In a world where everyone has an equal lack of privacy (e.g. everything everyone does is filmed and can be watched by everyone else), don't you think social mores regarding what is "embarrassing" or "shameful" would change?
> don't you think social mores regarding what is "embarrassing" or "shameful" would change?
I'm old enough to realize they already have quite a bit. As a child, it was safest for a gay person to stay in the closet, now states are legalizing gay marriage. The idea that someone can be openly gay alone is a huge change. Even celebrities used to hide it, now they can't because someone is sure to catch a photo of them out with someone or at a club.
The same is true for drug use. Michael Phelps was caught on camera with a pipe, but people just shrugged and moved on.
A) The transitions aren't always smooth, and the people whose privacy is violated are sometimes sacrificed in the years-long process of mainstreaming whatever "shameful" thing they did.
B) We're a hypocritical lot, so there will probably always be things that we all do and yet still shame others for doing. So the common knowledge that everyone does a particular thing won't be enough to shield you from the shame of being exposed as a doer of that thing.
For things that only effect an individual yes but there are others like extra marital affairs with involve real damage to another person. I don't see things like that ever becoming acceptable (nor should they) yet they aren't illegal.
> Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. [...]
Personally, I phrase the debate as Security and Privacy versus the Government.
[+] [-] derefr|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dabent|16 years ago|reply
I'm old enough to realize they already have quite a bit. As a child, it was safest for a gay person to stay in the closet, now states are legalizing gay marriage. The idea that someone can be openly gay alone is a huge change. Even celebrities used to hide it, now they can't because someone is sure to catch a photo of them out with someone or at a club.
The same is true for drug use. Michael Phelps was caught on camera with a pipe, but people just shrugged and moved on.
[+] [-] karzeem|16 years ago|reply
A) The transitions aren't always smooth, and the people whose privacy is violated are sometimes sacrificed in the years-long process of mainstreaming whatever "shameful" thing they did.
B) We're a hypocritical lot, so there will probably always be things that we all do and yet still shame others for doing. So the common knowledge that everyone does a particular thing won't be enough to shield you from the shame of being exposed as a doer of that thing.
[+] [-] mechanical_fish|16 years ago|reply
At this point I'm tempted to just say "go watch Gattaca" and leave the rest as an exercise for the reader.
Privacy evolved as a useful solution to many social problems. When that solution is ripped away, the problems will remain.
[+] [-] wmf|16 years ago|reply
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Transparent_Society http://books.google.com/books?id=hsyA7hmDEqYC http://www.davidbrin.com/transparent.htm
[+] [-] pmorici|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mhb|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Dmunro|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JohnFritzen|16 years ago|reply
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=983717
[+] [-] lpolovets|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|16 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] trebor|16 years ago|reply
Personally, I phrase the debate as Security and Privacy versus the Government.
[+] [-] theBobMcCormick|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] RevRal|16 years ago|reply