Debunking The Dangerous "If You Have Nothing To Hide, You Have Nothing To Fear"

I have never bought the nothing to hide theory. I found a number of different reasons why I have never bought into the "group think".

1) The rules may change, think if a new law was to uniformly install surveillance cams in private homes to prevent force domestic violence. But a new election brings in a bunch of new do weller's and they now want booze illegal. Now the surveillance is done for both!. And with 27,000 pages of federal crimes, we are all guilty.

2) In regards to mass surveillance, data could/is be collected that could implicate you, but if you have nothing to hide, you got nothing to fear right?
Not really. Imagine if you are at a bar because of the burritos, and you don't drink any alcohol. But the cameras pick your car's license plate up there a couple times a week. This info is given to the insurance companies and next thing you know jacked insurance rates or no insurance due to surveillance cam proof of your bar fly habits.
Or you are helping dis-advantaged home owners in the inner city fix plumbing in their house, many churches sponsor this. But there is a known drug house next door, but your car is parked in the area, GOT YA. Again the "privilege" of driving may be in jeopardy or child protective services gets involved. Have fun in court. This turns into self censorship, and that isn't freedom.

3) Laws must be broken for society to progress: A society which can enforce all of its laws will stop dead in its tracks. The mindset of “rounding up criminals is good for society” is a very dangerous one, for in hindsight, it may turn out that the criminals were the ones in the moral right. Less than a human lifetime ago, if you were born a homosexual, you were criminal from birth. If today’s surveillance level had existed in the 1950s and 60s, the lobby groups for sexual equality could never have formed; it would have been just a matter of rounding up the organized criminals (“and who could possibly object to fighting organized crime?”).

This is a good point and one that I have never heard before. I think MJ will be another example of people doing something that should be handled like beer, and we will look back on it and wonder what were we thinking.
If the govt/corps could monitor the food we eat can you imagine that. No health insurance, and we (govt/corps) don't care if you don't like sage infused broccoli loaf, no health insurance for you. If/when we have Minority Report surveillance, govt/corps can really put the screws to you (more).

4) Four – Privacy is a basic human need: Implying that only the dishonest people have need of any privacy ignores a basic property of the human psyche, and sends a creepy message of strong discomfort. We have a fundamental need for privacy.

I put a small lock on my locker that I put my crappy coat in and my even crappier shoes in, does anyone want to steal hell no. But I want my stuff locked but am I hiding something, no, but I demand my privacy.

I left out our own person tracking device that we call cell phones. These are a very dangerous tool too.

Am I looking at this issue that is going to get more heated correctly?


falkvinge.net...

I never looked at it this way. Good post!

a reply to: seasonal

You have battered the nail firmly about the head.

There is absolutely no way to look at surveillance culture as anything else than an invasion of privacy, and one of many facets of the collapse of liberty.

a reply to: seasonal

Nice post. S+F.

Or you are helping dis-advantaged home owners in the inner city fix plumbing in their house, many churches sponsor this.

Don't forget the town will likely want a permit and inspection and the associated fees for the above repairs.

I feel like you. It's not that I have anything to hide, but it's a certain expectation of privacy. I know in public that's becoming possible less and less, but with the constant surveillance and storage of digital footage if ever needed becoming more and more common, where does it end.

My wife is of the if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide opinion. It will be interesting if and what event happens that changes her position!

a reply to: peter_kandra

storage of digital footage if ever needed becoming more and more common, where does it end. My wife is of the if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide opinion. It will be interesting if and what event happens that changes her position!

Excellent point, with storage of our actions, possibly for ever, new laws come up, and your keester get prosecuted for something that is now considered dastardly. Like maybe hunting, shooting lead bullets, disciplining your child for being, well a child, in a restaurant that has digital cameras (your child later does something really bad). Oh God does it get deep in a hurry.

"Nothing to hide" by someone elses standard. Not ours. Who determines whats best for everyone and makes that into law? Control freaks. They do it in stages always implying its criminal to question them.

"If you think privacy is unimportant for you because you have nothing to hide, you might as well say free speech is unimportant for you because you have nothing useful to say."

"The right to privacy is the right to self. You "own" you. You decide when you want to share you and when you don't. It is really just that simple."

(Above quotes from some other website)

The idea of privacy for the pubic is evaporating, while those in public office are ever more secretive.

a reply to: TrueBritAs usual you are right, smarmy bas****. Sarc..
Has anyone really thought of the push now in the UK for smart meters on the electric ? One of the biggest, pernicious acts I've come across.
Oh yes, the advertisement says you can better control your usage. Buuuuttt, they can also alter your tariff on a second by second basis. Like how can you tell if they up your rate for an hour half way through the day. Your bill comes and you have to pay it as they say how much you have used.
Another example, say you use a lot of electricity on an innocent reason. They can tell that and could inform the authorities that you are running a marijuana farm. ie. You have to explain just why are you using higher that normal electricity.
It is a spy in your house on usage and as they have continual contact with it (down the mains line) they can do just what they want with your day to day usage but more worryingly, the past usage history.

a reply to: intrptr

The idea of privacy for the pubic is evaporating, while those in public office are ever more secretive.

