3 ms·
''The very idea of privacy is under threat'' it is very possible that the author wrote this piece -or at least he had it in his laptop- while he was in an airp
by zeynel1 16y ago
''The very idea of privacy is under threat''
it is very possible that the author wrote this piece -or at least he had it in his laptop- while he was in an airport waiting to get scanned - or at least once in his lifetime embarked on an airplane in an airport - while he was in an airport his privacy is not --under threat-- he has -no- right to privacy - his lagguage is opened - his body is scanned naked -- his privacy is violated to the core and he can do nothing about it - except to take the humiliation and rationalize it later
-or-
the author may be walking in the streets of new york -or any big city- where he is vidotaped non-stop - he has no privacy - some entity is violating his privacy by videotaping him and he can do nothing about it - his privacy is not -under threat- his privacy is non-existent -because- his privacy -is- violated - he has no privacy while he is walking in the streets of new york
you may say that his home is his castle -and- he has his -right- to privacy at home - even this is not true
the fact that he appears to have privacy at home is because the enity who -owns- his right to privacy does -not- care what he does at home --but-- if the entity who owns his right to privacy -suspects- that he is doing something in his -castle- that he is not supposed to do according to the entity who owns his right to privacy - his privacy at home will be violated just like his privacy is violated in the airport
the fact that at a certain place at a certain time --supposedly at home-- he has a -semblance- of privacy does not mean that his privacy is not violated - he has lost his ---right--- to privacy long time ago
i dont know how to explain this - if he had his -right- to privacy no one -can- violate his privacy -but- his privacy is violated all the time and he can do nothing about it - this means that he has no -right- to privacy
-because-
his privacy can be violated any time by the entity who own his privacy
the right to privacy is not something that you have it here now and not there and then -- as a human being he has no -right- to privacy
if anyone can explain what i am trying to say in a better language i would be most grateful
- slvrspoon 16y agoI appreciate it's hard to write in a non-native language (i'm assuming English is not your first language) and a lot of your observations about the loss of privacy in everyday life are true. However, you are wrong about not having "right" to privacy. Why do search warrants exist? Why do newspapers get sued for slander? I'd love to hear more about what HN thinks about online privacy.
- pmichaud 16y agoI laughed reading this because I read all the dashes and pauses as William Shatner explaining privacy. Reread it in that frame, and you'll love it! I do think you're wrong though. Rights have limits, even rights we can all pretty much agree aren't be violated regularly. When it's necessary to violate someone's rights, we normally have strict procedures in place for doing so, and legal remedies in case someone oversteps. I think the issue with privacy is that the exceptions are too many, and the remedies too weak.
- zeynel1 16y ago--with privacy exceptions are too many - and remedies too weak-- well - thank you for putting so well what i was trying to say in my lengthy comment i interpret your insightful statement as saying that a human -body- has no privacy and no right to privacy -because- the entity who violates the privacy of a human body is the same entity who -defines- the exceptions --and-- the remedies human body has no right to -define- what human privacy is and there is only 1 entity who violates the privacy of human body - that entity may have different -names- but it is the same being the being who has the absolute right to violate the privacy of a human body is the --same-- entity who also -enforces- the -remedies- --and-- who owns your privacy -is- your master a slave has no privacy in other words the owner of your right to privacy tells you --i grant you privacy but -i- reserve the right to violate your privacy as i wish-- what kind of right to privacy is that which means that - that entity who violates the privacy of a human body has the freedom and right to violate the privacy of the human body - if that entity -owns- the right to privacy of the human body -then- human body -does not- own its own privacy might is right - and whoever has the right to -define- is the mightiest in the case of privacy - your right to privacy as a human being can only be violated by an entity who is not a human being - so a mother entering her daughters room without knocking - this is -not- the kind of violation of privacy we are talking about - in the airport your right to privacy is violated by an entity who is not human but a -bodyless- human or maybe - we -are- talking about the same -kind- of privacy as mother-daughter privacy - the mother enters her daughters room without knocking to show that she -the mother- can violate her -daughters- privacy and -therefore- she -the mother- is in charge for some unfortunate reason the authority -loves- to prove again and again that -she- is the authority -and- for some reason authority appears to be -she- the same goes with human body - the entity who owns the right to privacy of a human body must show -again and again- that -it- or that bodyless and -therefore- genderless entity who owns the human right of privacy - must humiliate the human body again and again by scanning the naked human -body- and violate the most sacred privacy of human body and prove that human body has no privacy - to prove that -it- is the owner of the human right of privacy