4. Have you ever being diagnosed with a mental illness?
5. Are you currently on anti-depressants?
6. Were you ever sexually abused as a child?
7. Have you ever fancied someone of the same sex?
8. Have you ever had sex with someone of the same sex?
9. Have you ever criticised your current employer or boss to anyone else?
10. Do you love all of your children equally?
11. Have you ever fantasized about...
12. Are you planning to get pregnant in the next two years?
13. Have you ever lied on a cv/resume?
14. Are you mean to your wife / husband on a regular or semi-regular basis?
15. Do you have trouble acquiring or maintaining an erection?
16. Are you one of those women who’ve never had an orgasm?
17. What prescription drugs are you currently taking?
18. Have you ever cut yourself?
19. Have you ever attempted suicide?
20. Have you contemplated suicide in the past 2 weeks?
21. Would you be happy with your answers to these questions being made public? Or being read by your employer, local 23 year old policeman, or nosey neighbour?
I could go on and on. None of the actions mentioned in these questions are illegal, but for many/most people, the answers would be intensely private.
Responses like these just legitimize the idea that privacy is about hiding things. It isn't. Privacy is a way of restricting the government's power over you.
Giving the government the power to read your email, tap your phone, and record your porn usage isn't bad simply because it's embarrassing. After all, the data will likely only be seen by a computer. But it gives the government enormous power to make decisions about you -- decisions about whether you may take a commercial airline flight, get a security clearance, get a job, or even be indefinitely detained -- without your knowledge or consent, and without you knowing how they make the decisions.
Recall the stories of people getting on the no-fly list with no appeals process and no way to find out what information had been used to put them there.
In short, a lack of privacy gives the government the power to be even less transparent in its decision-making, and gives it yet more power over its citizens. It's not a question of discovering your fetishes or being embarrassed, and we shouldn't act as though having nothing to hide really is an excuse.
There's a rather good paper I can recommend on the subject:
One important thing to recognize is that: "You can read my text/call logs" !== "You and the rest of the world can know everything about me"
So someone saying they "have nothing to hide" doesn't really mean they would answer all the above question publicly, but rather there is no electronic record/evidence of anything they know they want to keep private.
And, as another point of discussion, whilst the matters raised in those questions may be deeply personal for many people, frankly I wouldn't be concerned if my answers to those questions were in the public domain.
I tried to think of a persuasive, semi-automated way to use it and came up with this:
First, make a website where you would log in with Facebook or Google (and optionally give your Twitter handle) and then give answers to questions like the ones above. Filled-in answer forms would be stored and then (by default) accessible to the public (through a search form and a "latest" column on the front page). Include a small checkbox at the bottom to keep the filled-in form hidden from the public but available to the government upon request.
Now, when people say they "have nothing to hide" to you on-line do the following:
1. Link them to that website.
2. At this point they will most likely try to qualify their initial statement with a "from the government".
3. Bring to their attention the checkbox at the bottom.
4. "But the owner of the website might sell the data anyway!"
5. You are now at a good starting point for an in-depth conversation about privacy ("How is this different from Facebook?").
Of course, this is rather manipulative and could become obnoxiously overused, but would you rather this tool existed or not? Feel free also to suggest your improvements.
Apparently those people in the twitter feed are fine with getting registered and living under high transparency.
My suggestion would be a crowd funded campaign to doxx each one of them. Would be happy to donate a few hours of my time tracing their real names.
With some funded capital we could buy and publish for each one a personal background check sort of a personal gift to free them from the burden of anonymity.
Here's the thing. If it's only YOUR answers that can be made public and the entire world is expected to scrutinize them, you will want to keep it private.
But if lots of people's answers are public, you will quickly see that everyone... is just human. The things we consider private and embarrassing are absolutely common and normal. It's absolutely normal to be abnormal. It's normal to be average. It's okay to have weird fantasies, other people have weird fantasies too. Everyone takes a shit.
It's the imbalance of information release that is more upsetting.
Until a few weeks ago, my answer to all these questions would have been on the safe side (except for 11 which is very open-ended). I think, most people who say "I have nothing to hide, so why should I worry about privacy?" have a list like this one to fall back upon.
The question of whether you have anything to hide is really the same as whether you're willing to put everything that you have ever thought under legal scrutiny. It's not about being on the "correct social and legal side" in all the tame scenarios that one has dreamed up.
10. yes - as far as I know, you either love someone or you don't, I don't think it comes in degrees.;
11. yes; 12. no; 13. no; 14. no;
15. yes, but [array of excuses];
16. no; 17. none;
18. Yes, but not intentionally [kitchen job for 4 years]
19. no; 20. no; 21. No, just indifferent.
Why is the policeman 23 years old? Seems like a strange number to pull out of a hat. Also I'm pretty sure lying on your CV is illegal - that would be some sort of fraud, wouldn't it?
Please list the names, addresses, dates of birth, phone numbers, and any private information you may have access to (SSN, credit card number, banking details) of your mother, father, brothers, sisters, children, and any other family members.
