> That's a rehash of a number of silly 'nothing to hide' pseudo arguments. We shouldn't so dismissive of the "so what" attitude that is pervasive in this never

> That's a rehash of a number of silly 'nothing to hide' pseudo arguments. We shouldn't so dismissive of the "so what" attitude that is pervasive in this neverending stream of data collection articles. Many are using their opinion of "great harm" to influence their cries for oversight, I think it's only fair for others to use their opinion of "no harm" to counter it. GP didn't say they had nothing to hide, they said what was collected was harmless and that opinion, especially given the tradeoff in services received, is widely held and it's ok.