5 ms·

Yes, transparency is the only practical and realistic way to deal with privacy. Information want to be free. The sooner we learn to adapt and resolves issue due

by matz1 7y ago

Yes, transparency is the only practical and realistic way to deal with privacy. Information want to be free. The sooner we learn to adapt and resolves issue due to our information being public the better.

AlexandrB 7y ago
Maybe for the plebs. The wealthy are already bulwarking their own privacy using legal and technological means. Giving up on protecting privacy for everybody just turns it into a luxury good for the wealthy while stripping it from those that can’t afford it. This creates yet another vector of inequality in our society. Edit: Since you used the “information wants to be free” phrase - commonly invoked with the copyright enforcement controversies of the 2000s - it’s important to note how that turned out. From where I sit, I see a lot of large, powerful companies stealing ideas and content from small creators with no repercussions while small creators are under the thumb of automated content ID systems (see YouTube). “Fair Use” in video content is effectively dead - YouTube and their large media “partners” hold all the cards. When information is “free” those with all the lawyers get to set their own rules.
- matz1 7y ago
  The wealthy will always have the edge, regardless how you deal with privacy, thats what the definition of wealthy. Wealthy = more power/resource. What I'm saying is, you can't solve privacy issue by hiding information. That is not feasible, as technology progresses, its become easier and easier for information to move. I acknowledge that there are going to be issue due to our information being public and thats what we should fix instead of trying to hide the information. Right now it is an issue if my ssn or credit card number become public. The fix should not be by making my ssn or credit card number stay hidden. We should fix it so that even if my ssn or credit card number become public it would not cause me harm. Another example, right now it is an issue if I post something embarrassing on twitter. The fix should not by deleting/hiding my tweet. We should fix it so that even if my tweet become viral it would not cause me harm.
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    > We should fix it so that even if my tweet become viral it would not cause me harm. Anonymity can supply that effortlessly. Some will say it is just pseudonymity and no real anonymity, but I think that is wrong. If you post with your name, you have become a public persona. Just hinting at the fact that public personas often have staff to manage public relations. You could of course kill that, but the repercussions would be quite severe.
    - matz1 7y ago
      >Anonymity can supply that effortlessly Until the real name leaks, which is only matter of time. Anonymity is what i mean by fixing the issue by hiding the information. >If you post with your name, you have become a public persona. Just hinting at the fact that public personas often have staff to manage public relations. You could of course kill that, but the repercussions would be quite severe Yes, right now it is an issue with using real name. We should not fix it by hiding the name, we should fix it so that using real name would not cause harm. In other words, we should take the information being public as the base condition and solve the problem that arise from that.
      - raxxorrax 7y ago
        I don't think that you can shield yourself from judgement in any way. Aside from that there are more extreme cases of bullying and stalking. I am not advocating accepting these issues, but it is just the best way to deal with it. And there is no argument why it shouldn't be possible. That we currently speak very openly on the net is such a treasure. With an open ID it would just end like China. There would be topics you just don't speak about because reputation damage wouldn't make it worth it. That would be a significant loss. I don't really see problems with anonymity. Privacy is a human need, I certainly will not share it with the world. In fact I actively disengage from any intimacy if a larger public is involved, naturally I would assume. There is little incentive to change that. I have a public persona that is neatly compartmentalized. With effort you could connect that of course, but in practice nobody has access on the whole. I tend to keep it that way. Not saying that having a facebook account with all your family photos is equivalent of total transparency. Clear names just don't work that well because numerous practical reasons. Of course there could be an AI that analyses my writing style or simply has access to all relevant network information. But until that time I hope legislative measures are in place. They already are and companies tread very lightly on handling personal information. It could cost them. Ok, people said mean things under the veil of anonymity. Big deal. But recent evidence suggests they would do it with their ID in the open just as well.

by matz1 7y ago

AlexandrB 7y ago

Maybe for the plebs. The wealthy are already bulwarking their own privacy using legal and technological means. Giving up on protecting privacy for everybody just turns it into a luxury good for the wealthy while stripping it from those that can’t afford it. This creates yet another vector of inequality in our society. Edit: Since you used the “information wants to be free” phrase - commonly invoked with the copyright enforcement controversies of the 2000s - it’s important to note how that turned out. From where I sit, I see a lot of large, powerful companies stealing ideas and content from small creators with no repercussions while small creators are under the thumb of automated content ID systems (see YouTube). “Fair Use” in video content is effectively dead - YouTube and their large media “partners” hold all the cards. When information is “free” those with all the lawyers get to set their own rules.

matz1 7y ago
The wealthy will always have the edge, regardless how you deal with privacy, thats what the definition of wealthy. Wealthy = more power/resource. What I'm saying is, you can't solve privacy issue by hiding information. That is not feasible, as technology progresses, its become easier and easier for information to move. I acknowledge that there are going to be issue due to our information being public and thats what we should fix instead of trying to hide the information. Right now it is an issue if my ssn or credit card number become public. The fix should not be by making my ssn or credit card number stay hidden. We should fix it so that even if my ssn or credit card number become public it would not cause me harm. Another example, right now it is an issue if I post something embarrassing on twitter. The fix should not by deleting/hiding my tweet. We should fix it so that even if my tweet become viral it would not cause me harm.
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  > We should fix it so that even if my tweet become viral it would not cause me harm. Anonymity can supply that effortlessly. Some will say it is just pseudonymity and no real anonymity, but I think that is wrong. If you post with your name, you have become a public persona. Just hinting at the fact that public personas often have staff to manage public relations. You could of course kill that, but the repercussions would be quite severe.
  - matz1 7y ago
    >Anonymity can supply that effortlessly Until the real name leaks, which is only matter of time. Anonymity is what i mean by fixing the issue by hiding the information. >If you post with your name, you have become a public persona. Just hinting at the fact that public personas often have staff to manage public relations. You could of course kill that, but the repercussions would be quite severe Yes, right now it is an issue with using real name. We should not fix it by hiding the name, we should fix it so that using real name would not cause harm. In other words, we should take the information being public as the base condition and solve the problem that arise from that.
    - raxxorrax 7y ago
      I don't think that you can shield yourself from judgement in any way. Aside from that there are more extreme cases of bullying and stalking. I am not advocating accepting these issues, but it is just the best way to deal with it. And there is no argument why it shouldn't be possible. That we currently speak very openly on the net is such a treasure. With an open ID it would just end like China. There would be topics you just don't speak about because reputation damage wouldn't make it worth it. That would be a significant loss. I don't really see problems with anonymity. Privacy is a human need, I certainly will not share it with the world. In fact I actively disengage from any intimacy if a larger public is involved, naturally I would assume. There is little incentive to change that. I have a public persona that is neatly compartmentalized. With effort you could connect that of course, but in practice nobody has access on the whole. I tend to keep it that way. Not saying that having a facebook account with all your family photos is equivalent of total transparency. Clear names just don't work that well because numerous practical reasons. Of course there could be an AI that analyses my writing style or simply has access to all relevant network information. But until that time I hope legislative measures are in place. They already are and companies tread very lightly on handling personal information. It could cost them. Ok, people said mean things under the veil of anonymity. Big deal. But recent evidence suggests they would do it with their ID in the open just as well.