Might as well throw in all the info you have for any friends and acquaintances too.
And their private photos, too, because you don't care about hiding things that people have shared with you in confidence, right? You must not, because you said you have nothing to hide.
While I don't necessarily condone this, it is an interesting thought. Social motivation (i.e. what people think about us) is one of the most powerful motivations in the world. How would the world change if everyone knew everything? Would we be motivated to be better people?
What if everyone's credit score was public or everyone knew how much time people spent on Facebook, watching TV, or similar activities? Would we become better?
Imagine if political and business leaders were elected on such characteristics, the truth. What if everyone was known for who they really were? Would crime and corruption go down? Would there ever be another war if people understood each other better?
It'd sure make dating easier...do you really want to start a life with this person now that you know what they are? Do you want this person to be the mother/father of your children? The bar would certainly be lower, because nobody is perfect and everyone has secrets.
Would the truth be beautiful once it’s universal? People who lived lives of quiet desperation (more than we think) would find out how many other people are just like them. Would people stop being ashamed of who they are? Would rates of mental illness, suicide, and depression plummet?
Would the world be better? I assure you it'd be more compassionate. People would be less likely to judge people based on unrealistic standards while quietly ignoring their own shortcomings.
I wouldn't be surprised if in the next 20 years we saw an 'Open' organization where people opt-in to share everything about themselves and make everything public. Maybe it'd be cathartic, maybe it wouldn't catch on, but with enough critical mass the social pressure would be interesting to see (i.e. how those running for political office are pressured to release past tax filings).
I don't have nothing to hide from the government. This doesn't mean everyone I know should know everything about me. I am just a number for people collecting information about me, whereas for YOU or anyone in my social circle, certain kind of information can change my reputation and the way I'm seen by my peers forever.
Stop equating "the government is doing statistics about people and keeping that information confidential" with "everyone should know everything about anyone".
If you think the problem is that the government could leak that information, anyone that is currently handling your data (e.g. Google) could.
Along the same lines:
1) Govt asks: Have you ever committed a crime? and waits for your response
2) Then asks: Have you ever jaywalked/gone faster than posted speed/etc? (any other "common" crime)
If you answered "no" to 1) and "yes" to 2) then, congrats! You've committed a felony (perjury) in the US. Even if you've done nothing else wrong, you can go to jail.
It's funny—my boss has wished me luck on interviews, and people I barely know know I'm on an anti-depressant. The fact I've made an attempt on my own life is posted publicly on HN.
As far as I know, I'm also absolutely uninteresting to any 3-letter agencies. I'm still not a fan of omnipresent surveillance of my phone's activity… or any other activity, for that matter.
What does it really take to become interesting to these guys, and how might that impact my life? Is political speech critical of, say, the collection of citizens' phone metadata enough to catch their interest? Is unknowingly associating with someone they find interesting enough? Knowingly associating?
In an ideal world, if any of these things subject me to additional scrutiny, once I turned out not to be a legitimate threat, that'd be the end of it. I wouldn't even know anyone had been watching. But does it ever go further, even when it shouldn't?
How are we supposed to know when everything's done in secret?
Good start to think about "nothing to hide". In addition there is no way of saying what becomes sensitive in the future and who might have access to the data. When pre-nazi germany collected religious census data it wasn't with the intention to supply the nazis with an efficient database to crack down on jews and other minorities. What can comfortably be public changes tremendously over time and who gets access to the data.
The question to ask yourself is really how much risk is tolerable that some data point will be used in the future to discriminate against you.
The other concern is the conformity this attitude breads. Do you really think everybody should refrain from testing the boundaries and adjust their actions to whatever the mainstream is? This way "nothing to hide" is an easy attitude. What kind of society actively discourages edgy thinkers and innovators and where does this lead to politically and culturally? Certainly not a place I want to be part of.
For me, this misses the point. Regardless of whether or not I have nothing to hide now, that doesn't mean I won't have anything to hide in the future. We would you give the government a permanent lease on your personal details into the indefinite future? Even if you stay exactly the same, the government can change.
According to your quiz, I have nothing to hide, but I'm still a strong privacy advocate. Privacy to me is all about context and understanding the consequences of your actions. If I run naked through Times Square, I shouldn't have any reasonable expectation of physical privacy, but if I whisper to a friend I would. Either way the important factor in both scenarios is that your expectation of privacy aligns with reality.
As for context, specifically with regards to prism, if I dial a wrong number that happens to belong to a terrorist, I may find myself guilty by association, with the burden of proof of innocence in my own hands. Quickly hanging up and dialing a similar number after might not be sufficient defense since that could be a strategy terrorists use to cover their tracks.
Talking about the content of what they might know is a distraction of the real problem. If there is too much power and information with one organization (the goverment in this case) bad things happen to individuals that go against these organizations.
