access using mug shots and finger prints but even when we will get there, people will be happy about it because they will be told this keeps terrorists away.

I completely agree with you, but excessive fear of de-anonymization may lead to paranoia.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Mine is that the majority of people will never start valuing Privacy even when they are already in an Orwellian scenario.

I think most people view privacy a bit differently. Yes, it's true that the majority of people carry surveillance devices everywhere they go, and they often freely broadcast their daily activities on social media, but they very much care about hiding certain things from coworkers, bosses, partners, or friends. So there is some value in privacy.

It's just that most people don't care about Big Corps scrutinizing their lives, because they have come to accept the fact that Big Tech giants are unavoidable at this point, and that laws and politics are simply rigged theater.

The Western world today is not exactly Orwellian. In the novel, the privacy of all people was violated, but those who even remotely entertained the thought of having some private time in their lives became the number one target of the Big Brother State, even if they posed no practical danger to it. Something as simple as abstaining from the media (i.e., "turning off the TV") was considered criminal.

But the world today is far more sophisticated than that Communist State. People do have the freedom to turn off the TV, quit social media, start reading about Bitcoin, the banking system, and so on, and become "anti-systemic". This is not considered illegal. The political pawns are simply placed in an order where hierarchical blackmail results in a helpless situation, where the Money Alchemists can print endless money and fund wars without being questioned.

The current state of affairs is that pretty much everyone knows the system is corrupt. The thing is, everyone is weakened, broke, and has found such comfort in distractions that the people in charge of the world don't have to force you to believe in Big Brother; they just have to keep you in this numb state.

[LoyceV]

I see the future as a combination between Idiocracy and 1984.

I've already seen examples of government telling people not to believe what they see with their own eyes. It literal comes from Orwell's warning handbook:

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

because they will be told this keeps terrorists away.

My country is flying in terrorists for prosecution, after which they're released back into our society. I can't help but think their logic works the wrong way: without the terrorists they couldn't do the mass surveillance they want. Just like they couldn't as easily phase out cash money by removing ATMs without criminals blowing up ATMs at a large-scale.

People have their homes FILLED UP with microphones and cameras and they are excited about it.

I'm pretty sure my Linux laptop doesn't use its microphone to spy on me, but I've always toyed with the idea of physically removing it. The camera is easily disabled with tape. I buy as few "smart" devices as possible. Our new washing machine wants a Wifi connection "for custom programs", but at least it still has physical buttons and can be used without internet connection.
The main devices we have spying all over the house are phones. They're really terrible: the battery drains quickly, so you know it's doing something all day. You can't physically remove the microphone, as that would negate the main function of a phone. I'd be totally fine without a front camera, but tape on the touch screen is ridiculous. The rear camera is too convenient to permanently disable it with tape. And even if I don't bring my phone, someone else still has one that does the same. So that makes phones the perfect device to spy on everyone.

I can't wait to buy a new car that collects data on my sexual activity!
This part from the above link says it all:

Researchers spent 600 hours reading privacy policies, downloading apps, and corresponding with brands

I've recently rejected the privacy policy of a device and returned it, but most people accept just about anything, and reading through it is a massive waste of time.

Also fun for privacy: Owners of Luxury Smart Beds Literally Lost Sleep Due to AWS Outage.
My take: anything that can work without a blockchain, shouldn't use a blockchain. Anything that can work without internet, should be offline.

[SamReomo]

I'm pretty sure my Linux laptop doesn't use its microphone to spy on me, but I've always toyed with the idea of physically removing it. The camera is easily disabled with tape. I buy as few "smart" devices as possible.

If you prefer highest level of privacy then it's better to remove microphone from your laptop as that's not a hard thing to do, yes it's okay to cover camera with a tape that's what I've done myself. Since there's no use of laptop camera for me and that's why disabling was the best choice, by the way it sounds good to remove the microphone from the laptop.

The main devices we have spying all over the house are phones. They're really terrible: the battery drains quickly, so you know it's doing something all day. You can't physically remove the microphone, as that would negate the main function of a phone. I'd be totally fine without a front camera, but tape on the touch screen is ridiculous. The rear camera is too convenient to permanently disable it with tape. And even if I don't bring my phone, someone else still has one that does the same. So that makes phones the perfect device to spy on everyone.

We can't do anything with the phones and that's the bitter truth, although it's possible to physically remove cameras from the phones because most of us don't really use those cameras at all but even doing that is not going to be any helpful because we can't convince other around us to remove the cameras from their phones as they'll consider as mad or someone with overthinking issues. The smartphones are the best devices for the ones who want to spy on us and we can't do anything about that. I still see people who use feature phones to have maximum privacy but still they can't have full privacy because others around them will always have smartphones with good cameras and microphones.