4 ms·

I often like Schneier, but his arguments are weak in this article. "My problem with quips like these -- as right as they are -- is that they accept the premise

I often like Schneier, but his arguments are weak in this article. "My problem with quips like these -- as right as they are -- is that they accept the premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong. It's not. Privacy is an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining the human condition with dignity and respect." I do agree with Schneier's examples and reasons of the importance of privacy, and I agree that the point is not about hiding a wrong. In addition to "an inherent human right" it's also "a basic human need," he says. I would say that the right to life (including property) is fundamental, and privacy of different things is something one can choose to protect or not depending on the issue. Most people don't care about phone number and address being public; they don't cover their faces walking around town; they don't care that grocery stores and credit cards track purchases. Privacy as an extension of life and property makes more sense. You protect it where it's important. I don't see that he argued any points about dignity and respect being essential to his point - I think those are just some of the reasons you want to keep some things private, not essentials.

sown 18y ago
I think one way that dignity is essential is that we all have secrets and all humans have a strong desire to keep them that way. It breaks a person down to not have it. An example might be during boot camp where there are few secrets and humiliation and lack of privacy are used to break a recruit. For example, in some churches, a list of the highest and lowest tithes from parishioner. Of course, the goal is obvious: to humiliate and subject people. Of course you don't have to go to that particular church but if one is devout and that church is the only local representation of your particular denomination you can see how that would be ...undignified. I could go on. Vis a vi: Revenge of the Nerds II when the Alpha Betas are plotting on how to humiliate the Tri-Lams.
- natch 18y ago
  Of the churches you've heard of doing that, which denominations were they, may I ask? I wonder if any churches would go so far as to post this on the web.
  - sown 18y ago
    when I was in church there was talk of it in the past. My mom says this happened to her in s. korea. anyways, it's a good hypothetical example.
fauigerzigerk 18y ago
I think he's absolutely right to call privacy a basic need, much more so than property. Being exposed can be humiliating. I think it's a very fundamental psychological need to draw your own lines and open up selectively towards people you trust. Being in control of your private matters is necessary in order to feel safe and safety is a recognised basic psychological need. I'd rather someone take away my bike than make me feel vulnerable, helpless and exposed to people I may not trust.
- khafra 18y ago
  In this sense, I'd call privacy part of the social level in Maslow's heirarchy of needs. It's a more abstracted need than food or shelter, which is why people will historically give up social needs for the physical fundamentals--but it's only less important than food and shelter in the sense that layers 4-7 of the OSI model are less important than layers 1-3.

sown 18y ago

I think one way that dignity is essential is that we all have secrets and all humans have a strong desire to keep them that way. It breaks a person down to not have it. An example might be during boot camp where there are few secrets and humiliation and lack of privacy are used to break a recruit. For example, in some churches, a list of the highest and lowest tithes from parishioner. Of course, the goal is obvious: to humiliate and subject people. Of course you don't have to go to that particular church but if one is devout and that church is the only local representation of your particular denomination you can see how that would be ...undignified. I could go on. Vis a vi: Revenge of the Nerds II when the Alpha Betas are plotting on how to humiliate the Tri-Lams.

natch 18y ago
Of the churches you've heard of doing that, which denominations were they, may I ask? I wonder if any churches would go so far as to post this on the web.
- sown 18y ago
  when I was in church there was talk of it in the past. My mom says this happened to her in s. korea. anyways, it's a good hypothetical example.

fauigerzigerk 18y ago

I think he's absolutely right to call privacy a basic need, much more so than property. Being exposed can be humiliating. I think it's a very fundamental psychological need to draw your own lines and open up selectively towards people you trust. Being in control of your private matters is necessary in order to feel safe and safety is a recognised basic psychological need. I'd rather someone take away my bike than make me feel vulnerable, helpless and exposed to people I may not trust.

khafra 18y ago
In this sense, I'd call privacy part of the social level in Maslow's heirarchy of needs. It's a more abstracted need than food or shelter, which is why people will historically give up social needs for the physical fundamentals--but it's only less important than food and shelter in the sense that layers 4-7 of the OSI model are less important than layers 1-3.