This a problem that's not exclusive to police states, it also affect western democracies and corporations. For the US right now the individuals at stake are the ones that go against and or scare the status quo: whisteblowers, hackers, political activists, etc.
That's far from the only reason to encourage privacy.
I don't really know how to respond to here. I believe that I see your point, but even though I wouldn't mind my answers to that questionnaire being made public, I still feel that both communal and personal interests of members of society would benefit from institutional pressure in support of privacy, and strong crypto for that matter.
Ehh... this is all relevant, but indirect. How about:
22. What is your credit card number, expiry date and security code?
And on the subject of "nothing to hide from the government": the government in United States is - still - pretty good. But the trend, the trend is a worry!
I wasn't aware that this controversy was about the government publishing citizens' most private personal secrets on the internet. You're right, this is a whole lot different!
Sure you realize that audience is way smaller then what you imply and you did answer to most of those questions to your doctor/lawyer etc..
Try to compare apples to apples
The sad irony out of all this is that if you are served with an NSL, you now are legally obligated to have something to hide.
As Nicholas Merrill, writing anonymously in 2007 for the Washington Post [1] puts it:
"Living under the gag order has been stressful and surreal. Under the threat of criminal prosecution, I must hide all aspects of my involvement in the case -- including the mere fact that I received an NSL -- from my colleagues, my family and my friends. When I meet with my attorneys I cannot tell my girlfriend where I am going or where I have been. I hide any papers related to the case in a place where she will not look. When clients and friends ask me whether I am the one challenging the constitutionality of the NSL statute, I have no choice but to look them in the eye and lie."
So its not only that some law-abiding citizens have something to hide; the NSA is legally obligated tens of thousands every year [2] to have do it.
Think about how the NSA helped stop all the killings and maimings at the boston bombing.
Oh wait, they didn't - from two super stupid criminals not even trying to hide what they were planning.
So WTF good are they doing for all the damage they've done to our society.
NSA has become just like the TSA, completely useless theater that hassles everyone and accomplishes nothing.
Just wait until they can park hundreds of drones over every city and track everyone's movements historically, forever - the logic will be you are in public so no warrant needed or there will be yet another secret warrant for the entire country.
Since this isn't immediately clear to commenters - this is designed to be ironic. I don't know if all the people volunteering tweets know that, but it's clearly described in the website linked on this Twitter account[1].
I highly recommend you go there for further reading, it presents a lot of useful data about the FBI and the United States' breach of privacy and constitutional rights recently and historically.
The author is trying to send a message ironically and rally people against the NSA's abuses and the corollary fallacy of "If you have nothing to hide, why do you care?" which has also been debunked by Bruce Schneier[2].
Since you all have nothing to hide, please post the following:
Name
Address
Phone #
date of birth
SS #
credit card numbers+ expr dates+cvv
Routing and account numbers for relevant bank accounts
Logins/passwords to commonly used services
Your security question/answer combos
Pictures of all your keys on your keychain
Well, unless, you're a terrorist and don't want to volunteer this info.
These tweets are just a sliver of the overwhelming evidence that most of the US population is incredibly naive. The issue with that, of course, is that they won't vote out of office the officials responsible for allowing these programs. Every elected official involved in the oversight of these programs, those that announce support for them, and those that do not publicly denounce them, must be voted out in the next election. That won't happen because of people like this. As a democratic society, ambivalence may be the most dangerous enemy we face.
It would be interesting to see what would happen if the NSA offered free, nationwide, unlimited mobile voice/LTE data/SMS with a warning that all of it would be monitored and recorded. My bet is the adoption rate would be above 90%.
Wow, probably the best story/argument against "I've got nothing to hide" I've read so far. I posted a link to an article with a convenient list of counter arguments yesterday[0], but this one, in the sense of direct, believable danger easily surpasses those (for me, at least).
That story is actually happening. Various parts of it have already happened in all sorts of civilized countries (US, UK, NL, DE ...), infiltration of completely innocent protest and activist groups, blackmail, he didn't mention agent provocateurs but things invariably get real messy really quick when the agency gets pressed for results of these expensive operations and the activists are in fact quite innocent, just exercising their rights to have meetings and organising protests, nothing more. And then everyone and their friends & family gets on a list.
The torturing, maybe not yet. Not in my country as far as I know. But that is actually going on, on large scale, in countries that seem otherwise quite civilized. And it is happening to the people that had "nothing to hide" just as much.
Probably even moreso because they do not realize what the stakes really are until it's too late to hide.
It would be fun if "internet detectives" (think 4chan) have a look at the profiles of people with "nothing to hide" and expose all their dirty secrets (affairs, comments that could be taken as racist, tax avoidance, listening to Bieber, gossiping about coworkers, naked pics or sex chats they made with their partners, whatever) to the internets.
Especially nice it would be if that would get them fired (e.g a negative comment about their company boss in an email to a friend).
That might illuminate them about the value of privacy.
That said, they are not the targets of NSA, because they are useless to society anyway (they are not active citizens), and not a threat to any government.
