41–50 of 87 posts
Relate to them how how little bits of data on Facebook is exactly the same exploitation vector for scams that enemies use in warfare (no exaggeration, it is literally the same).
I would ask to rifle through their phone right in front of them. There's a subtle difference between something you'd want to hide (because it could be incriminating) and something you don't want made public (because it could be embarrassing). I have nothing incriminating, but I have embarrassing stuff on my phone that I would rather nobody looked at. A phone is an intensely personal device where a lot of your private…
You want something that causes a visceral reaction, not rational arguments.
The more disgust, fear, awkwardness you can cause with your action, the clearer the message you get across.
I remember seeing a documentary featuring Edward Snowden, where he said something along the lines: "Saying "I do not care about my privacy, because I have nothing to hide", is like saying "I do not care about freedom of speech, because I have nothing to say"" This explanation stuck with me, because I find it extremely useful in situations when explaining the importance of privacy online to non-technical people.
I might still care about freedom of speech for the freedom of others which I value. I may not agree that I find value, assuming I have nothing to hide, in other people's privacy.
Not taking a position on privacy here, I'm just stating the analogy doesn't stick.
I would ask to rifle through their phone right in front of them. There's a subtle difference between something you'd want to hide (because it could be incriminating) and something you don't want made public (because it could be embarrassing). I have nothing incriminating, but I have embarrassing stuff on my phone that I would rather nobody looked at. A phone is an intensely personal device where a lot of your private…
I think easiest way to get point of privacy to people is through their kids. Are they fine with some random people gathering a lot of data about their kids?
Besides all the analogies you have the right to privacy. Nobody should violate it just as nobody should violate your freedom, etc.
Ask them what do states have to hide by having stuff classified as "top secret" or why do they run secret services. And why should I, as an individual, be transparent with an entity that is not transparent to me?
I’m as tinfoil hat wearing as they come but will still say that’s a terrible answer. States have intelligence agencies and maintain secrecy for both security reasons (nuclear codes shouldn’t be public right?) and privacy reasons of citizens involved (innocent till proven guilty).
> And why should I, as an individual, be transparent with an entity that is not transparent to me?
The first half of that is enough to stand on its own. You shouldn’t have to be transparent simply because that’s your choice to do so.
Some ones I've seen and liked - "If you're not doing anything wrong in your living room, why draw the curtains?" "We should save paper by sending people their bank statements on postcards. If you're not doing anything financially shady, you should be okay with the postman seeing it."
I remember seeing a documentary featuring Edward Snowden, where he said something along the lines: "Saying "I do not care about my privacy, because I have nothing to hide", is like saying "I do not care about freedom of speech, because I have nothing to say"" This explanation stuck with me, because I find it extremely useful in situations when explaining the importance of privacy online to non-technical people.
The key point is that you do not get to decide if you have something to hide.
When you share data extensively with companies or the government, they now have the power to use it to make decisions about you. They may use that power in ways you disagree with. They may punish you for things you don’t think are wrong, or deny you employment for reasons you think are stupid, and so on. It’s not your decision that you are perfect and have nothing to hide; they get to use your data and decide that.
Daniel Solove has expressed a version of this argument before, that privacy is really about power, and it is compelling: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565
Moxie Marlinspike makes a similar point that positive social changes, like acceptance of homosexuality or marijuana, require the ability to do socially disapproved things in private. With no privacy, the changes would never happen, because nobody would have been able to, say, privately have a same-sex relationship. https://moxie.org/blog/we-should-all-have-something-to-hide/