First off, thanks for replying. I don't really understand where you were going with your first paragraph. My point was there should be a damn good reason, and

First off, thanks for replying. I don't really understand where you were going with your first paragraph. My point was there should be a damn good reason, and damn good protections, for the use of public data if it has the potential to transgress into the private boundaries of public servants. I think the additional potential for abuse of position in public service roles certainly forfeits some expectations of privacy. But do not see the public utility in allowing that kind of open data.. if you mean to point out that such a system will be abused, then I fully agree. My greater point, and the reason I posted, is exactly the opposite of your second paragraph. People often confuse privileges with rights, but they are simply something conferred on you by another. It is not like rights or responsibilities which tend toward a sort of universal human condition. They are given quid pro quo. Just because it may be given in response to exercising your responsibilities, does not mean it has anything whatsoever to do with them. Also, a driver's license is an interesting example. I generally think I have a right to do whatever the fuck I want as a human, provided I do no harm to others. Theoretically, it is not a privilege the state gives me. A drivers license is a social pact and further, a recognition that I take my responsibilities seriously. In reality, the state has taken away my right to drive, by threat of punishment, and given it back to me as privilege. Power games.. This sort of subtle manipulation of power and privilege makes me think that perhaps privilege is fundamentally morally wrong. Though probably unavoidable, they have a way of corrupting, both those who think they have a right to the power and those who think they have a right to the privilege.