3 ms·

I would tend to agree in theory. Data is a very valuable thing that is necessary to improve beyond a certain point. Complete, unrestricted transparency of every

by scalio 10y ago

I would tend to agree in theory. Data is a very valuable thing that is necessary to improve beyond a certain point. Complete, unrestricted transparency of every facet of everything gives the data-wielders (humanity) unprecedented insight. It's also, however, a complete pipe dream only possible in a perfect world. Otherwise, some people will see the data in question, realize the immense power it holds, and do bad things. Privacy is necessary because some people are dicks and constantly strive to get an advantage over others. Ideally, it's only a temporary solution until humanity can figure its shit out, whatever that would be. Until then, it's the only way to minimize oppression, which is the biggest risk to human development there is. So for now, RMS is right. There's just no way of getting rid of privacy that would not severely hurt.

tslug 10y ago
We're on a progression curve, right? Privacy is melting away over time with more sensors and advances in big data analysis techniques. We'll never get to where everything is 100% transparent. Too many photons. But I believe we're already at the point that privacy is effectively gone. It's just a question now of whether the people who have the information is only the big corporations, big governments, the best hackers, and/or whoever paid for it, or whether we want to pull this privacy band-aid off and just disarm their power in the first place by broadcasting the information and changing our behaviour and rules on the back-end of what our responsibility is to others with the information we have on them. If you broadcast everything, then if some people are dicks, you see that, too, right? And if we still get to be judged by a jury of our peers (hope-hope), then with any luck, there are enough nice people out there to say, "Yup, dick move. Stop that." Privacy is just an eggshell defense. When/if it's breached, that's that. The dicks win. We currently have so little recourse, because it's so badly asymmetric. The dicks now have the information and proceed to hurt you with it, but you don't necessarily have the information showing them hurting you.
- type0 10y ago
  > If you broadcast everything, then if some people are dicks, you see that, too, right? There are 3 kinds of people: https://youtu.be/sEJ7l0kfDic?t=39 https://youtu.be/sEJ7l0kfDic?t=39
- scalio 10y ago
  What you want is people to take responsibility for their actions. That's not gonna happen anytime soon.
  - tslug 10y ago
    I'm no less skeptical than you as to our natural inclinations, but I do think it helps people be more respectful of others when they know the world is watching. They've seen this with police officers wearing body cameras. They receive 93% fewer complaints. That's a profound difference.
    - scalio 10y ago
      Might work for a while until enough incidents pass unnoticed (which will happen given the mass). The police is a very specific group of people that's already under massive scrutiny.

by scalio 10y ago

tslug 10y ago

We're on a progression curve, right? Privacy is melting away over time with more sensors and advances in big data analysis techniques. We'll never get to where everything is 100% transparent. Too many photons. But I believe we're already at the point that privacy is effectively gone. It's just a question now of whether the people who have the information is only the big corporations, big governments, the best hackers, and/or whoever paid for it, or whether we want to pull this privacy band-aid off and just disarm their power in the first place by broadcasting the information and changing our behaviour and rules on the back-end of what our responsibility is to others with the information we have on them. If you broadcast everything, then if some people are dicks, you see that, too, right? And if we still get to be judged by a jury of our peers (hope-hope), then with any luck, there are enough nice people out there to say, "Yup, dick move. Stop that." Privacy is just an eggshell defense. When/if it's breached, that's that. The dicks win. We currently have so little recourse, because it's so badly asymmetric. The dicks now have the information and proceed to hurt you with it, but you don't necessarily have the information showing them hurting you.

type0 10y ago
> If you broadcast everything, then if some people are dicks, you see that, too, right? There are 3 kinds of people: https://youtu.be/sEJ7l0kfDic?t=39 https://youtu.be/sEJ7l0kfDic?t=39
scalio 10y ago
What you want is people to take responsibility for their actions. That's not gonna happen anytime soon.
- tslug 10y ago
  I'm no less skeptical than you as to our natural inclinations, but I do think it helps people be more respectful of others when they know the world is watching. They've seen this with police officers wearing body cameras. They receive 93% fewer complaints. That's a profound difference.
  - scalio 10y ago
    Might work for a while until enough incidents pass unnoticed (which will happen given the mass). The police is a very specific group of people that's already under massive scrutiny.