But any activist, dissident, whistleblower, investigative journalist, hacker, writer, progressive politician etc, people that move society and laws forward, people from MLK to Aaron Swartz to Phil Zimmerman, are those that can and will be targeted by such measures. The same kind of people that today's J.E. Hoover's would target.
I may have well been one of those people, but I recently had a terrible experience crossing the border into Canada. I was on a bus, and everyone was waived through but me. They asked the purpose of my visit, which was to see an old friend. I told them truthfully when they asked, that I'd met her on the internet years and years ago, as a teenager. I also had met her in real life before. I was pulled aside for over 30 minutes and grilled about embarrassing, irrelevant things. The border patrol then asked for me to unlock my phone to look at my email. I was shocked and asked if that was necessary and/or legal. He looked at me with this cold look and said, "This is the border. We can ask you to do anything."
I didn't have anything to hide but I just felt so violated sitting there on a bench while he looked through my phone. It was pretty traumatic for me and I've gotten flashbacks to the event a few times - it will make me take precautions and think twice before traveling with my laptop and phone if the border patrol can just ask for the password - which, I don't think they can, but they could also stop me from entering Canada probably if I denied.
It's not as obvious when it's going on behind the scenes, but it's so different for me now that I went through this event. I just can't get over how violated I felt, and honestly - I ask any of the people Tweeting for that to happen to them, for some cold-eyed patrol officer to grab your phone, force you to unlock it, and just go through your mail, Facebook, snapchat, embarrassing photos, etc. Just because it happens behind the scenes doesn't make it better.
I seriously don't get the mouthfrothing outrage. For years and years, everyone knowledgeable kept saying - if you post it on the internet, it is public.
You're using Google - Google reads your stuff. Algorithms build a profile of you, select ads, etc.
You're using Amazon - Amazon knows and never forgets what you're buying and browsing for.
You're using Credit Cards - the CC company knows a lot about you.
You have a bank account - the bank knows a lot about you.
You have a mobile phone - the operator knows a lot about you.
Ever had the opportunity to look behind the curtains? Like how banks build customer profiles? Withdraw money from ATMs regularly late at night on weekends? You like to party, noted in your internal credit profile. Implemented that shit myself. The NSA has less impact on your life than your bank.
Etc, Etc, Etc. What do you think all those CRM systems out there are used for? Those are private intelligence tools, with next to no government oversight. No auditors coming in, no whistleblowers, nothing. There are rules of course, but who, ever, has really been caught violating them? Got fined? Went to jail? Right...
And now everyones's OUTRAGED because the government dared to do the same all these private corporations have been doing all along. I don't get it. It's aok if your stuff shows up in data.com, Binley's, etc., right? No outrage, ever.
All the shouting over the Internet, posting on Twitter, Facebook, HN, reddit, .. in plaintext, documented for eternity, in plain sight. No privacy concerns there, oh no. I have accounts in 56 privately owned, for-profit communication tools - but I deeply care about privacy. Here, have my baby pictures, and my current location. Did I tell the world what I think of that Mexican place yet?
You want privacy? Then shut. the. fuck up. Don't write it down, don't take pictures, don't use your credit card. As has been known for a long, long time.
But next week all of this will be over as Apple has WWDC and the OUTRAGE of the common neckbeard will be directed to another awesome topic.
I'd love to see digital privacy taught as part of the curriculum in public school computer classes. If every student learned their rights when they learned how to type, these fools with 'nothing to hide' would think a bit deeper about all the information (including the info that may be used against them in a court of law) they've posted online over the past 10-15 years.
This should be a part of education. Maybe it is already in some parts of Europe that are more sensitive with privay breaches than US (France? Germany?).
Anyway, I live very far from my youngest brother, and have only few occasion to chat with him. Last time I felt the need to check his awareness of the matter (he is on Facebook and has the right age to share pics of drunk friends), and was happy to hear that he was under a pseudo and was using carefully the privacy features.
It amazes me how the racism embedded in our theoretical "equality" prevents people from talking about the real threat here.
Sure, there's the philosophical loss of privacy and the threat of fear-based self-censorship. But the real people under attack are those with tenuous immigration status, low income and/or affiliation with minority communities. These are the people the US has been terrorizing since 9/11, yet don't have enough social capital to get the media (or HN) involved when they're illegally searched and wrongfully accused.
Last week I heard a perfect answer from a speaker from ISOC at a conference:
If you are claiming you have nothing to hide, you are not a social creature. Normal people sometimes feel embarrassment or shame after some error, and then we would hope nobody saw that.
I also have no problem with those people willingly sending anyone any of their personal information. The problem is when people aren't given a choice whether their personal information is kept secret.
Fun novelty account, but if you actually read some of the tweets, you'll see that some of these people are being facetious. For example:
> NSA wants to spy on me? GO AHEAD! You'll see some sick shit!!! #NSA #privacy #government #internetsex #bringiton
> I'm fine with the NSA listening to my calls, but god help them if they're reading my twitter drafts.
