zlacker

[return to "Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is irrelevant"]
1. elrode+Rt[view] [source] 2016-01-06 10:28:15
>>syness+(OP)
There are very few topics where I just cannot get the point of the discussion among smart people, but this is one of them.

Look at the real world NOW, 15 years after all the surveillance. You still can explode bombs and kill people middle in a european capital without any encryption at all. Is this the kind of surveillance you are afraid of?

If you want to hide something, there are infinitely many ways to do this. No surveillance can (or ever will) read the one time pad encrypted communication. So you have (and always will have) your freedom and capabilities to hide — what's your problem?

Arguments like "well then show me your bank account" are just plain stupid: I have no interest in sharing this information with my work colleagues, my neighbours or my friends just because it would have implications in some social aspects (it's not about security!). But his information is only sensitive in context of a personality. I'd neither have problem to show anything to a random stranger nor would I be interested myself in this information coming from a random stranger.

If somebody uses my information in an unethical way, it is not the problem of a surveillance, but that it's possible at all.

Exposing my personal data to a government during an investigation could also protect me by verifying my alibi. We have nothing to hide, right?

The comparison with free speech is ridiculous. Free speech is the opposite of hiding and doesn't imply breaking the law. Hiding implies playing by other rules, than commonly established. Free speech is important because eventually I might have something to say. But no one would ever agree that he or she will have something to hide eventually (without getting criminal).

So I'm still missing the point...

◧◩
2. CurtMo+SY[view] [source] 2016-01-06 16:56:26
>>elrode+Rt
The most concise description of what you're missing is "chilling effects".

In a hardcore surveillance society, almost any innocent act can be harmful to one. If government, for anti-terrorism reasons, has a rather complete picture of our lives, then we need strong safeguards against how they can act based on that picture.

And the same goes for the private sector, which might form that picture for business reasons.

[go to top]