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

If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

jacquesmattheij.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 321 posts

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#261

Post by simoncion »

markb139 wrote: post #202
67726e wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny part was, I didn't even own a gun for the break in or when I found the dude breaking into my neighbors house. In fact, I was lucky enough that there happened to be a cop driving by right as I ran out the door to try to grab his plate number. In the case of the carjacking, that happened to my boss when he pulled over to render assistance to a man who crashed his motorcycle. Him just trying to be a good Samaritan…

The Scouts aren't armed with concealed weapons.

Incorrect. Every Boy Scout I know carries at least one knife, after they get their Toting Chit.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#262

Post by copsarebastards »

If you have nothing to hide, sure. But we aren't in an accepting enough world where that's the case for almost anyone. Have you had sex outside of marriage? Smoked marijuana? Are you gay or trans? All of these are things that in many contexts could be used against you, and as such it's pretty reasonable to want to keep those things secret from people you don't know and trust.

Just because you have something to hide doesn't mean you've done something wrong and deserve to have it exposed.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#263

Post by boyaka »

oneloop wrote: post #53
michaelpinto wrote: post #8

Something that people in silicon valley just don't get is that that the above argument also applies to tech corporations like Google who collect personal data for living and then say "trust us, we'll do no evil". The industry is upset about Snowden because it cost them sales in China, but for the most part while it talks the talk it doesn't walk the walk. * If we're going to talk about WWII a good example would be IB…

I was gonna say that at least in the tech world if you don't like a company you can just not use their products. But then it occurred to me that if you don't like a country you can just move...

Or you can work to purge the scum that is ruining the country your ancestors worked to make great, and that you were born and raised in.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#264

Post by voidz »

jsingleton wrote: post #33
dmvaldman wrote: post #3

"When you say I don't care about the right to privacy because I have nothing to hide, that is no different than saying I don't care about freedom of speech because I have nothing to say or freedom of the press because I have nothing to write." - Edward Snowden

Well put. The Open Rights Group regularly do briefings on things like this and one of the "Responses you might get and how to counter them" arguments is: "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear That isn’t true. Surveillance has been used against journalists, whistleblowers and human rights activists. Most of us want to keep parts of our lives private." [0] I've had people use the naïve "nothing to fear…

So, even if you have nothing to hide, you still have things to fear.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#265

Post by kuschku »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #133
kuschku wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, in this case it might be. In a society where no one owns guns, the chance that some intruder has a gun is near to null, so you don’t need a gun either.

Clearly a 5'1", 105lb woman has no need of a gun when a 6'4", 240lb man breaks into her home.

I am a 5'10", 120lbs woman, and I feel more safe knowing that no one has a gun.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#266

Post by joering2 »

The last part of this sentence has a false premise. You do have plenty to fear, because any government has made errors in their judgments many times before. In fact, any lawsuit brought against GOV that has been won, as well as any won appeal, is indeed a living proof government makes mistakes as well.

Ergo, it is not that I shouldn't have anything to hide because I shouldn't fear the government, it is rather that I fear that the government can misinterpret whatever it is that I'am hiding. (I strongly suggest watching movie "Brasil").

Government, after all, is about masses and implementing rules "for all", not "for individuals". A simple example is me being a long term photographer. I enjoy indoor photos. How the light is formed, aperture used, shots being taken, angles, etc. I browse Anne Geddes photos of almost naked children on secure Tor from a local starbucks on a Wifi dongle that I don't use for anything else (public wifis collect and store MAC data) not because I'm a pedophile (something Gov can assume), but rather because I have no idea how Gov could stretch this information, and I am unsure if I could be financially able to pick up my lawyers tab to get a chance to prove to the judge few months into the lawsuit that I am actually a long-term photographer hobbyist, no some twisted kiddie pron lover.