> I'm fine with the NSA listening to my phone calls. Maybe the next time I'm getting unhelpful advice from AT&T, they could jump in and help
I know this is just a novelty account, though some on here have already called to "dox" these people. Remember that when you see a Tweet, you are literally seeing 140 characters of text, with no context to what that person was referring to or the kind of flippant personality that person may have.
Judging someone you had no previous knowledge based on a brief message...hmm, sounds like what our government agents do from time to time.
It's almost like a fundamentalist's abortion doctor hitlist. This is inviting everyone who cares about privacy to search through the retweeted's internet persona and expose any incongruity.
For 99.999% of the US population the totalitarian monitoring won't have any direct consequences in the near future. The real problem IMHO is that it makes impossible to create any kind of opposition to the current political-financial-media elite. Any potential leader of such opposition will be thoroughly studied and profiled. Nothing found to black mail him with? Well he likes to eat at a certain italian restaurant and he likes blonde women. Throw some narcotic in his food, have a 17yo girl seduce him and that guy belongs for life ...
Assume someone at the NSA has access to the data. Assume they have money problems or drugs or gambling. Assume a criminal or terrorist organization has money to buy access. Assume you're screwed.
When people say they have nothing to hide, there is an implicit qualifier. They still have much to hide -- from coworkers, neighbors, friends, etc.
What they really mean is they have nothing to hide from an entity with which they have a very special relationship. So special is it, that it's superfluous - perhaps even disrespectful - to mention it when saying things like "I have nothing to hide," "I pay my taxes," or "I'm law abiding."
It is the relationship between the owned and the owner.
It doesn't matter whether as an individual you have anything to hide or not. That's completely missing the point. The problem with all this data collection/snooping is that it gives the government (or some branch of the state) far too much power.
People who do have secrets can be blackmailed. And whatever they're forced to do can potentially harm society. It doesn't even matter what the nature of the secret is.
[+] [-] john_flintstone|12 years ago|reply
1. Have you ever had an abortion?
2. Have you ever cheated on your husband / wife?
3. Are you currently looking for a new job?
4. Have you ever being diagnosed with a mental illness?
5. Are you currently on anti-depressants?
6. Were you ever sexually abused as a child?
7. Have you ever fancied someone of the same sex?
8. Have you ever had sex with someone of the same sex?
9. Have you ever criticised your current employer or boss to anyone else?
10. Do you love all of your children equally?
11. Have you ever fantasized about...
12. Are you planning to get pregnant in the next two years?
13. Have you ever lied on a cv/resume?
14. Are you mean to your wife / husband on a regular or semi-regular basis?
15. Do you have trouble acquiring or maintaining an erection?
16. Are you one of those women who’ve never had an orgasm?
17. What prescription drugs are you currently taking?
18. Have you ever cut yourself?
19. Have you ever attempted suicide?
20. Have you contemplated suicide in the past 2 weeks?
21. Would you be happy with your answers to these questions being made public? Or being read by your employer, local 23 year old policeman, or nosey neighbour?
I could go on and on. None of the actions mentioned in these questions are illegal, but for many/most people, the answers would be intensely private.
[+] [-] capnrefsmmat|12 years ago|reply
Giving the government the power to read your email, tap your phone, and record your porn usage isn't bad simply because it's embarrassing. After all, the data will likely only be seen by a computer. But it gives the government enormous power to make decisions about you -- decisions about whether you may take a commercial airline flight, get a security clearance, get a job, or even be indefinitely detained -- without your knowledge or consent, and without you knowing how they make the decisions.
Recall the stories of people getting on the no-fly list with no appeals process and no way to find out what information had been used to put them there.
In short, a lack of privacy gives the government the power to be even less transparent in its decision-making, and gives it yet more power over its citizens. It's not a question of discovering your fetishes or being embarrassed, and we shouldn't act as though having nothing to hide really is an excuse.
There's a rather good paper I can recommend on the subject:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565
(I've posted this several times over the past few months, so this is half self-plagiarism)
[+] [-] thomseddon|12 years ago|reply
So someone saying they "have nothing to hide" doesn't really mean they would answer all the above question publicly, but rather there is no electronic record/evidence of anything they know they want to keep private.
And, as another point of discussion, whilst the matters raised in those questions may be deeply personal for many people, frankly I wouldn't be concerned if my answers to those questions were in the public domain.
[+] [-] networked|12 years ago|reply
I tried to think of a persuasive, semi-automated way to use it and came up with this:
First, make a website where you would log in with Facebook or Google (and optionally give your Twitter handle) and then give answers to questions like the ones above. Filled-in answer forms would be stored and then (by default) accessible to the public (through a search form and a "latest" column on the front page). Include a small checkbox at the bottom to keep the filled-in form hidden from the public but available to the government upon request.
