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

201–210 of 219 posts

Re: Why was this secret?

#201

Post by pavelrub »

grey-area wrote: post #171
pavelrub wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are misinterpreting the post. Derek isn't claiming that your decisions about what to keep private shouldn't be respected, but rather that you - the person who wishes to keep things private - might benefit from thinking twice about what is it you are actually afraid of, and whether it is all rational. Claiming that her diary was secret because "she wanted to" is really beside the point. People constantly "want" ma…

People constantly "want" many things which are harmful to them. In this case, Derek and his friend appear to want something which is harmful to them (almost completely transparency in all their activities, to the extent of revealing a private diary on request). People are just pointing out why this is harmful, and why he should think twice before proclaiming that 'secrets are just facts'. You can't ever take back hav…

And yet whether Derek is right or not is unrelated to whether people should have a right to keep things private - of course they should. This is why grellas is misinterpreting the post, and this is also why your last paragraph is also a misinterpretation of the post.

As to the content of the post itself - there are obvious edge cases where releasing private information is harmful. I don't think Derek is claiming that they don't exists, or that total transparency is the best way to go. Let each of us think for ourselves what kind of information we should keep private because of real, rational and justified reasons, and what is based on irrational fears of exposing something that nobody cares about in the first place. I think you will find that often the majority of what people consider worth hiding is of the second kind.

People don't keep private diaries because they believe that "a growing lack of privacy is a serious problem in our society", they keep private diaries because they feel psychologically inclined to do so.

Re: Why was this secret?

#202

Post by mcb3k »

JimboOmega wrote: post #12
Qantourisc wrote: post #4

"So if someone is going through my private things, for example, and gets upset about what they find, then that’s their problem, not mine!” Must agree... until someone makes it your problem, by social standards, laws, or anything else they can use to make your life harder.

My thoughts almost exactly. It's all fine until you wind up on some sort of watchlist because of something "someone" found, and then travelling by air is a nightmare. I'm not sure why, exactly, we decided that people we don't like but we can't pin any crimes on are punished by having limited access to air travel, but that's how it is! On a related and more personal note, I once got in a large amount of trouble for a…

I had a similar thing happen to me back in high school, where my personal blog I was keeping had repercussions with some of the student populace. Pretty quickly after, I set the whole thing to private and stopped updating. I've run several blogs after that, but none of them where public and containing personal information.

Re: Why was this secret?

#203

Post by jarrett »

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.

It's fine if it doesn't resonate with you, but that's evidently because your perspective is limited by your relatively good fortune.

"Dystopia" wouldn't seem so contrived to residents of East Germany under the Stasi. We're not speaking in hypotheticals. There is precedent for societies using the available technology to erode privacy as much as possible.

"Enemies trying to ruin lives" wouldn't seem so contrived to some people who've had abusive, stalker exes. Read about some of the things people do for personal vendettas. It may not have happened to you, but it probably happened to somebody you know.

"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." Until someone unexpectedly uses your personal information to materially harm your well-being. Then your life becomes much more stressful.

Re: Why was this secret?

#204

Post by jarrett »

blah32497 wrote: post #127
coldtea wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He isn't arguing that privacy is inherently bad, or you should never ever have secrets. Yeah, if your trying to overthrow an fascist regime, it makes sense to have secrets. But again, that's a contrived reason. If you're MLK, that's not really the norm. That's a contrived reason too. For one, it SHOULD be the norm. "Be the change you want to see in the world" and everything. It's not just something to pay lip servi…

Okay, I reread the article b/c I was starting to feel like I read something completely different. At no point does the author mention the government and at no point does he mention making every aspect of your life public. Seems like most of the people replying either didn't read the article and they just want to vent. There are legitimate reason to have secrets, and there are reasons that are stressors and actually s…

"At no point does the author mention the government and at no point does he mention making every aspect of your life public." That's correct. I made the root post for this particular comment thread, and I consciously expanded the discussion to include broader questions of privacy. That's why I began by saying that the author's explicit claims were fine, but that I also noticed a possible subtext. We're not declaring the author wrong, because he never explicitly said the things with which we're now disagreeing. We're stating a position that some people hold, then disagreeing with that position.

Re: Why was this secret?

#205

Post by jarrett »

Toenex wrote: post #167
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,…

Now imagine a dystopian future when all such diaries are available to a privileged subset of society. Imagine the power that subset would hold, and all the ways it would likely be abused. Surely that power comes not from the honesty of the words in the diary, but from the fear that those words become widely known. Do most people have something to hide that is so shameful, so damning? In many cases is secrecy a luxury…

"Do most people have something to hide that is so shameful, so damning?"

Have you ever complained to a friend or family member about your boss? Then the answer is yes.

Have you ever said something really embarrassingly politically incorrect? Then the answer is yes.

Have you ever possessed an illegal drug, including alcohol while underage? Then the answer is yes.

Re: Why was this secret?

#206

Post by lukeqsee »

PeterisP wrote: post #176
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…

It's also related the other way - if everything you do or say is public, it won't be held against you. Noone cares about your sexual kinks or comic tastes, if everyone knows about the even weirder issues of the president and all the congressmen.

Perhaps not in the greater world. However, the only way what you're suggesting would work in my anecdotal world is if everyone was 100% open (civil disobedience). That won't happen without a significant critical mass of people; people are, in general, sheep and cowards.

Re: Why was this secret?

#207

Post by differentView »

justinlilly wrote: post #98
differentView wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? Are you going to stay awake 24/7 to stop those abusers when they get too close to their victims?

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.

The most theoretical part of such a scenario is the police force that follows procedures perfectly and aren't ever overworked.

Re: Why was this secret?

#210

Post by tbrownaw »

PeterisP wrote: post #176
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…

It's also related the other way - if everything you do or say is public, it won't be held against you. Noone cares about your sexual kinks or comic tastes, if everyone knows about the even weirder issues of the president and all the congressmen.

Except that your parents' ultra-conservative church tells them what you're doing is wrong. And while your parents don't care if the politicians all go to hell, they definitely care if you do. Which means there's far less annoying family drama if you just keep it quiet.
Post reply on HN