'People who want privacy have something to hide.'

[ph0b0s123]

In both Europe and the US at the moment there are efforts to get ISP's to record absolutely everything everyone does on-line (Reported here [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/28/details_of_all_internet_traffic_should_be_logged_says_mep/],here [http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/27/hawaiis-proposed-online-tracking-law-comes-under-fire-from-isps/] and here [http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/the-legislation-that-could-kill-internet-privacy-for-good/242853/]). From websites visited, to emails sent and comments left for example here and other places. There is also the technology available now to track almost everyone when not on-line via CCTV cameras and GPS in cars.

Now the reason used for all this being needed by legislators, is to protect people. Either from child abusers on-line, to terrorists outside your homes.

Now whenever any reservations are brought about this, the usual response seems to be only people who have something to hide should be worried about all this extra 'monitoring'.

What do people here think? Should we be monitored on mass without any thought to probable cause as with targeted monitoring (i.e wiretaps, etc). And is the argument that only people who have something to hide want privacy, a good one?

Edit: Forgot to also ask, do people think the Internet laws above are good if they are going to reduce, to some amount, child abuse etc. Or is it peoples view that the invasion of privacy outweighs the theoretical benefits? Or are child abusers and terrorists just bogey men that legislators use to try to get through things people would not allow otherwise.

Edit: I think the Benjamin Franklin quote has been done to death now. "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Also the it's only OK if politicians let us monitor them / root through their bins / watch them going to the toilet, first, points have been made.

Edit: FBI getting in the on the act....
http://publicintelligence.net/do-you-like-online-privacy-you-may-be-a-terrorist/

Edit: Now Canada: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/02/16/canadian_internet_privacy/
Bill's author: "You can either stand with us or with the child pornographers."
That's right if you don't support the loss of your internet Privacy you are actively supporting child abusers. Logic Fail...

 

[MrTub]

It's a dumb argument and I've only heard it once.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

What do people here think? Should we be monitored on mass without any thought to probable cause as with targeted monitoring (i.e wiretaps, etc). And is the argument that only people who have something to hide want privacy, a good one?

See here's the thing.

Just because you don't want everyone to see everything you do doesn't mean you're doing something illegal.

Example: Let's say that there's a guy running for public office, or just trying to get a promotion at work. Then this legislation goes through and it's discovered that he has a fetish for dressing up in Pokemon suits when having (consensual) sex. The guy would be ruined! He would be laughed out of office, or his boss might actually fire him because he doesn't want "Weirdos" working for him. And keep in mind that this poor guy isn't doing anything wrong, but will suffer greatly.

So yeah, practically everyone has something they don't want anyone knowing. Whether it's a fetish, or how often they masturbate, or if they have a bizarre hobby like making Iron Man suit replicas. If these secrets are exposed for all to see, they can be embarrassing at best, and harmful to their lives at worst.

As long as we're not doing anything illegal in our homes, no one has the right to step inside and spy on us.

Oh, and I highly doubt that this will apply to politicians, so no one can argue that this system would keep them "Clean". Just try suggesting that they make political party spending 100% transparent, and see how they take it. They'll fight that to the grave.

Honestly, spying on everyone is just going to benefit the people on top who want to control everything and make the world a big grey homogenous mass of boring, mindless, homogenized living dolls.

So screw this legislation, it's only going to make life miserable, and get abused to hell and back.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

double post... my internet crapped out.

Sorry.

 

[Kevlar Eater]

Not a very good argument at all. I can just as easily say that people who don't respect other people's respect don't respect their own. And they also smell and are addicted to facebook.

 

[him over there]

What do people here think? Should we be monitored on mass without any thought to probable cause as with targeted monitoring (i.e wiretaps, etc). And is the argument that only people who have something to hide want privacy, a good one?

See here's the thing.

Just because you don't want everyone to see everything you do doesn't mean you're doing something illegal.

Example: Let's say that there's a guy running for public office, or just trying to get a promotion at work. Then this legislation goes through and it's discovered that he has a fetish for dressing up in Pokemon suits when having (consensual) sex. The guy would be ruined! He would be laughed out of office, or his boss might actually fire him because he doesn't want "Weirdos" working for him. And keep in mind that this poor guy isn't doing anything wrong, but will suffer greatly.

