[FoRK] exactly how much privacy should we have?

Eugen Leitl eugen at leitl.org
Sun Jun 16 05:46:57 PDT 2013


On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 07:10:54PM -0700, Bill Humphries wrote:
> 
> On Jun 15, 2013, at 5:21 PM, Noon Silk <noonslists at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > but do we agree that watching nothing is also
> > wrong?
> 
> The problem about "how much surveillance" we should tolerate is complicated by private surveillance. 

End users should sousveil all they want, provided they
don't sell the information to any commercial or federal
aggregator. 
 
> We can require it take an act of congress and a note from my mother to allow the government access to communications, but that does not prevent private parties from trying to monitor our movements, intents, conversations and activities. Government surveillance is a 4th amendment matter, private surveillance is, as far as I can tell, a different body of law.

Our public servants should have zero privacy. 
 
> And the other problem is that even if we make it more difficult for the government to listen in on us, does it prevent them from buying traces of our activities from third parties.

You don't have to buy, if you can issue secret laws, or
just show what happens if you don't comply. 

It makes things moderately more difficult if you need to strongarm a
lot of small players. Which is why centralism should be deprecated,
but users are clueless that way.
 
> Any reforms to the matter have to address both problems. 
> 
> And, for what it's worth, Lauren Weinstein's getting increasingly panicked in his email list posts, because, I think, it's dawning on him that people who don't want Big Brother watching everything they do may not go for Google doing the same, even if you get a free email account with it.

Yeah, Lauren has managed to completely lose any credibility.
I skim or skip most of the messages there.


More information about the FoRK mailing list