Now, when people say they "have nothing to hide" to you on-line do the following:
1. Link them to that website.
2. At this point they will most likely try to qualify their initial statement with a "from the government".
3. Bring to their attention the checkbox at the bottom.
4. "But the owner of the website might sell the data anyway!"
5. You are now at a good starting point for an in-depth conversation about privacy ("How is this different from Facebook?").
Of course, this is rather manipulative and could become obnoxiously overused, but would you rather this tool existed or not? Feel free also to suggest your improvements.
[+] [-] stfu|12 years ago|reply
My suggestion would be a crowd funded campaign to doxx each one of them. Would be happy to donate a few hours of my time tracing their real names.
With some funded capital we could buy and publish for each one a personal background check sort of a personal gift to free them from the burden of anonymity.
[+] [-] shurcooL|12 years ago|reply
But if lots of people's answers are public, you will quickly see that everyone... is just human. The things we consider private and embarrassing are absolutely common and normal. It's absolutely normal to be abnormal. It's normal to be average. It's okay to have weird fantasies, other people have weird fantasies too. Everyone takes a shit.
It's the imbalance of information release that is more upsetting.
[+] [-] hzay|12 years ago|reply
The question of whether you have anything to hide is really the same as whether you're willing to put everything that you have ever thought under legal scrutiny. It's not about being on the "correct social and legal side" in all the tame scenarios that one has dreamed up.
[+] [-] oelmekki|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ceautery|12 years ago|reply
10. yes - as far as I know, you either love someone or you don't, I don't think it comes in degrees.;
11. yes; 12. no; 13. no; 14. no;
15. yes, but [array of excuses];
16. no; 17. none;
18. Yes, but not intentionally [kitchen job for 4 years]
19. no; 20. no; 21. No, just indifferent.
Why is the policeman 23 years old? Seems like a strange number to pull out of a hat. Also I'm pretty sure lying on your CV is illegal - that would be some sort of fraud, wouldn't it?
[+] [-] natch|12 years ago|reply
Please list the names, addresses, dates of birth, phone numbers, and any private information you may have access to (SSN, credit card number, banking details) of your mother, father, brothers, sisters, children, and any other family members.
Might as well throw in all the info you have for any friends and acquaintances too.
And their private photos, too, because you don't care about hiding things that people have shared with you in confidence, right? You must not, because you said you have nothing to hide.
[+] [-] gmays|12 years ago|reply
What if everyone's credit score was public or everyone knew how much time people spent on Facebook, watching TV, or similar activities? Would we become better?
Imagine if political and business leaders were elected on such characteristics, the truth. What if everyone was known for who they really were? Would crime and corruption go down? Would there ever be another war if people understood each other better?
It'd sure make dating easier...do you really want to start a life with this person now that you know what they are? Do you want this person to be the mother/father of your children? The bar would certainly be lower, because nobody is perfect and everyone has secrets.
Would the truth be beautiful once it’s universal? People who lived lives of quiet desperation (more than we think) would find out how many other people are just like them. Would people stop being ashamed of who they are? Would rates of mental illness, suicide, and depression plummet?
Would the world be better? I assure you it'd be more compassionate. People would be less likely to judge people based on unrealistic standards while quietly ignoring their own shortcomings.
I wouldn't be surprised if in the next 20 years we saw an 'Open' organization where people opt-in to share everything about themselves and make everything public. Maybe it'd be cathartic, maybe it wouldn't catch on, but with enough critical mass the social pressure would be interesting to see (i.e. how those running for political office are pressured to release past tax filings).
An interesting thought.
[+] [-] matteodepalo|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] al_biglan|12 years ago|reply
If you answered "no" to 1) and "yes" to 2) then, congrats! You've committed a felony (perjury) in the US. Even if you've done nothing else wrong, you can go to jail.
Also: Always take the 5th... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc (especially in light of infractions against the 4th)
[+] [-] Ygg2|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LnxPrgr3|12 years ago|reply
As far as I know, I'm also absolutely uninteresting to any 3-letter agencies. I'm still not a fan of omnipresent surveillance of my phone's activity… or any other activity, for that matter.
What does it really take to become interesting to these guys, and how might that impact my life? Is political speech critical of, say, the collection of citizens' phone metadata enough to catch their interest? Is unknowingly associating with someone they find interesting enough? Knowingly associating?
In an ideal world, if any of these things subject me to additional scrutiny, once I turned out not to be a legitimate threat, that'd be the end of it. I wouldn't even know anyone had been watching. But does it ever go further, even when it shouldn't?
How are we supposed to know when everything's done in secret?
[+] [-] stefanix|12 years ago|reply
The question to ask yourself is really how much risk is tolerable that some data point will be used in the future to discriminate against you.
The other concern is the conformity this attitude breads. Do you really think everybody should refrain from testing the boundaries and adjust their actions to whatever the mainstream is? This way "nothing to hide" is an easy attitude. What kind of society actively discourages edgy thinkers and innovators and where does this lead to politically and culturally? Certainly not a place I want to be part of.
