7 ms·
[FR] Je n'ai rien à cacher (I've got nothing to hide)
- subliminalpanda 12y agoTranslation of the first point, to best of my ability (If interested in more, please ask): I have nothing to hide. In fact yes, and so do you. ----- --> May I ask for your computer, e-mail and Facebook password? Promise, I won't do anything bad, only read. How would you dare to answer no? If you have nothing to hide, you cannot make the distinction in what you disclose publicly, and what may bother you a little bit more. As soon as you impose a barrier, you have something to hide (and that's normal!). The rest of us, human beings, are distinguished between each other because we all have a private life, an intimacy that we do not reveal to all. -----
- LLWM 12y agoThat's a silly question that calls into question your understanding of computer systems. When we say we have nothing to hide, we're not talking about passwords. Someone knowing your password can impersonate you. That's a very different risk from them knowing information about you. If all you want to do is read the information I make public, send a friend request like a normal person.
- fit2rule 12y agoDid you miss the memo where the repressive security agencies of the world have given themselves the right to impersonate you online?
- LLWM 12y agoYeah, probably. I thought that was all security agencies. Isn't the whole idea of spies that they assume false identities to try to gather information they wouldn't legitimately have access to?
- Thasc 12y agoSo you have nothing to hide except for things that could put you at risk if publicly disclosed. I think that disclosing any information could put a person at risk in some way or another. So I'll hide everything until I decide it's necessary not to.
- anthony_d 12y agoOh, please. He had a valid point and you made a personal attack. A precise definition of what should be public and what is private would be a valuable contribution to the conversation, insults are not.
- LLWM 12y agoThat's a completely inaccurate description of my reply. But I suppose you'll consider that remark a personal attack too?
- Galanwe 12y agoGoogle translate in english: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=fr&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fjenairienacacher.fr%2F&edit-text=&act=url https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&js=y&prev...
- hengheng 12y ago(I don't know enough French to discuss this matter, let's stick to English) All the people I have met who resort to the "nothing to hide" paradigm were older than 65.these people don't have Facebook or smartphones, and they don't realize that their cars, insurance records and financial transactions are all being tracked. They do not understand the sensitivity of meta data or social graphs, nor do they care. They have their life in order, and surveillance doesn't take anything away from them. The fear of terrorism is a lot more substantial at their points in life. I don't know about discourse in France - I can imagine that hell just broke loose after the recent attacks. Here in Germany, it's very much a generation problem. Those who care about civil rights and an active democracy are young, and young educated people are a minority. Old people are heavily catered to by the governing parties, and they all seem to love surveillance, most being lucky enough to never have experienced the downsides. This fight feels a lot like the gay rights movement. Preconceptions are impossible to overcome, all you can do is wait for twenty years until you have a sizeable part of the population behind you, and then start an uproar. In the meantime, it doesn't help to, say, explain how small the aids propagation rate is. Nobody cares.
- pjc50 12y agomost being lucky enough to never have experienced the downsides In Germany, or just in West Germany? Have people forgotten the Stasi already?
- thissideup 12y agoYes. We are two generations out. The memory is long gone.
- thissideup 12y agoAs a worthy aside, Kundera described totalitarianism as the process of depriving people of memory to transform them into children.
- robmcm 12y agoI often wonder what my generation won't care about in 35 years that the younger population see as outrageous. My most obvious guess is more rights to non humans, AI/Animals/Environment etc.
- jetskindo 12y agoNot having something to hide forces you to divulge everything because you have nothing to hide. Except that thing that is nobody's business. This mentality fires back quickly and is usually a trait of someone who haven't thought it through yet.
- LLWM 12y agoEveryone who disagrees with you simply hasn't thought things through? What a compelling argument.
- perlgeek 12y agoA page like this should show naked man and woman (not too attractive), with all their pubic hair and genitals exposed. Most people think they have their body to hide. Showing them that it isn't so might make a difference.
- jsprogrammer 12y agoClothes have protective and insulative properties. Their purpose is not always solely to hide physical appearance.
- thissideup 12y agoBathing suits don't, but they're still widely worn.
- jsprogrammer 12y agoBathing suits don't have protective or insulative properties? What?
- thissideup 12y agohttp://www.wigglestatic.com/product-media/5360090022/speedo_placement-5cm-brief-print-5-black-usa-charcoal-watermelon-front_SS14.jpg?w=1400&h=1400&a=7 http://www.wigglestatic.com/product-media/5360090022/speedo_...
- icebraining 12y agoPersonally, I've tried nudist bathing, and I much prefer having a layer of protection between my crotch and rocks, sharp shells, and the sun.
- thissideup 12y agoYou're missing the forest. The point is that people choose to cover certain parts of themselves, even if they are just laying on a towel sunbathing.
