If you want to convince your friends they should support encryption, here's how I like to get past the "nothing to hide" argument. Imagine we're sitting at a bar, chatting. None of us have anything to hide. Then the government passes a law that all conversations must be streamed on Youtube Live, so an agent comes in, sets up a camera at our table, and starts streaming. We still don't "have anything to hide". We're ju…
Oppose the Earn IT Act
341–350 of 570 posts
Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act
#342Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is somewhat subjective, but I think they've got it backwards. Under approval voting, strategic voting and honest voting are basically the same: you vote for as many of the candidates as you can tolerate, and maybe if there's a candidate you really don't want to win you vote for everyone but them. Except elections rarely work like that. There isn't a set of options I can tolerate and a set I can't. I want my pr…
STAR, the system we're advocating, solves a lot of these issues though. Score voting is "like" approval voting but with more precision (really approval is just the binary version of score). STAR05 is often suggested because experimentation shows that it has enough expressiveness to generate good winners but is simple. You can always add more expressiveness by increasing the range in which you can score candidates, bu…
Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act
#343If you want to convince your friends they should support encryption, here's how I like to get past the "nothing to hide" argument. Imagine we're sitting at a bar, chatting. None of us have anything to hide. Then the government passes a law that all conversations must be streamed on Youtube Live, so an agent comes in, sets up a camera at our table, and starts streaming. We still don't "have anything to hide". We're ju…
What's actually happening is that Facebook, Google, et.al. can read your messages and the Government can do so with a warrant. Nobody is planning on broadcasting everything to everyone. We don't have to ask people if they would do that or not. The vast majority of them do that today.
Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act
#344If you want to convince your friends they should support encryption, here's how I like to get past the "nothing to hide" argument. Imagine we're sitting at a bar, chatting. None of us have anything to hide. Then the government passes a law that all conversations must be streamed on Youtube Live, so an agent comes in, sets up a camera at our table, and starts streaming. We still don't "have anything to hide". We're ju…
The best sentiment I've ever heard about privacy is from Shoshana Zuboff, and it's now influenced my thoughts. It's at the end of her amazing 2018 book 'Surveillance Capitalism', the best book on tech I have ever read. She shares a conclusion along this line: To be private and free from surveillance is to be human. If we have no privacy, we lose our humanity.
She explains that there is a direct connection between being watched, and being controlled. We need freedom of diversity - to will - to decide for ourselves. Otherwise, and now I conclude, bad actors with power lust will only bend the world to their vision.
The guilt-tripping words of "nothing to hide" come from a place of privilege - or worse, hypocrisy. It is an insult to anyone who is different from the norm, and who wants to be themselves. What you have every right to hide does not even have to be illegal, but often it is, like LGBTQ people last century. Illegal ≠ immoral.
Privacy is a core freedom to protect human diversity. It must not be shamed. It must be loved. Cherished. Treasured.
Privacy begets diversity. Surveillance begets conformity. Which one is more important for the development of life in the universe?
As a child, I instinctively knew that privacy was something natural and important in life. Now as an adult, with education and intellect I can articulate why - and resist psychological manipulation and intellectual dishonesty from others trying to tell us that privacy should die.
I'm able to see the insanity of my own age. And I will guard privacy with my life on the street, if I have to.
Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act
#345I cannot believe that the one thing we have bipartisan consensus on is destroying strong encryption. I guess I’m biased since this is essentially my whole livelihood, but this is crazy, right?
Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act
#346If you want to convince your friends they should support encryption, here's how I like to get past the "nothing to hide" argument. Imagine we're sitting at a bar, chatting. None of us have anything to hide. Then the government passes a law that all conversations must be streamed on Youtube Live, so an agent comes in, sets up a camera at our table, and starts streaming. We still don't "have anything to hide". We're ju…
I'm stealing your analogy but I'm also ready for people to smugly proclaim that they would have no issue with livestreaming their entire life since they have nothing to hide.
When people make public speeches they tend to choose words more carefully because they aware about possible dramatic consequences.
The same level of awareness for each private conversation in the bar can lead to a lot of efforts. It's another level of efforts to formulate things correctly. Sometimes people just need a safe place to formulate and try ideas without worrying about being punished for consequences.
If everything is livestreaming it's hard to achieve certain level of relaxation.Because it becomes a hard work to avoid saying something they didn't mean.
This kind of hard extra work would result in overloads and intentional faking to be on the safe side.
And 'that' is the core damage effect of any mass surveillance: Inability to have a free and open private discussions.
So even when there is 'nothing to hide', there is a lot of work just to 'avoid to show' something you didn't mean.
Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act
#347Earlier quoted context omitted.
My nothing to hide argument is a little different; Nothing to hide is an incomplete sentence. Nothing to hide from who? Surly you want to hide your children from abusers and predators? Don't you want to hide your banking details from con artists and fraudsters? Your identity from identity thieves.. Your location from burglars, your car keys from car thieves or your blood type from some rich mobsters with kidney probl…
Wouldn't the counterargument be "but only the government would have access, and we can trust the government"?
Mind if I riffle through your contacts? Is it ok to DM any cute people I find?
Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act
#348Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the key here isn't broadcasting, it's storage. In the future (?) we might think we can detect Parkinson's or MS very early through voice/video/typing characteristics. Your conversations were recorded, the data leaked to or purchased by a fly by night company hired by your bank, and now suddenly despite your excellent credit history you can't get a 30 year mortgage, you try to find a new job but companies are…
> In the future (?) we might think we can detect Parkinson's or MS very early through voice/video/typing characteristics. We probably won't.
[1] someone, not me; "Cognito is a keylogger that tracks typing metrics, analyzes them with AI to diagnose Parkinson's"
Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act
#349Re: Oppose the Earn IT Act
#350If you want to convince your friends they should support encryption, here's how I like to get past the "nothing to hide" argument. Imagine we're sitting at a bar, chatting. None of us have anything to hide. Then the government passes a law that all conversations must be streamed on Youtube Live, so an agent comes in, sets up a camera at our table, and starts streaming. We still don't "have anything to hide". We're ju…
The "nothing to hide" argument is so old and easily debunk-able, I don't take seriously anyone who offers it up at this point.
I also do not take such person seriously but if I wish to convince such person I need a good argument that works.
If it's easy debunk-able for you I would be interested to see a few from you.