Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why was this secret?

sivers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 219 posts

Re: Why was this secret?

#111

Post by woah »

blah32497 wrote: post #33
jarrett wrote: post #9

In the context of coding projects, the author's conclusion seems realistic. Given current events though, I can't help but wonder if there's a subtext about privacy and snooping. If so, then I would venture this observation: Your friend's super-secret diary is meaningless to you only because you have no desire to abuse the access you've been given. Suppose instead your friend's devious enemy obtained the diary. Then,…

The reasons for privacy are always so contrived. "Dystopian futures", "enemies trying to ruin lives" etc. etc. It never resonates with me. I think what the author is trying to say is that if you live an open life with few secrets, then your life will be less stressful. He's encouraging us to really reevaluate what we keep secret b/c when you sit down to think about it, it's most likely all in your head.

Could you please post your real name? If not, you are by definition a hypocrite in what you have just said.

Re: Why was this secret?

#112

Post by ilaksh »

This person realized that with the NSA and however many other agencies spying on us, and other issues, we may not effectively have any real privacy anymore, and therefore he has come up with one or more rationalizations for why this is OK.

This is probably a common thing. Seems a bit similar to Stockholm syndrome. Anyway its probably an automatic self-defense mechanism.

The scary part is that a significant portion of the population is probably also doing a similar sort of rationalization now.

People will eventually accept any circumstance that they can't change, unless it is going to kill them. Actually, even if it _will_ kill them. In fact, our inevitable death is one aspect of life that people will often rationalize in the most determined way.

We can change this circumstance though. We can have privacy, even in the digital age. Don't give up your natural rights so easily.

Re: Why was this secret?

#113

Post by mcintyre1994 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #77
BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The abused wouldn't be able to track their abuser's allies without knowing who they all were.

But if any of the abuser's allies did anything to the abused, they could be easily identified and tracked down; this could act as a deterrent.

If we're not capping the level of abuse it could easily be too late though. Let's take it to the extreme, somebody wants to kill you and you have no choice but to broadcast your location to everybody. Some people receiving that data, you don't know who, are happy to do the killing for the person who wants to kill you. Afterward they can be identified and tracked down, but at this extremity it's too late.

Re: Why was this secret?

#114

Post by matz1 »

gnaffle wrote: post #102
justinlilly wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the theoretical data is available on the theoretical abuser, the police could monitor it, or you could have a non-profit service which monitors the proximity and alerts authorities / sends a "get out of the house" message to you.

So, instead of living a life in relative safety, you get to spend the rest of your life on alert and in fear. I really don't see how you can argue that this would be an acceptable solution.

No I would have no problem if they just watch, only if they did something hurt then its problem. In open society they can be tracked easily.

Re: Why was this secret?

#115

Post by lukeqsee »

jnbiche wrote: post #100
lukeqsee wrote: post #60

When you live in a society where anything you do or say (or accidentally appear to have said or did) will be held against you, privacy matters. It matters so much you don't log-in to online messaging services because you're wary of SSL MitM attacks or send non-encrypted emails from that network or do a litany of other "normal" things. It definitely means you aren't 100% open like Sivers is suggesting. How do I know t…

Since you've shared that anecdote, may I ask why you chose to go to such a university? I'm guessing it's probably a religious university (don't know of any non-religious schools with such strictures). Was it for spiritual reasons, or for financial reasons? Personal question, obviously, so feel free to tell me to shove off, but I'm very curious how intelligent people make these decisions.

I'd be happy to discuss those personal decisions in a private setting (email me, if you wish, it's on my profile). I don't think a public discussion will yield much benefit.

Also, I would argue military academies have such demands upon the person.

Re: Why was this secret?

#116

Post by gnaffle »

matz1 wrote: post #114
gnaffle wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, instead of living a life in relative safety, you get to spend the rest of your life on alert and in fear. I really don't see how you can argue that this would be an acceptable solution.

No I would have no problem if they just watch, only if they did something hurt then its problem. In open society they can be tracked easily.

Great for you, but I think that you understand that not everyone would feel the same in such a situation?

Re: Why was this secret?

#117

Post by zobzu »

Now imagine that instead of her boyfriend, someone who hates her finds the diary. Yeah.

You're stupid. That's not a secret tho - it's just a fact. I'd happily sugar-coat it but I'm tired of feeling like we're degrading our minds since internet came around with fast paced sensationalistic crap.

Re: Why was this secret?

#118

Post by iQuercus »

m0nastic wrote: post #34

I can't even imagine about what privacy is going to look like in 20 years, or how society will adapt to deal with it. What seems missing from his thought experiment is how to address privacy for things that concern more than just a single participant. I don't particularly worry about my individual privacy, or care about securing my things. If someone managed to get a hold of my email, I wouldn't be very put out. I do…

If I recall my history correctly, then through most of human history the notion of privacy has not been anywhere near as robust as it is today.

We live in "luxurious" times as it pertains to what we consider privacy today.

Re: Why was this secret?

#119

Post by matz1 »

mcintyre1994 wrote: post #113
TeMPOraL wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if any of the abuser's allies did anything to the abused, they could be easily identified and tracked down; this could act as a deterrent.

If we're not capping the level of abuse it could easily be too late though. Let's take it to the extreme, somebody wants to kill you and you have no choice but to broadcast your location to everybody. Some people receiving that data, you don't know who, are happy to do the killing for the person who wants to kill you. Afterward they can be identified and tracked down, but at this extremity it's too late.

The punishment for killing is the deterrent.

Re: Why was this secret?

#120

Post by lesserknowndan »

amirmc wrote: post #61
jacalata wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? You think that, for instance, someone trying to leave an abusive partner doesn't have more reason to want their whereabouts unknown than someone with no psychotic acquaintances? Someone who turned state's witness against their drug dealer friends?

Let's flip that around. The key point would be "everyone's location ... No exceptions". Then you'd know if that abusive partner was approaching you (and call relevant authorities). The dealers would probably also be known without needing a witness. Of course, we'd also know who was sleeping with whom and when. It's an interesting thought experiment to imagine such a world but for it to be viable, society would have t…

Assuming that the location is based on tracking a mobile phone, the aggressor could quite easily leave their phone at home and if they need a phone take an unregistered one.

The problem with open information is that those with evil intent can take precautions to ensure their activities aren't monitored.

Post reply on HN