Since when was linking an action with its consequence 'deciding that I shouldn't be doing something' or 'authoritarian and creepy'?

Patient: "It hurts when I do this!" Doctor: "Then don't do that."

You can still do it, just don't act surprised when it hurts. You can't have it both ways.

Because there is no action -> consequence chain in that phrase. All you have to do to see this is make the private information involuntary -- not the result of an action. The canonical case is not some horrible thing you might have done that you want to keep private. The typical case is something out of your control that you don't want everyone to know.

My argument is not that the subsequent phrase about putting things on the internet is false. It's not. That has a consequence. My argument is that the quote includes two basically unrelated parts and the statement about putting things in reach of google is only one part of it.

When people say the first phrase was taken out of context, I know they apologizing for google, whether they realize it or not -- because it wasn't taken out of context. It's obviously how Eric really feels -- and I think it shows how incredibly dangerous it is to trust people who have no obligation to you with your information.

I don't understand what the alternative is. If you insist on doing something you don't want people to know about, and you refuse to learn to cover it up,... then what!?

I wrote something up above, but the gist is -- you don't have to do anything to have something you want to hide.

Ok, so you have something you want to hide, and you don't want to learn to hide it. You want other people to fix that for you?