Schneier: The Value of Privacy

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/05/the_value_of_pr.html

by tpyo • 17 years ago

109 20 17 years ago

schneier.com

Dmunro• 17 years ago

Though the article is from 2006, it's timely

lpolovets• 17 years ago

Sadly, articles like this are always timely.

JohnFritzen• 17 years ago

I think it was posted in response to this...

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=983717

trebor• 17 years ago

> Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. [...]

Personally, I phrase the debate as Security and Privacy versus the Government.

theBobMcCormick• 17 years ago

Just the government? So you have no problems with Google, Microsoft, etc. violating your privacy? It's only a problem if the government does?

txxxxd• 17 years ago

A corporation will use your information to make money, and they only have access to data that you freely provide them or their partners.

The government can gather your information covertly, can obtain data from multiple companies using legal means unavailable to corporations, and typically do so with the goal of charging one with a crime.

derefr• 17 years ago

In a world where everyone has an equal lack of privacy (e.g. everything everyone does is filmed and can be watched by everyone else), don't you think social mores regarding what is "embarrassing" or "shameful" would change?

wmf• 17 years ago

Yes, but it would take a generation and there would be a lot of damage along the way.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Transparent_Society http://books.google.com/books?id=hsyA7hmDEqYC http://www.davidbrin.com/transparent.htm

ErrantX• 17 years ago

As already pointed out this has pretty much already happened for homosexuality.

Is it a totally bad thing? (or rather is the "sacrifice" of a generation worth considering?)

dabent• 17 years ago

> don't you think social mores regarding what is "embarrassing" or "shameful" would change?

I'm old enough to realize they already have quite a bit. As a child, it was safest for a gay person to stay in the closet, now states are legalizing gay marriage. The idea that someone can be openly gay alone is a huge change. Even celebrities used to hide it, now they can't because someone is sure to catch a photo of them out with someone or at a club.

The same is true for drug use. Michael Phelps was caught on camera with a pipe, but people just shrugged and moved on.

EliAndrewC• 17 years ago

Michael Phelps was also suspended from competition for several months and lost some of his endorsement deals as a result of the pipe photograph. Plus while people in your life (and mine) may have just shrugged and moved on, this was a big deal for a lot of people and was endlessly discussed in the media.

Granted, this isn't nearly the scandal it may once have been, nor is it considered nearly as shameful as in the past, so the social mores are definitely changing. But that photograph definitely had a negative impact on his life.

karzeem2• 17 years ago

Certainly, but there are a couple trouble spots.

A) The transitions aren't always smooth, and the people whose privacy is violated are sometimes sacrificed in the years-long process of mainstreaming whatever "shameful" thing they did.

B) We're a hypocritical lot, so there will probably always be things that we all do and yet still shame others for doing. So the common knowledge that everyone does a particular thing won't be enough to shield you from the shame of being exposed as a doer of that thing.

mhb• 17 years ago

Like the non-politically-connected or non-celebrities taking drugs?

mechanical_fish• 17 years ago

Yes, but that won't solve the problem.

At this point I'm tempted to just say "go watch Gattaca" and leave the rest as an exercise for the reader.

Privacy evolved as a useful solution to many social problems. When that solution is ripped away, the problems will remain.

pmorici• 17 years ago

For things that only effect an individual yes but there are others like extra marital affairs with involve real damage to another person. I don't see things like that ever becoming acceptable (nor should they) yet they aren't illegal.

RevRal• 17 years ago

Ah, the tumultuous calm before the storm.

Schneier: The Value of Privacy

Related Stories