- bsaul 12y agoI generaly agree with those slides, yet something bother me in one of the video : One of the slide gives a false feeling of equality between two quotes, one by Brice hortefeux and one by Eric schmidt on privacy. The first one is about surveillance cameras put in public streets by an elected representative of the people (a mayor). The other is about scanning private conversations by a private company who only deals with shareholders. I don't think calling everything "a society of surveillance" helps to finely tune the measures that we'll have to put in place to improve security in a not too radical way. He later makes the point that even measures taken by governments could be completely misused by fascists regime, which is true. But then the problem is maintaining a democratic power, and a fair legal system. And that problem existed with disastrous consequences far before the internet was created.
- fit2rule 12y agoThe problem is that the French people don't see their existing government for the fascist, imperialist organization that it currently IS. If you don't think so, just ask a Cameroon'ian businessman who is trying to get a loan what he thinks about French imperialism. Better ask him before he tells you first, Monsieur!
- bsaul 12y agoI'm usualy really into criticizing french bureaucracy but i must admit i have absolutely no idea what you're talking about... Could you give more details ?
- mercurial 12y ago> One of the slide gives a false feeling of equality between two quotes, one by Brice hortefeux and one by Eric schmidt on privacy. > The first one is about surveillance cameras put in public streets by an elected representative of the people (a mayor). > The other is about scanning private conversations by a private company who only deals with shareholders. Don't people choose to trust Google with their data, in the same way they delegate their power to the mayor? > He later makes the point that even measures taken by governments could be completely misused by fascists regime, which is true. But then the problem is maintaining a democratic power, and a fair legal system. What are you getting at with that? The fact is, large amounts of processing power, an incredible amount of data collected (in a way that would not have been possible in a pre-Internet era), and little accountability by design are an extremely dangerous combination. You do not even need to go back to the Vichy era for that. Both Hoover and the Gaullist SAC people would have been delighted to have such information at their disposal...
- SixSigma 12y agoIf suddenly there was a regime that was going to exterminate all French people you might change your tune. You have no idea what the world will be like 10 years from now. The French nationals that dutifully filled out their 1930s census form had nothing to hide, until IBM rolled into town and started doing 1940s Big Data on it, then lots of people wanted to hide.
- icebraining 12y agoSigh. Another argument based on (1) missing the context under which many people say that phrase, which is "nothing to hide" from law enforcement, and on (2) images of a future totalitarian system, which regardless of how likely it actually is, it's not considered so by most people. In my case, they're preaching to the choir, but if I was actually one of the people they were trying to convince, it'd fail completely.
- fit2rule 12y agoThe French have a lot to worry about, because their country is a serious pain in the ass to a lot of people in the world. What the French have done to Africa, and what they continue to do to Africa - which should be one of the richest continents on Earth, in terms of world economy - is definitely something that has to be hidden from the French public, or else they wouldn't stand one minute more of their ruling elite lying to them. Former French colonies are, as of today, being heavily repressed by France. This fact needs to continue to be hidden, lest the world wake up to the repression and demand that the French people do something effective about it. Until then, terrorism is to be expected. You can't rule as an imperial power and not expect blowback; people want to be free to live their lives un-repressed. EDIT: Read this, and then re-consider your downvote: http://thisisafrica.me/france-loots-former-colonies/ http://thisisafrica.me/france-loots-former-colonies/ Fact is, the Western nations have a lot of responsibility for imperial machinations in the world, and while the French people - as well as those of us in other Western nations - may not have anything to hide, we certainly have a LOT that must be revealed to us in order to understand just why people are willing to give their lives to disrupt Western imperialism. Its not all religion; mostly, its economic and human rights violations on the part of the Western powers, which motivates such heinous response.
- collyw 12y agoAre you an American posting this by any chance?
- fit2rule 12y agoWhat has that got to do with anything? Nope.
- ptaipale 12y agoThat "thisisafrica" article has been posted to HN at least twice recently, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8876429 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8876429 - and as the previous comment chain says, it looks very bogus.
- 12y ago
- julie1 12y agoIt is a FUD. Thesis : you may think you have nothing to hide, but because of sociogramms and retroactive laws you do. Because everybody is related to everybody, you are being watched. Thus don't move, don't speak, just hide.
- guyzmo 12y agoManual english translation (draft): https://lite5.framapad.org/p/nothing-to-hide https://lite5.framapad.org/p/nothing-to-hide please improve it, and why not make an igotnothingtohide website ;-)
- guyzmo 12y agoas I already own the domain, I have put together: http://nothing.to/hide/ http://nothing.to/hide/ which redirects to the pad. Once we got a nice and readable translation, I'll put a nicer page over there. Don't hesitate to ping me on twitter @guyzmo, or IRC (freenode, zmo).
- jpatte 12y agoThe third paragraph "Pourquoi est-ce plus compliqué que ce que l'on pense ?" ("Why is it more complicated than what you think?") refers to retroactivity of the law [1], claiming that you might have troubles later for doing things that are not illegal now but might become illegal in the future, which means it's safer to just hide what you are doing now. However AFAIK retroactive laws are forbidden by Human Rights (and by the United States Constitution, notably) except for very specific cases, so this whole paragraph is a giant strawman. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law
- antientropic 12y agoThat makes the risky assumption that every future government will consider itself bound by the ban on ex post facto laws.