So yeah, practically everyone has something they don't want anyone knowing. Whether it's a fetish, or how often they masturbate, or if they have a bizarre hobby like making Iron Man suit replicas. If these secrets are exposed for all to see, they can be embarrassing at best, and harmful to their lives at worst.

As long as we're not doing anything illegal in our homes, no one has the right to step inside and spy on us.

Oh, and I highly doubt that this will apply to politicians, so no one can argue that this system would keep them "Clean". Just try suggesting that they make political party spending 100% transparent, and see how they take it. They'll fight that to the grave.

Honestly, spying on everyone is just going to benefit the people on top who want to control everything and make the world a big grey homogenous mass of boring, mindless, homogenized living dolls.

So screw this legislation, it's only going to make life miserable, and get abused to hell and back.

Oh great now I can't add anything to the thread. Hit the nail on the head right here man!

 

[boag]

In both Europe and the US at the moment there are efforts to get ISP's to record absolutely everything everyone does on-line (Reported here [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/28/details_of_all_internet_traffic_should_be_logged_says_mep/],here [http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/27/hawaiis-proposed-online-tracking-law-comes-under-fire-from-isps/] and here [http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/the-legislation-that-could-kill-internet-privacy-for-good/242853/]). From websites visited, to emails sent and comments left for example here and other places. There is also the technology available now to track almost everyone when not on-line via CCTV cameras and GPS in cars.

Now the reason used for all this being needed by legislators, is to protect people. Either from child abusers on-line, to terrorists outside your homes.

Now whenever any reservations are brought about this, the usual response seems to be only people who have something to hide should be worried about all this extra 'monitoring'.

What do people here think? Should we be monitored on mass without any thought to probable cause as with targeted monitoring (i.e wiretaps, etc). And is the argument that only people who have something to hide want privacy, a good one?

Yes I do have shit to hide, I dont want anyone watching while I have cyber pony sex with my GF when im not in town to feed her fetish. That should be private between me and her.

 

[JoJo]

Not only will everyone's privacy be breached, anyone who REALLY had something to hide would just use Tor or similar to hide their IP, so all the non-stupid terrorists and child-abusers would get away with their dirty deeds leaving the rest of us to pick up the bill. I know Moore's law means storage is ever cheaper but must cost a hell of a lot of store everything that happens online for an entire year.

 

[C F]

And is the argument that only people who have something to hide want privacy, a good one?

Nope.

You see, here's the thing: Everyone is selfish to some extent, putting themselves above others. Privacy is merely an extension of that. At the simplest, basic level, we enjoy it because it is time and space that belongs to no one but ourselves. The next reason (by extension) is that it gives us freedom from others. Everyone likes the idea of doing stuff without anybody else knowing. It gives us the comfort that we are individuals, and we can enjoy reprieve from society. We don't hide because we feel guilty, it's because we feel comfortable doing it.

That would be like saying "People only sleep because they're having lewd dreams." Okay? Maybe that could be true. Maybe that's something that occurs frequently for you and want to revel in it. But odds are you hit that pillow because you're tired and you've got a long day tomorrow. And sleep's just the thing you need to refresh and rejuvenate.

And that brings us to tonight's WØRD:
Tired Argument.

Surely they can try better than that.

 

[appleblush]

It's a stupid argument. It's akin to saying that I don't want people to watch me take a shit because I have tentacles growing out of my vagina. People like their privacy in some aspects of their life. It's the reason we have developed so many ways to improve personal privacy over the years, through the invention of anti-spyware software, and tinted windows, and doors.

And on that note, people who have something to hide are going to find new ways to hide it the minute such legislation would be passsed.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Eh, it's a copout non-argument that's as old as time.
There are good reasons to keep your private life safe anyway; when it's available to everyone in society, some part of that society may find a way to leverage it against you for whatever reason.

There's always at least one asshole out there who will attempt to do it too..

 

[ph0b0s123]

It's a dumb argument and I've only heard it once.