My second answer to this is a "gimme your password" test. Just few weeks ago I was pulled over in a shady neighborhood because my friend is broke and cannot afford anything better. The cop immediately wanted to search my car. I responded I have nothing to hide here. He replied "well, in this case if you have nothing to hide, then you shouldn't have anything against my search, Sir". To what I reached out for a pen and my notepad, opened it on an empty page and handed it to the police officer. He asked me "what is this?". I said: "kindly please give me your email address and password to it". He didn't laugh but clearly didn't want to get suck in. I quickly added: "I mean after all, if you have nothing to hide in your mailbox, then you shouldn't be concerned of me having access it, do you?". He responded "have a good day" and let me on my way.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#267

Post by vidarh »

aaronem wrote: post #188
DanBC wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a man break into my home when I was there. He got in through the roof, going up scaffolding on a derelict building next door. I offered him a cup of tea, and told him it would probably be safer for him to leave via my front door and down the stairs rather than back down the scaffolding. He declined the tea, but I went and made one for myself and called the police. He went back out the way he'd come in. The poli…

That's nice, especially since he didn't have one of the very many knives which are, I gather from the news, such a perennial problem in your neck of the woods. Here's hoping you stay lucky!

Knife crime was popular in the news for a while because they reported on disproportionally many cases, presumably because of the lack of something more exciting - like gun crime.

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#268

Post by ux-app »

67726e wrote: post #173
lern_too_spel wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing like that has ever happened to me. In fact, I have never been in a situation where I would have been better off with a gun on me. Funny how people who own guns seem to end up in dangerous situations so often.

Funny part was, I didn't even own a gun for the break in or when I found the dude breaking into my neighbors house. In fact, I was lucky enough that there happened to be a cop driving by right as I ran out the door to try to grab his plate number. In the case of the carjacking, that happened to my boss when he pulled over to render assistance to a man who crashed his motorcycle. Him just trying to be a good Samaritan…

I don't understand how a gun would make things better in any of these scenarios. Without a gun the worst case scenario is that some property is stolen. Big deal. With a gun the worst case scenario is that a human being's life has been snuffed out.

here's an idea. Get property insurance instead of a gun. That way if your shit gets stolen you'll get a shiny, brand new replacement from the insurance company!

And nobody dies!

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#269

Post by ux-app »

baddox wrote: post #160
Maken wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from starting a gun race with the burglar and fearing losing your life altogether with your possessions, I never follow this reasoning. How is it worse facing without guns a unarmed intruder than facing with a gun a well armed one?

If you're physically weaker than the other person, it's pretty clear how it's worse. Two people with guns is a much more even match than two different-sized people without guns. And that's ignoring the criminals-will-still-have-guns argument.

Contrary to what Hollywood would have you believe, the vast, vast majority of home intruders don't want to murder you (it's so rare that these people get special nicknames like "Son of Sam" or "Zodiac Killer"). Most intruders just want your shit so they can sell it off.

Adding a gun into the mix runs counter to simple common sense. The rational response is to have property insurance and stay out of a burglar's way.

This approach is a double win. 1. Nobody dies (yay!) 2. You get brand new stuff paid for by the insurance company!

Re: If you've nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

#270

Post by derf_ »

perfTerm wrote: post #107
jsingleton wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well put. The Open Rights Group regularly do briefings on things like this and one of the "Responses you might get and how to counter them" arguments is: "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear That isn’t true. Surveillance has been used against journalists, whistleblowers and human rights activists. Most of us want to keep parts of our lives private." [0] I've had people use the naïve "nothing to fear…

And even if I have nothing to hide why can't I fear for potential whistle blowers, journalists, or activists? It's a shame that we love to boil incredibly complex issues down into simple platitudes. You find it on facebook, on the news, on twitter (although short and sweet does work well there), and every where else you look and people you talk to. It's a shallow way to talk about things.

"That's the ten-word answer my staff's been looking for for two weeks. There it is. Ten-word answers can kill you in political campaigns. They're the tip of the sword.

Here's my question: What are the next ten words of your answer? Your taxes are too high? So are mine. Give me the next ten words. How are we going to do it? Give me ten after that, I'll drop out of the race right now. Every once in a while... every once in a while, there's a day with an absolute right and an absolute wrong, but those days almost always include body counts. Other than that, there aren't many unnuanced moments in leading a country that's way too big for ten words."

--President Josiah "Jed" Bartlet, The West Wing Season 4, Episode 5 (2002)

Post reply on HN