>> "The reason is "people" lack education in technology"

> This is a dumb statement.

How about doing a bit of research before saying stuff like that?

For example:

https://lifehacker.com/this-chart-shows-how-computer-literat...

From the article:

"The results aren’t terribly surprising if you’ve ever worked a help desk. Around 5% of the U.S. population ranks at level 3, the strongest level of computer literacy. Another 26% ranks at level 2, where users can do things like “find a sustainability-related document that was sent to you by John Smith in October last year.” Those who ranked in level 2 likely aren’t developers or engineers, but they get by.

However, for the 69% of the population below level 2, complex skills are still hard to come by. 26% of people weren’t even able to use computers. The full report at the source link below shows how these numbers break down over age ranges. Regardless, the numbers give some perspective on how skilled the overall population is."

And this is about using a computer. Understanding technology in general is a very different matter. The data on this isn't difficult to discover. There have been a number of studies, for example:

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/12/04/half-of-ame...

The vast majority of the population is utterly ignorant when it comes to technology. Start adding areas like machine learning and AI and the chasm is massive, deep and wide.

Using tech people to claim this problem does not exists and, therefore, calling the statement "stupid", betrays a failure to understand the topic at hand.

The same is true about medical knowledge. The vast majority of the population is utterly ignorant about medical science, pharmacology, etc. Claiming this statement is "stupid" because doctors, nurses and medical practitioners do, in fact, understand the domain, is, again, missing the point. And missing reality.

The example is useful because, unlike in the general case of technology, the medical sector has a range of safeguards, rules and laws in place in order to protect consumers. Very little, if any, of that exists in technology.

You can manufacture and sell a 3D printer that can fail and burn down someone's house. There is not FDA equivalent in order to ensure some level of safety exists as a minimum. If you think FCC, UL, CE and TUV provide those safeguards, well, you are obviously not in the hardware business. This is particularly true for the utter junk that comes from China, where these certifications are given away like candy and ar sometimes falsified.

And so, you can insert a microphone and a camera into a consumer device and there really isn't anything preventing anyone from using those sensors nefariously. This is particularly true if the device's firmware and software can be updated over the 'net. Which means you can ship a device that can test out to be completely benign. Later on the same device is updated over the net to include obtrusive capabilities that compromise privacy, and nobody is there to prevent that.

And then, of course, there's this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vL4HLTZQ_Q

and this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-lMIGV-dUI

...and who can forget this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHGd6LqAVzw