4 ms·

I think the title is backward — the article discusses power as a threat to privacy and encryption, which is often the case. If everyone had perfect privacy from

by clwg 2y ago

I think the title is backward — the article discusses power as a threat to privacy and encryption, which is often the case. If everyone had perfect privacy from those in power, the tax system would be entirely based on honor, and no one would have government-issued IDs. Encryption does not significantly impact metadata collection, and its use could be a signal (no pun intended); and a single warrant can revoke a fair amount of the privacy that has been granted. I believe that an educated population poses a greater threat to "power" more than anything else. If more people understood what encryption is and how it affects the integrity and confidentiality of communication(and understood what those terms mean) and why privacy is important, we would be having a much more constructive discussion or at least adopting a more united adversarial stance against attacks on these technologies and rights, similar to the 90s when the online population was generally more technical and concerned about these issues as a whole. More than anything, attacks on encryption and privacy should be seen as attacks against the social contract we have with those in power, and they're failing to provide adequate justification for the mass erosion of privacy.

roenxi 2y ago
Your first two sentences are in contradiction and the article has it right. The reason privacy is a threat to power is because the more of it people have the harder it is to raise taxes. Taxes are the crux of the entire system. What use is power without being able to raise taxes? It doesn't get discussed much because if pressured most people would rather abandon privacy than give up taxing others. If we all pretend that privacy and taxes can both be achieved at once we can at least get everyone to, in principle, agree privacy is an admirable goal and maximise what privacy we do all get. Although with things like Monero and other privacy coins we have suddenly got an asset that is actually private and therefore fundamentally resistant to taxation. It is a weird development with hard-to-foresee implications.
- clwg 2y ago
  I didn't intend for there to be contradictions (it's early, and I was on my first cup of coffee). What I meant was that the privacy battle against power has either already been decided or it never truly existed. We are granted rights by those in power, and these rights can also be rescinded by them, it's at the heart of the matter. At most, privacy is an annoyance to them because their authority is derived from their monopoly on violence. If I hide my finances to evade taxes, it's a crime, and there are consequences if I get caught. If crypto becomes an issue, they can just make it illegal like in China. We've also had the ability to perform tax evasion using cash for quite some time.

by clwg 2y ago

roenxi 2y ago

Your first two sentences are in contradiction and the article has it right. The reason privacy is a threat to power is because the more of it people have the harder it is to raise taxes. Taxes are the crux of the entire system. What use is power without being able to raise taxes? It doesn't get discussed much because if pressured most people would rather abandon privacy than give up taxing others. If we all pretend that privacy and taxes can both be achieved at once we can at least get everyone to, in principle, agree privacy is an admirable goal and maximise what privacy we do all get. Although with things like Monero and other privacy coins we have suddenly got an asset that is actually private and therefore fundamentally resistant to taxation. It is a weird development with hard-to-foresee implications.

clwg 2y ago
I didn't intend for there to be contradictions (it's early, and I was on my first cup of coffee). What I meant was that the privacy battle against power has either already been decided or it never truly existed. We are granted rights by those in power, and these rights can also be rescinded by them, it's at the heart of the matter. At most, privacy is an annoyance to them because their authority is derived from their monopoly on violence. If I hide my finances to evade taxes, it's a crime, and there are consequences if I get caught. If crypto becomes an issue, they can just make it illegal like in China. We've also had the ability to perform tax evasion using cash for quite some time.