3 ms·

The ability to keep secrets is a fundamental human right. Encryption is a technical protection against that violation, separate from legal consequences. Encrypt

The ability to keep secrets is a fundamental human right. Encryption is a technical protection against that violation, separate from legal consequences. Encryption means I can keep my secrets even if the government locks me up until I reveal the password. I don't see how it is a key driver of militarization and enhanced financialization.

bayleev 6mo ago
In the above conceptualization, the protection of the often trivial secrets of individuals is often used as a kind of moral and informational camouflage for the actual re-orientation of power around secrets that really matter, i.e., bank account balances, account numbers, insider trading tips, etc. Hence why Apple markets their devices as protecting a fairly nebulous notion of privacy, it's not wrong, but it's not the most interesting part of what happens.
- asymmetric 6mo ago
  What is the most interesting part of what happens? I find your line of thought interesting but I’m not sure where you’re leading it.
  - salawat 6mo ago
    Information asymmetry is the root from which all evil sprouts. There are benign forms no one in their right mind has an issue with. Then there are more malign forms amplified and protected by the very same measures that cordon off the more benign forms. Insider info, beneficial ownership information, trade secrets, even what the Government would see "classified" are all far more destructive overall than their benefit to the handful of individuals keeping them warrants. If there is an ill or a vice to be found, secrecy is a consistent bedfellow thereof. But secrecy is as much a benevolent bedfellow as well, as it curtails mass scale abuses through enforced ignorance. Like the Internet, it's one of those "that which empowers the individual equally if not moreso empowers the organization". You can't make things easier for individuals, without making it easier for groups of individuals to turn around and abuse unorganized individuals with the same tools.
vladms 6mo ago
The more I think of it I thinkt that secrets are a tool of the rich and powerfull to keep the weak and poor subjugated. I for one think that a society with lots of transparency (think at least on financial transactions and wealth) would reach a more honest state. And there are examples where this actually works - like the stock exchange: people agree that to be able to take good decisions, the publicly listed companies must be transparent. Of course changing from "full secrecy mode" to "let's be more transparent" can't happen suddenly, but there are places where there are more transparent (ex: in Norway you can ask for someones tax declaration) and the country continues to function. And you can't do it in all places: if you are in a place where people hate each other for various reasons with passion (ex: skin color, place of birth, what you believe in etc.) then keeping secrecy is smart while the society solves the other things. If you think secrecy is what protect I think it is taking a huge chance. Hatefull people around will make at some point a mess and can affect someone, secrecy or not.
- danaris 6mo ago
  I assure you, if, under the current system, everyone were required to reveal all our secrets a) the rich and powerful would be able to use the secrets of the weak and poor to exploit and subjugate us even more b) the rich and powerful would use their wealth and power to ensure that their secrets remained hidden, regardless of the law

bayleev 6mo ago

In the above conceptualization, the protection of the often trivial secrets of individuals is often used as a kind of moral and informational camouflage for the actual re-orientation of power around secrets that really matter, i.e., bank account balances, account numbers, insider trading tips, etc. Hence why Apple markets their devices as protecting a fairly nebulous notion of privacy, it's not wrong, but it's not the most interesting part of what happens.

asymmetric 6mo ago
What is the most interesting part of what happens? I find your line of thought interesting but I’m not sure where you’re leading it.
- salawat 6mo ago
  Information asymmetry is the root from which all evil sprouts. There are benign forms no one in their right mind has an issue with. Then there are more malign forms amplified and protected by the very same measures that cordon off the more benign forms. Insider info, beneficial ownership information, trade secrets, even what the Government would see "classified" are all far more destructive overall than their benefit to the handful of individuals keeping them warrants. If there is an ill or a vice to be found, secrecy is a consistent bedfellow thereof. But secrecy is as much a benevolent bedfellow as well, as it curtails mass scale abuses through enforced ignorance. Like the Internet, it's one of those "that which empowers the individual equally if not moreso empowers the organization". You can't make things easier for individuals, without making it easier for groups of individuals to turn around and abuse unorganized individuals with the same tools.

vladms 6mo ago

The more I think of it I thinkt that secrets are a tool of the rich and powerfull to keep the weak and poor subjugated. I for one think that a society with lots of transparency (think at least on financial transactions and wealth) would reach a more honest state. And there are examples where this actually works - like the stock exchange: people agree that to be able to take good decisions, the publicly listed companies must be transparent. Of course changing from "full secrecy mode" to "let's be more transparent" can't happen suddenly, but there are places where there are more transparent (ex: in Norway you can ask for someones tax declaration) and the country continues to function. And you can't do it in all places: if you are in a place where people hate each other for various reasons with passion (ex: skin color, place of birth, what you believe in etc.) then keeping secrecy is smart while the society solves the other things. If you think secrecy is what protect I think it is taking a huge chance. Hatefull people around will make at some point a mess and can affect someone, secrecy or not.

danaris 6mo ago
I assure you, if, under the current system, everyone were required to reveal all our secrets a) the rich and powerful would be able to use the secrets of the weak and poor to exploit and subjugate us even more b) the rich and powerful would use their wealth and power to ensure that their secrets remained hidden, regardless of the law