"I have nothing to hide" is the wrong way to think about surveillance

http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/06/why-i-have-nothing-to-hide-is-the-wrong-way-to-think-about-surveillance/

by washedup • 13 years ago

96 18 13 years ago

lr• 13 years ago

My response to the "I have nothing to hide," or "Don't break the law, and you have nothing to worry about," crowds is the following: If you have nothing to hide, then you should not be opposed to having a "black box" installed in your car. This way, the next time you are pulled over for any reason, the police/highway patrol can just plug into your black box, and if you have exceeded the state speed limit at any point (since it was last read), they can just give you a ticket on the spot.

mixmastamyk• 13 years ago

Why wait to get pulled over? They could mail the fine the moment the infraction occurs. Actually, now that I think of it why mail it? Could just debit your bank account directly and save everyone a lot of time.

pyre• 13 years ago

I remember watching an episode of the defunct show Seaquest DSV as a kid, and this was partially there. It was an automated checkpoint that recorded the 'speeding,' but the ticket/payment/etc all happened automatically with a notification to the user.

macavity232• 13 years ago

"Bzzt! You are fined one credit for a violation of the Verbal Morality Statute."

droidist2• 13 years ago

You don't even really need a black box, just a traffic camera that can read your license plate, like a red light camera, maybe combined with a radar gun. Just a camera and some basic physics could probably do it (distance / time = velocity). Once the municipalities start hurting for money even more I bet we'll see this, along with automatic parking citations using cameras.

netcan2• 13 years ago

I think this is a bad example. The problem you get with this is the problem of transition.

At the moment, enforcement of speeding works a certain way and the whole culture of enforcement, punishment and compliance has grown around it. Changing one part breaks it, but given enough time under the black box regime, we'll develop new culture and it will all be ok again. Maybe you get a warning buzz when you start to speed, a $1 fine after 3 seconds and a $10 fine after 10.

Some better questions are 'what is your salary?' 'what kind of porn do you watch?'

carsongross• 13 years ago

The right way to think about surveillance, in the US anyway, is as follows: the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

superuser2• 13 years ago

Papers, houses, persons, and effects does not include communications or other people's papers about you. We need a new Wiretap Act for this era.

ericHosick• 13 years ago

does not include communications or other people's papers about you.

One could say that the type information I have is ill-relevant: it is still covered by the 4th amendment (it is my papers, houses, persons, effects). So, it doesn't make logical sense that information I hold about other people is in some way not covered under the 4th amendment.

jdp23• 13 years ago

The discussion from the original posting on Moxie Marlinspike's blog is at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5869394

Daniel Solove's "Why privacy matters even if you have nothing to hide" is a good complement to this piece. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4105485

netcan2• 13 years ago

I think there is a parallel between copyright industries going crazy trying to make digital copies obey the rules of physical copies and our current horror at our loss of privacy. pg had an essay that starts by comparing copyright theft in the digital age to a restaurant owner trying to charge for smells.

Maybe surveillance is the wrong way to think about privacy.

Proleps• 13 years ago

Even if you have nothing to hide people you depend on might have something to hide. If a politician cheats on his wife, and only a small branch of the government knows this, they could use this to bribe him.

nathan_long• 13 years ago

Among other flaws, the titular phrase comes with hidden assumptions:

"I have nothing to hide", assuming":

- everyone accessing my information, now and forever in the future, is honest

- those monitoring me and agree with me about what's good and bad and their definition never changes in a way that hurts me

- my information can never be stolen by crooks, advertisers, etc

and so forth

jsemrau• 13 years ago

Freedom is to not have to care about surveillance.

fnordfnordfnord• 13 years ago

For arguing with these "I have nothing to hide" folk.

I'd like to put up a website[1]. At the website, I'd begin posting my personal details. Telephone records, Credit Card Bills, Utility bills, etc. Eventually have a lot of info on there. Not because I like surveillance or don't enjoy my privacy, but because now I can go and make really snarky comments and arguments to the "I have nothing to hide" brigade. Invite them to post all of their data, show their hypocrisy when they don't, or show what we can all learn about them if they do. Anybody else interested?

[1] Trouble is I suck at websites.

nano111• 13 years ago

I have everything to hide until the government has nothing to hide.

"I have nothing to hide" is the wrong way to think about surveillance

Related Stories