Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is irrelevant

Re:Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is... by mirimir on Wednesday January 06, 2016 @02:07AM (#10849086)

Limiting privacy to stuff that's "not Evil" is unworkable, because there's no reliable way to distinguish "good" from "evil". For example, many Wahhabi Muslims consider homosexuality to be at least as evil as child pornography. And indeed, some decades ago, that was virtually the case in the US.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is... by DonaldFisk on Wednesday January 06, 2016 @02:47AM (#10849197)

That's moral relativism. It can be used to argue that blood transfusions are evil, or that slavery isn't.

It would be better to ask whether someone, who is not a willing participant, is harmed by the activity. That's easier to establish.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is... by Nutmog on Wednesday January 06, 2016 @05:51AM (#10849786)

That test allows child porn as long as the participants don't get harmed in real life. It does make sense but I think most anti-child-porn proponents would say that causing harm isn't needed for it to be evil.

The fact is, our collective idea of good and evil is internally inconsistent. It's still skewed by our repulsion to sexual deviancy and our fear of being judged by our peers. We really can't distinguish right from wrong. We aren't even able to apply the simple test you proposed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is... by mirimir on Wednesday January 06, 2016 @03:34AM (#10849306)

Yes, I agree. But still, there must be some entity that tests for non-aggression. And everything can be gamed. It's far safer to bake in privacy such that it can't be compromised.

[ Parent | on HN ]