Obama said he will be more transparent than any other admin. Where is our freedom of the press calling him out? Oh they are owned by 10 huge corps/wealthy people. You are right, they are awfully secretive to "rule" a free country. I fear it is going to get worse, and not in 10 years.

a reply to: crayzeed

Another example, say you use a lot of electricity on an innocent reason. They can tell that and could inform the authorities that you are running a marijuana farm. ie. You have to explain just why are you using higher that normal electricity. It is a spy in your house on usage and as they have continual contact with it (down the mains line) they can do just what they want with your day to day usage but more worryingly, the past usage history.

It's official, the rabbit hole just added another 3 floors.

a reply to: seasonal

I used to buy into the "logic" behind that stance when I was younger (teen and early '20s), but when I grew up, became an adult, and saw my intelligence mature a bit, I was able to determine exactly why that approach to life is absolutely the wrong answer if the goal is to live in a free society.

a reply to: seasonal

I would also like to point out that even if (hypothetically) there was no "intent" on information gathered about you by the government being used against you by the government, what happens when there is a breach?

To use your camera in the home example....

Even if they EXCLUSIVELY looked only for domestic violence, what is to stop some random hacker from breaking into my feed and recording it and/or broadcasting it? If I am, I dunno, dancing around my house in my boxer shorts I am not doing anything wrong but I still don't want that spread all over the place.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I have one suspect in mind-It's name starts with a G and ends with oogle.

I never log in to youtube on my laptop yet somehow my smart phone knew my viewing history. I smell a rat.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I don't think I ever bought into it. One reason may have been my 260 pound 6' even police officer father, you got time for a short (kinda) funny story?

Good,
In a Meijer parking lot (like walmart supercenter). A clean cut 20 something with a clip board approached our 1979 dodge diplomat ex cruiser, I was 12. It was a hot summer day so he asked my dad through his open window if he would like to sign his petition to get so and so from the communist party on some ballot measure.
My dad told him to get away from my G@d Dam# car before I get out of it, and he was serious. The 20 something said he is going to report him, out came the padge, and some other unpleasant words from my father who also was a navy man at the bay of pigs.
Ah the formative years when a father and son bond. I thank him for his stiff and rigid opposition to what he say as a threat. This did give me a deep motivation to know why things are the way they are, and want solid proof.

I know there are some that bought into it, but not so many. Even William Hague, one time leader of the conservative party, and later Foreign secretary in Cameron's government, disappeared after coming off with that during the Snowden affair.
It's simply not just an invasion of privacy, it's the forming of an anti-social policy'strategy...aka them and us right through just about every aspect of your life, and they are the watchers, and they are watching us, not just a few individuals like in Maggie Thatcher's day, but all of us, each with our own little pigeon hole.
So I'll say what I said a few times before on this very subject, Feck the secret services, here and around the world, feck them all, they are shabby little cheapskates that couldn't do a decent days work.

a reply to: seasonal

Nice...I'm not as direct, but I try to teach my son in a similar fashion, although I only curse like an Army vet, not a Navy one.

I wish that I never felt that way, but I had the misfortune to grow up California, so you can understand that the concept of privacy from the state is not exactly the strength of that state's citizenry. But like I said--I grew up, and I learned.

Plus, going through basic training and serving in the military really reminds you how precious privacy is, even if you have nothing to hide--it's something that you learn to covet while in, and protect when you're out.

And I know what a Meijer is--it's actually my preferred store where I live (Northern KY outside of Cincinnati).

a reply to: eluryh22

If I am, I dunno, dancing around my house in my boxer shorts I am not doing anything wrong but I still don't want that spread all over the place.

IF that's the worst.

As we all know there is nothing stopping knowledgeable people from eaves dropping using our cell phones and of course tracking us.

a reply to: seasonal

It is mainly the phone and google. Google knows where you have been.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: seasonal

Google knows where you have been.

That's more than I might know at times!

a reply to: reldra

OnStar Maybe
Helps GM track a stolen vehicle or respond to an emergency like a tire blowout or air-bag deployment by way of an in-car monitoring system that records GPS data,

Black boxes no as of 2009
Almost all new cars come with an event data recorder, which is an electronic device connected to a variety of sensors around the vehicle both inside and outside. It can tell if a driver is wearing a seatbelt, or if the oil pressure is low, and in the event of a crash it will send a signal instructing the car's airbags to deploy. It also tracks the car's acceleration or deceleration and its speed in the seconds before a crash occurs. Such information is vital to crash investigators and commonly is used by insurance companies to determine who's at fault in a wreck

Navigation systems
I would imagine they can be hacked.

www.autoblog.com...

Nobody really listens to me anyway, why would I worry about debunking something. As far as important people think, I am just a nobody just like two hundred million people in this country.