[+] [-] jmilloy|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] billiamram|12 years ago|reply
As for context, specifically with regards to prism, if I dial a wrong number that happens to belong to a terrorist, I may find myself guilty by association, with the burden of proof of innocence in my own hands. Quickly hanging up and dialing a similar number after might not be sufficient defense since that could be a strategy terrorists use to cover their tracks.
[+] [-] Tosh108|12 years ago|reply
This a problem that's not exclusive to police states, it also affect western democracies and corporations. For the US right now the individuals at stake are the ones that go against and or scare the status quo: whisteblowers, hackers, political activists, etc.
If you want a concrete example the post on HN from just a few hours ago is a great one: https://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/05/15-7
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] marchdown|12 years ago|reply
I don't really know how to respond to here. I believe that I see your point, but even though I wouldn't mind my answers to that questionnaire being made public, I still feel that both communal and personal interests of members of society would benefit from institutional pressure in support of privacy, and strong crypto for that matter.
[+] [-] wslh|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mrkuchbhi|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] D_Alex|12 years ago|reply
22. What is your credit card number, expiry date and security code?
And on the subject of "nothing to hide from the government": the government in United States is - still - pretty good. But the trend, the trend is a worry!
[+] [-] pkulak|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cunac|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] heyitsnick|12 years ago|reply
As Nicholas Merrill, writing anonymously in 2007 for the Washington Post [1] puts it:
"Living under the gag order has been stressful and surreal. Under the threat of criminal prosecution, I must hide all aspects of my involvement in the case -- including the mere fact that I received an NSL -- from my colleagues, my family and my friends. When I meet with my attorneys I cannot tell my girlfriend where I am going or where I have been. I hide any papers related to the case in a place where she will not look. When clients and friends ask me whether I am the one challenging the constitutionality of the NSL statute, I have no choice but to look them in the eye and lie."
So its not only that some law-abiding citizens have something to hide; the NSA is legally obligated tens of thousands every year [2] to have do it.
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03... [2] http://epic.org/privacy/nsl/
[+] [-] skore|12 years ago|reply
This is sure to make short work to any friendship, especially relationships. Disgusting and dehumanizing.
Imagine being legally required, by your government, to seem as though you are having an affair.
[+] [-] hannibal5|12 years ago|reply
What would happen if 1000-5000 people who have been served NSL would come out at same day. Many of them working in big companies.
[+] [-] ck2|12 years ago|reply
Oh wait, they didn't - from two super stupid criminals not even trying to hide what they were planning.
So WTF good are they doing for all the damage they've done to our society.
NSA has become just like the TSA, completely useless theater that hassles everyone and accomplishes nothing.
Just wait until they can park hundreds of drones over every city and track everyone's movements historically, forever - the logic will be you are in public so no warrant needed or there will be yet another secret warrant for the entire country.
[+] [-] dylangs1030|12 years ago|reply
I highly recommend you go there for further reading, it presents a lot of useful data about the FBI and the United States' breach of privacy and constitutional rights recently and historically.
The author is trying to send a message ironically and rally people against the NSA's abuses and the corollary fallacy of "If you have nothing to hide, why do you care?" which has also been debunked by Bruce Schneier[2].
Just wanted to put that out there.
[1]: http://danielsieradski.com/nothing-to-hide/14572
[2]: https://www.schneier.com/essay-114.html
[+] [-] kefka|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] downandout|12 years ago|reply
It would be interesting to see what would happen if the NSA offered free, nationwide, unlimited mobile voice/LTE data/SMS with a warning that all of it would be monitored and recorded. My bet is the adoption rate would be above 90%.
[+] [-] nodata|12 years ago|reply
The Eternal Value of Privacy http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securityma...
Reddit comment from this week: http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1fv4r6/i_belie...
[+] [-] tripzilch|12 years ago|reply
Wow, probably the best story/argument against "I've got nothing to hide" I've read so far. I posted a link to an article with a convenient list of counter arguments yesterday[0], but this one, in the sense of direct, believable danger easily surpasses those (for me, at least).
That story is actually happening. Various parts of it have already happened in all sorts of civilized countries (US, UK, NL, DE ...), infiltration of completely innocent protest and activist groups, blackmail, he didn't mention agent provocateurs but things invariably get real messy really quick when the agency gets pressed for results of these expensive operations and the activists are in fact quite innocent, just exercising their rights to have meetings and organising protests, nothing more. And then everyone and their friends & family gets on a list.
The torturing, maybe not yet. Not in my country as far as I know. But that is actually going on, on large scale, in countries that seem otherwise quite civilized. And it is happening to the people that had "nothing to hide" just as much.
Probably even moreso because they do not realize what the stakes really are until it's too late to hide.
[0] http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127...
[+] [-] coldtea|12 years ago|reply
Especially nice it would be if that would get them fired (e.g a negative comment about their company boss in an email to a friend).
That might illuminate them about the value of privacy.
