3 ms·

In my opinion the nothing to hide argument is valid in a personal basis, but not in a policy making basis. I am against the surveillance of citizens in the name

by yiyus 7y ago

In my opinion the nothing to hide argument is valid in a personal basis, but not in a policy making basis. I am against the surveillance of citizens in the name of security, and I actively support the EFF in their attempts to stop it, but I do not have a sticker covering my webcam because if someone at NSA is spending his afternoons watching me working, and maybe putting the finger in my nose from time to time, I sincerely don't care.

natch 7y ago
Limiting the conversation to what is seen on a webcam doesn’t come close to covering the scope of what could happen. Let’s say your screen is captured as well. And sometimes that screen will contain personal and private information of friends and family who might care. It is not your call to decide for them whether their information should be put at risk or not by an organization that has proved itself capable of leaking like a sieve. You could argue that your devices contain no names of friends or pictures or contact info or messages of any sort with anyone. OK, but that would be pretty unusual. Saying you don’t care is like driving drunk on an empty road with passengers in the car. You may not care about whether you die, but you have passengers. Your caring about yourself or not isn’t the issue.
- yiyus 7y ago
  I think you misunderstood my comment (being honest, it was not very well redacted). I do not disagree with anything you said at all, on the contrary. What I mean is precisely that a lack of personal reasons to keep your privacy is not a good reason to not push for privacy policies. I am totally against screen capturing, as I am against surveillance using laptop cameras or phone microphones, or public cameras capturing my face. However, even although I care about this and actively oppose these practices, I don't cover my face when I live my home, for example, and I don't think (some people may disagree) that I should. Of course, once this affect more people, it is not my choice to not care, and I will do everything possible to keep other people privacy.

by yiyus 7y ago

natch 7y ago

Limiting the conversation to what is seen on a webcam doesn’t come close to covering the scope of what could happen. Let’s say your screen is captured as well. And sometimes that screen will contain personal and private information of friends and family who might care. It is not your call to decide for them whether their information should be put at risk or not by an organization that has proved itself capable of leaking like a sieve. You could argue that your devices contain no names of friends or pictures or contact info or messages of any sort with anyone. OK, but that would be pretty unusual. Saying you don’t care is like driving drunk on an empty road with passengers in the car. You may not care about whether you die, but you have passengers. Your caring about yourself or not isn’t the issue.

yiyus 7y ago
I think you misunderstood my comment (being honest, it was not very well redacted). I do not disagree with anything you said at all, on the contrary. What I mean is precisely that a lack of personal reasons to keep your privacy is not a good reason to not push for privacy policies. I am totally against screen capturing, as I am against surveillance using laptop cameras or phone microphones, or public cameras capturing my face. However, even although I care about this and actively oppose these practices, I don't cover my face when I live my home, for example, and I don't think (some people may disagree) that I should. Of course, once this affect more people, it is not my choice to not care, and I will do everything possible to keep other people privacy.