4 ms·
Anyone who parrots 'nothing to hide' should have a public webcam in their shower.
by ClassyJacket 8y ago
Anyone who parrots 'nothing to hide' should have a public webcam in their shower.
- AmericanChopper 8y agoWhile that argument is valid, it doesn’t touch on the true nefariousness of ‘nothing to hide’. Which is how a secretive bureaucracy can interpret isolated facts any way they please, and place the burden of proof onto the accused. A real life example would be the no fly list. How do you get on it? How do you get off it? The best example in fiction would be Kafka’s The Trial, imo.
- supreme_court 8y agoAnd what is with all the fucking downvotes?
- LoSboccacc 8y ago"My problem with quips like these -- as right as they are -- is that they accept the premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong." https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2006/05/the_eternal_value_of.html https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2006/05/the_eternal...
- tremon 8y agosuggesting a webcam in the shower is not about "hiding a wrong".
- vinceguidry 8y agoParent was agreeing with the grandparent.
- JoeSmithson 8y agoI don't understand your point. It's possible to not want your nude photos public while also being comfortable submitting your DNA to a government database. I personally probably wouldn't submit my DNA without a particular reason, but I don't see what's the contradiction here?
- Haga 8y agoEver been in a liason with a policemen wife and had your DNA turn up in a murder case?
- Spare_account 8y agoYou're missing the point. Everyone in this thread agrees that submitting DNA voluntarily is a bad thing. There is no need to pursue that part. The confusion felt by some in this sub-thread is the analogy between 'having nothing to hide' and 'having a pub webcam in your shower'. I don't see the connection either.
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y agoWeird, because this genuinely wouldn't bother me, while being on a DNA database would.