> The counterarguments, for privacy and protecting it, are far from irrational and have been made by some of the greatest scholars of the past centuries. I don

> The counterarguments, for privacy and protecting it, are far from irrational and have been made by some of the greatest scholars of the past centuries. I don't doubt it. But when I wrote that I was being unconventional, I wasn't talking about the academy. I was talking about the HN zeitgeist. While the sample size is small here, don't you find it curious that 1 out of 17 responses agreed with me? And that I was called a bootlicker and demon. And that you yourself jumped to conclusions about who I am and what I've done with my life. I would normally ignore the personal stuff, but in this context it makes sense. Because, ironically, if/when privacy erodes completely, we won't have to guess anymore about one another. And I'll make the HN-unconventional assertion that both your response (and this response itself) would have been a bit more understanding, more insightful, and more fruitful for the both of us. As it is, we're essentially blind to one another right now as pseudo-anonymous names on forum.