3 ms·

If you live under a government where those examples are a reason to hide, then in the eyes of that government you are technically a criminal. Doesn’t describe m

If you live under a government where those examples are a reason to hide, then in the eyes of that government you are technically a criminal. Doesn’t describe my government. Even under the most oppressive governments though, there will still be a sizable majority that doesn’t have anything to hide and can feel secure using most technology, and they’ll be fine.

justinclift 8y ago
> Doesn’t describe my government. ... yet? :)
mokus 8y ago
> Doesn’t describe my government. This mindset seems to be why the US political parties keep handing each other more and more federal power. Nobody can imagine their nation would be so stupid as to ever put the Other Guys back in power again.
bzbarsky 8y ago
First, having talked a lot to people who actually lived under a somewhat oppressive government (USSR, and by the 80s it wasn't even that oppressive), most people _did_ in fact have something to hide. Second, just because it doesn't describe your government now doesn't mean it won't in the future, unfortunately. Consider examples of a 1920s German, or a 1960s Iranian (the old regime was oppressive too, but in different ways), or a 2000s citizen of Poland. Third, there are certainly places where the danger is not from the government but from your neighbors, including to some of the groups I listed. So thinking about this only from the perspective of governments and criminality is off. Hence my claim that "only criminals have something to hide" is a false statement. Fourth, I suspect that perception of how much one has to hide is highly age-dependent. As people get older they discover more and more things that they either want to hide or wish they could have hidden. Maybe I'm wrong in my guess as to your age, of course, but if I am not, I strongly urge talking about this sort of thing with people a few decades older. It can be _very_ eye-opening. Certainly was for me.
- matte_black 8y ago
  > Second, just because it doesn't describe your government now doesn't mean it won't in the future, unfortunately. Consider examples of a 1920s German, or a 1960s Iranian (the old regime was oppressive too, but in different ways), or a 2000s citizen of Poland. This is the risk averse argument against certain technologies. If you believe your government won’t change and are willing to take that bet, you can lean into technologies very hard and reap the benefits. Of course, if you think there may be a day where your government will change and use technologies against you, you could live out in the boonies and never even touch a computer, and thus get no benefits from emerging tech. It’s a trade off between being at the bleeding edge and being as secure and private as possible. Personally, I have made my decision. Could it be my undoing one day if government decides I’m guilty of everything? Sure, but I doubt it will happen. I’ll take the bet.
  - bzbarsky 8y ago
    As I said above everyone can make this decision for themselves, and should. It's just important to me to not paint any of the decisions here as "only criminals would do that"! Past that, I figure adults can and should decide these things for themselves. That said, I also think we should work toward changing the nature of the tradeoff, e.g. by changing how voice assistants work to minimize the privacy issues. I suspect there's a lot of work we could do on that front while not compromising the functionality of the voice assistants.

justinclift 8y ago

> Doesn’t describe my government. ... yet? :)

mokus 8y ago

> Doesn’t describe my government. This mindset seems to be why the US political parties keep handing each other more and more federal power. Nobody can imagine their nation would be so stupid as to ever put the Other Guys back in power again.

bzbarsky 8y ago

First, having talked a lot to people who actually lived under a somewhat oppressive government (USSR, and by the 80s it wasn't even that oppressive), most people _did_ in fact have something to hide. Second, just because it doesn't describe your government now doesn't mean it won't in the future, unfortunately. Consider examples of a 1920s German, or a 1960s Iranian (the old regime was oppressive too, but in different ways), or a 2000s citizen of Poland. Third, there are certainly places where the danger is not from the government but from your neighbors, including to some of the groups I listed. So thinking about this only from the perspective of governments and criminality is off. Hence my claim that "only criminals have something to hide" is a false statement. Fourth, I suspect that perception of how much one has to hide is highly age-dependent. As people get older they discover more and more things that they either want to hide or wish they could have hidden. Maybe I'm wrong in my guess as to your age, of course, but if I am not, I strongly urge talking about this sort of thing with people a few decades older. It can be _very_ eye-opening. Certainly was for me.

matte_black 8y ago
> Second, just because it doesn't describe your government now doesn't mean it won't in the future, unfortunately. Consider examples of a 1920s German, or a 1960s Iranian (the old regime was oppressive too, but in different ways), or a 2000s citizen of Poland. This is the risk averse argument against certain technologies. If you believe your government won’t change and are willing to take that bet, you can lean into technologies very hard and reap the benefits. Of course, if you think there may be a day where your government will change and use technologies against you, you could live out in the boonies and never even touch a computer, and thus get no benefits from emerging tech. It’s a trade off between being at the bleeding edge and being as secure and private as possible. Personally, I have made my decision. Could it be my undoing one day if government decides I’m guilty of everything? Sure, but I doubt it will happen. I’ll take the bet.
- bzbarsky 8y ago
  As I said above everyone can make this decision for themselves, and should. It's just important to me to not paint any of the decisions here as "only criminals would do that"! Past that, I figure adults can and should decide these things for themselves. That said, I also think we should work toward changing the nature of the tradeoff, e.g. by changing how voice assistants work to minimize the privacy issues. I suspect there's a lot of work we could do on that front while not compromising the functionality of the voice assistants.