This is my response to the "but I have nothing to hide" argument. You may not have an obvious reason to want your identity hidden, nor may I. But someone else m

This is my response to the "but I have nothing to hide" argument. You may not have an obvious reason to want your identity hidden, nor may I. But someone else may have a legitimate reason. A whistleblower, a victim of domestic violence, a political refugee, a newspaper reporter investigating corruption in a police department. Do you think these people should be able to make use of encryption and anonymity? Of course. But if they are the only ones trying to stay private, that privacy is a spotlight shining on their actions. It draws the attention of people who would take advantage of them and threatens their ability to protect themselves. Privacy, anonymity, and encryption protect the people who need them only when they are pervasive. The same way vaccines protect people who are susceptible to infection. Saying "I have nothing to hide" is akin to not getting a flu shot because you feel healthy. That's not how it works. You need that herd immunity or the virus will find cracks to survive in. When you refuse a vaccine or allow invasion of privacy because you don't feel threatened you're putting yourself ahead of people who are most at risk of being harmed by the disease or put in danger by having personal details become known.