5 ms·

Sounds like the "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear" argument. Not very compelling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argume

by mthoms 6y ago

Sounds like the "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear" argument. Not very compelling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument

busterarm 6y ago
See response here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25114692 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25114692
- mthoms 6y ago
  Okay, but what about a topic that is legal and acceptable in today's society but not in the society 20, 30 or 40 years down the line? What if being gay becomes socially unacceptable again? Or supporting the second amendment? Or [literally anything]? The problem is that what is socially and legally acceptable changes over time. Just 30 years ago, the standard for social acceptable commentary was wildly different in the areas of gender identity, sexuality, and race for instance.
  - busterarm 6y ago
    Yes, you should absolutely think about everything that you commit to public record. Yes, you might be totally fine now. You might be hanging out and get photographed with this creepy billionaire named Jeffrey Epstein who is just another creepy billionaire at your creepy billionaire parties. Then 20 years from now we find out he's running pedophile island and people start looking into your associations. We are not teaching people to be cautious about their public data and in fact there's an entire industry out there encouraging everyone to detail their whole lives in public record. Get off of social media _today_. Yes, it's probably too late. The other option is to be such a big celebrity that your entire life is public and you have the defense of scrutiny. Side note: Somebody from my high school class is a famous criminal. I regularly receive requests for interviews on the basis of that association alone despite having nothing to do with the person for decades.
    - mthoms 6y ago
      Using the billionaire pedophile example is a disgusting trick. You're trying to set me up for appearing to support that. Why not use more neutral examples? Like being gay or supporting certain political causes? What if those later become controversial or illegal? What then? Do you want to live in a world where you have to guard everything you say in semi-private conversations, just in case it one day becomes controversial? That sounds like an oppressive nightmare. The social media argument is tangential but I do agree with you there.
      - busterarm 6y ago
        I'm not setting you up as supporting anything. I'm illustrating the severity of the identifiable public record. When the Nazis started rounding up people to put in camps, they looked at the _extremely detailed_ Christian Parish records saying who was what and where they lived. They were thought to be innocuous and important records to keep at the time. Actually I think in the Scandinavian countries the state Church is still responsible for recording all marriage & death records. They stopped tracking births for the previously mentioned reasons. (Hey, we just learned the importance of separation of Church and State, too!) Nobody knows how important privacy is. Until they do.
        mthoms 6y ago
        >I'm illustrating the severity of the identifiable public record. This is an argument in favor of emails being non-verifiable, so now I'm confused. Previously you seem to be supporting the idea that email should be verifiable. Now you seem to be arguing the opposite. Everything you wrote above correlates with the opinions I've expressed so far. You also wrote: > If you live in a [country where homosexuality is illegal] and secretly a homosexual, do not send emails indicating that you're a homosexual. As if that's an acceptable state of affairs and a reasonable compromise for the purpose of catching the occasional bad actor. It isn't.
        busterarm 6y ago
        Not at all. a) email being verifiable is fine b) nobody should be so stupid as to use email for anything personal. it is not privileged communication and potentially permanent public record. c) if you want to use email, you'd better encrypt it and only for recipients that you trust.

by mthoms 6y ago

busterarm 6y ago

See response here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25114692 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25114692

mthoms 6y ago
Okay, but what about a topic that is legal and acceptable in today's society but not in the society 20, 30 or 40 years down the line? What if being gay becomes socially unacceptable again? Or supporting the second amendment? Or [literally anything]? The problem is that what is socially and legally acceptable changes over time. Just 30 years ago, the standard for social acceptable commentary was wildly different in the areas of gender identity, sexuality, and race for instance.
- busterarm 6y ago
  Yes, you should absolutely think about everything that you commit to public record. Yes, you might be totally fine now. You might be hanging out and get photographed with this creepy billionaire named Jeffrey Epstein who is just another creepy billionaire at your creepy billionaire parties. Then 20 years from now we find out he's running pedophile island and people start looking into your associations. We are not teaching people to be cautious about their public data and in fact there's an entire industry out there encouraging everyone to detail their whole lives in public record. Get off of social media _today_. Yes, it's probably too late. The other option is to be such a big celebrity that your entire life is public and you have the defense of scrutiny. Side note: Somebody from my high school class is a famous criminal. I regularly receive requests for interviews on the basis of that association alone despite having nothing to do with the person for decades.
  - mthoms 6y ago
    Using the billionaire pedophile example is a disgusting trick. You're trying to set me up for appearing to support that. Why not use more neutral examples? Like being gay or supporting certain political causes? What if those later become controversial or illegal? What then? Do you want to live in a world where you have to guard everything you say in semi-private conversations, just in case it one day becomes controversial? That sounds like an oppressive nightmare. The social media argument is tangential but I do agree with you there.
    - busterarm 6y ago
      I'm not setting you up as supporting anything. I'm illustrating the severity of the identifiable public record. When the Nazis started rounding up people to put in camps, they looked at the _extremely detailed_ Christian Parish records saying who was what and where they lived. They were thought to be innocuous and important records to keep at the time. Actually I think in the Scandinavian countries the state Church is still responsible for recording all marriage & death records. They stopped tracking births for the previously mentioned reasons. (Hey, we just learned the importance of separation of Church and State, too!) Nobody knows how important privacy is. Until they do.
      - mthoms 6y ago
        >I'm illustrating the severity of the identifiable public record. This is an argument in favor of emails being non-verifiable, so now I'm confused. Previously you seem to be supporting the idea that email should be verifiable. Now you seem to be arguing the opposite. Everything you wrote above correlates with the opinions I've expressed so far. You also wrote: > If you live in a [country where homosexuality is illegal] and secretly a homosexual, do not send emails indicating that you're a homosexual. As if that's an acceptable state of affairs and a reasonable compromise for the purpose of catching the occasional bad actor. It isn't.
        busterarm 6y ago
        Not at all. a) email being verifiable is fine b) nobody should be so stupid as to use email for anything personal. it is not privileged communication and potentially permanent public record. c) if you want to use email, you'd better encrypt it and only for recipients that you trust.