That said, they are not the targets of NSA, because they are useless to society anyway (they are not active citizens), and not a threat to any government.
But any activist, dissident, whistleblower, investigative journalist, hacker, writer, progressive politician etc, people that move society and laws forward, people from MLK to Aaron Swartz to Phil Zimmerman, are those that can and will be targeted by such measures. The same kind of people that today's J.E. Hoover's would target.
[+] [-] cupcake-unicorn|12 years ago|reply
I didn't have anything to hide but I just felt so violated sitting there on a bench while he looked through my phone. It was pretty traumatic for me and I've gotten flashbacks to the event a few times - it will make me take precautions and think twice before traveling with my laptop and phone if the border patrol can just ask for the password - which, I don't think they can, but they could also stop me from entering Canada probably if I denied.
It's not as obvious when it's going on behind the scenes, but it's so different for me now that I went through this event. I just can't get over how violated I felt, and honestly - I ask any of the people Tweeting for that to happen to them, for some cold-eyed patrol officer to grab your phone, force you to unlock it, and just go through your mail, Facebook, snapchat, embarrassing photos, etc. Just because it happens behind the scenes doesn't make it better.
[+] [-] pinaceae|12 years ago|reply
You're using Google - Google reads your stuff. Algorithms build a profile of you, select ads, etc.
You're using Amazon - Amazon knows and never forgets what you're buying and browsing for.
You're using Credit Cards - the CC company knows a lot about you.
You have a bank account - the bank knows a lot about you.
You have a mobile phone - the operator knows a lot about you.
Ever had the opportunity to look behind the curtains? Like how banks build customer profiles? Withdraw money from ATMs regularly late at night on weekends? You like to party, noted in your internal credit profile. Implemented that shit myself. The NSA has less impact on your life than your bank.
Etc, Etc, Etc. What do you think all those CRM systems out there are used for? Those are private intelligence tools, with next to no government oversight. No auditors coming in, no whistleblowers, nothing. There are rules of course, but who, ever, has really been caught violating them? Got fined? Went to jail? Right...
And now everyones's OUTRAGED because the government dared to do the same all these private corporations have been doing all along. I don't get it. It's aok if your stuff shows up in data.com, Binley's, etc., right? No outrage, ever.
All the shouting over the Internet, posting on Twitter, Facebook, HN, reddit, .. in plaintext, documented for eternity, in plain sight. No privacy concerns there, oh no. I have accounts in 56 privately owned, for-profit communication tools - but I deeply care about privacy. Here, have my baby pictures, and my current location. Did I tell the world what I think of that Mexican place yet?
You want privacy? Then shut. the. fuck up. Don't write it down, don't take pictures, don't use your credit card. As has been known for a long, long time.
But next week all of this will be over as Apple has WWDC and the OUTRAGE of the common neckbeard will be directed to another awesome topic.
[+] [-] davisr|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gbog|12 years ago|reply
This should be a part of education. Maybe it is already in some parts of Europe that are more sensitive with privay breaches than US (France? Germany?).
Anyway, I live very far from my youngest brother, and have only few occasion to chat with him. Last time I felt the need to check his awareness of the matter (he is on Facebook and has the right age to share pics of drunk friends), and was happy to hear that he was under a pseudo and was using carefully the privacy features.
[+] [-] miguelrochefort|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tammer|12 years ago|reply
Sure, there's the philosophical loss of privacy and the threat of fear-based self-censorship. But the real people under attack are those with tenuous immigration status, low income and/or affiliation with minority communities. These are the people the US has been terrorizing since 9/11, yet don't have enough social capital to get the media (or HN) involved when they're illegally searched and wrongfully accused.
[+] [-] jvdh|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] baddox|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] danso|12 years ago|reply
> NSA wants to spy on me? GO AHEAD! You'll see some sick shit!!! #NSA #privacy #government #internetsex #bringiton
> I'm fine with the NSA listening to my calls, but god help them if they're reading my twitter drafts.
> I'm fine with the NSA listening to my phone calls. Maybe the next time I'm getting unhelpful advice from AT&T, they could jump in and help
I know this is just a novelty account, though some on here have already called to "dox" these people. Remember that when you see a Tweet, you are literally seeing 140 characters of text, with no context to what that person was referring to or the kind of flippant personality that person may have.
Judging someone you had no previous knowledge based on a brief message...hmm, sounds like what our government agents do from time to time.
[+] [-] droopyEyelids|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] straight_talk|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] coldcode|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] glick|12 years ago|reply
What they really mean is they have nothing to hide from an entity with which they have a very special relationship. So special is it, that it's superfluous - perhaps even disrespectful - to mention it when saying things like "I have nothing to hide," "I pay my taxes," or "I'm law abiding."
It is the relationship between the owned and the owner.
[+] [-] Tycho|12 years ago|reply
People who do have secrets can be blackmailed. And whatever they're forced to do can potentially harm society. It doesn't even matter what the nature of the secret is.
Nobody should have that much power.