"Privacy is the space bad people need to do bad things in. Privacy is for paedos; fundamentally nobody else needs it."

Quote from Paul McMullan at Leveson Inquiry. Paul McMullan one of the journalists who took part in phone hacking....

After letting my questions above sit for a while, I thought I would chime in. I support tapping internet connections the same way it is done for tapping phones. I.e requiring a warrant before it happens. So it would only get you stuff from after the warrant was implemented. Don't know if this is still how it works in the US after they allowed the NSA warrent-less phone tapping powers.

 

[MrTub]

It's a dumb argument and I've only heard it once.

"Privacy is the space bad people need to do bad things in. Privacy is for paedos; fundamentally nobody else needs it."

Quote from Paul McMullan at Leveson Inquiry. Paul McMullan one of the journalists who took part in phone hacking....

Yeah, that is the only time I've heard anybody say it

And about your edit, it's kinda hard to really "police" anything on the internet since people that are doing illegal things are using proxys/tor/vpn and such things.

 

[ph0b0s123]

It's a dumb argument and I've only heard it once.

"Privacy is the space bad people need to do bad things in. Privacy is for paedos; fundamentally nobody else needs it."

Quote from Paul McMullan at Leveson Inquiry. Paul McMullan one of the journalists who took part in phone hacking....

Yeah, that is the only time I've heard anybody say it

And about your edit, it's kinda hard to really "police" anything on the internet since people that are doing illegal things are using proxys/tor/vpn and such things.

Well, that's the discussion about how effective the measures would be in combating the bogey men they are designed to stop. I.e not very effective. It would only catch the low hanging fruit, but since that is the mentality with most drug policy...

 

[Dr Pussymagnet]

My problem isn't that this argument exists, but that people actually think it's a good one.

 

[viranimus]

Well I would be categorically opposed to the notion of government attempting to gain information it has no use in having. However given that the general population has little or no concern with the wrong people having and misusing their information and even cheerfully profess their love for the corporate overlords who regularly track your browsing history, DVR habits, online purchases, status updates etc then I see no real point to try to resist because there are not enough people to put up enough resistance against it.

Why be opposed to giving one group of irresponsible jackovs consent to invade your privacy when you freely give that consent to a different group of irresponsible jackovs? The difference being one being a corporation and the other being government is an irrelevant distinction when you know one is bought and paid for by the other.

 

[WyndWalker02]

I hate this concept and the argument that "if you you're doing nothing wrong you have nothing to hide." Same thing with those x-ray spec machines in airports that made the news so much cause they were all but letting the TSA people look at you naked, and people argued that if you weren't hiding something you shouldn't complain. To quote good ole Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up a little liberty to acquire a bit of temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

 

[alandavidson]

What do people here think? Should we be monitored on mass without any thought to probable cause as with targeted monitoring (i.e wiretaps, etc). And is the argument that only people who have something to hide want privacy, a good one?

See here's the thing.

Just because you don't want everyone to see everything you do doesn't mean you're doing something illegal.

Example: Let's say that there's a guy running for public office, or just trying to get a promotion at work. Then this legislation goes through and it's discovered that he has a fetish for dressing up in Pokemon suits when having (consensual) sex. The guy would be ruined! He would be laughed out of office, or his boss might actually fire him because he doesn't want "Weirdos" working for him. And keep in mind that this poor guy isn't doing anything wrong, but will suffer greatly.

So yeah, practically everyone has something they don't want anyone knowing. Whether it's a fetish, or how often they masturbate, or if they have a bizarre hobby like making Iron Man suit replicas. If these secrets are exposed for all to see, they can be embarrassing at best, and harmful to their lives at worst.

As long as we're not doing anything illegal in our homes, no one has the right to step inside and spy on us.

Oh, and I highly doubt that this will apply to politicians, so no one can argue that this system would keep them "Clean". Just try suggesting that they make political party spending 100% transparent, and see how they take it. They'll fight that to the grave.

Honestly, spying on everyone is just going to benefit the people on top who want to control everything and make the world a big grey homogenous mass of boring, mindless, homogenized living dolls.

So screw this legislation, it's only going to make life miserable, and get abused to hell and back.

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.