The most common argument used in defense of mass surveillance is ‘If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear’. Try saying that to women in the US states where abortion has suddenly become illegal. Say it to investigative journalists in authoritarian countries. Saying ‘I have nothing to hide’ means you stop caring about anyone fighting for their freedom. And one day, you might be one of them.

  • shneancy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I don’t know where I read it but the best defence to “if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear” is “I don’t have anything to hide but I don’t trust your judgment or intentions”

  • Hellmo_luciferrari@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Saying you don’t care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is like saying you don’t care about freedom of speech because you don’t have anything to say.

    • sqgl@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      It was Edward Snowden who said that “Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.”

  • bufalo1973@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Easy: “You, the government, want me to show you all my data? Right after you show me (and everyone else) all your documents, including the “top secret” ones. Because you haven’t done anything wrong, right?”

  • Call Me Mañana@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    investigative journalists in authoritarian countries

    You mean like the US? Who achieved the feat of persecuting a foreign journalist as if he were an American citizen?

    EDIT: I know that Mullvad is also critical of american surveillance, but I find it very funny that when in the West they call a state democratic that does exactly the same (or worse) than a state in the East that they call “authoritarian”. It really reveals how empty of meaning this word is. “Ah, but these Western states have ‘democratic institutions’.” News for you: the states you call “authoritarian” have them too. In both cases, they can be and de facto are dictatorships.

  • hglman@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    There is a inversion of sorts here that is also important. If some people have access to the information hidden to everyone else they have power and control. Allowing just a few to read everything everyone else does gives them undo power. The access law enforcement has can and it abused, it is also sold or stolen.

  • onlooker@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    I tried arguing against this, but it’s no use. I tried pointing out how something can be branded illegal retroactively, like 20 years down the line, I tried the “give me your credit card info” approach, nothing took. 90% of the time the counter-argument is usually something to the effect of “big companies know everything about me anyway”, which is just guessing on their part.

    I’m just going to take care of my own privacy, because I’m clearly in the minority (present company excluded, of course). Almost everyone I know disregards online privacy completely, so I’m done trying to get a dialogue going with these people; it’s every man for himself. The only way online privacy will become a hot topic among laymen is when something nasty happens and at that point, it will have been too late.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      my personal response is ALWAYS “would you be fine living with a state mandated police officer, FBI agent, CIA agent, whatever, in your house 24/7 making sure you never did anything wrong?”

      the answer is no, because obviously it’s no.

    • Subverb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      As Doctorow points out, ‘Saying security and privacy don’t matter because you have nothing to hide is like saying freedom of speech doesn’t mater because you have nothing to say.’

      It’s a very short-sighted view. Those rights will be taken from you if you don’t protect them.

        • Gigasser@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          They may know everything about you right now. But they don’t know about your future self, how you can change, how you may be an entirely different person in as little as a year. Data is useful, but it is more useful the more updated and recent it is.

        • Subverb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Well I think it does, because they don’t know literally everything about us yet. But they will one day if we don’t fight back.

          • Landslide7648@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            You’re missing the point. It doesn’t matter what you or I believe, if a person has accepted that a big corporation knows everything about them and use this as a reason not to take action or prevent them from knowing more, then the Doctorow quote doesn’t apply.

    • oatscoop@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      “I don’t have anything to hide because I think I’ve done something wrong: I have something to hide because question your judgement and motives.”

      They’re fine giving you their info because they trust you. The problem is when the person seeking that information is untrustworthy – and some shithead(s) making their way into a company or government isn’t just possible, it’s likely.

      Tell them to give all their sensitive personal information to someone that hates them. Credit card numbers, political beliefs, nudes, sexual preferences/fetishes, etc.

    • Citizen@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Thank you very much for speaking my mind!

      I would also add that the “Plandemic” WAS that nasty thing that started other nasty things happening AND still few acknowledge what you are very well talking about.

      IT is not only about being able to exercise the freedom of speech, privacy or living and loving, IT IS about HUMANS and HUMANITY and those that are against it…

      REAL EYES, REALISE, REAL LIES! ☝️

    • umami_wasabi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Just tell them unlock their phone so you can take a look of his browser history. Works quite a few time for me.

      • Display name@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        “I don’t trust you!” But they trust whatever NSA-agent looking at their private photos not to save anything for later…

      • onlooker@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        At one time I did, and to my surprise, my friend did just that! Unlocked their phone and handed it to me without a word. Welp.

        • technomad@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah, that’s when you fuck with them. Make them regret doing that. Make a point they will never forget. Lol

        • nomous@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          So you logged into all their social media and changed their passwords and recovery emails right? I don’t just want access now, I want it in perpetuity.

  • atro_city@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Pornstars show us their assholes but I’m pretty sure they don’t want everybody to know where they live. Just like normal people aren’t comfortable shitting in a public toilet with the door open.

  • Elias Griffin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago
    • Women hide thier skin, lips, and age
    • Men hide thier jawline with beards and their insecurities are buried so well, they forget it themselves as a defense mechanism hoping the mental/emotional weakness will “heal” by next confrontation
    • Humans hide thier weakness,
    • Thier competitive business plans
    • Patents until they are published
    • Who are you falling in love with at the start
    • Exactly how much you are attracted to a person
    • Who you have a crush on
    • Your answer to a $10,000 competition
    • Your lottery ticket
    • The location of your gold and gun
    • The location of your child when allowed online
    • Whether someone is away from home for extended periods of time, you leave the lights and TV on.
    • Inventions until it’s marketed
    • Science Fair Project until it’s unvield
    • Presents until they are opened
    • Your private parts
    • Your private thoughts on your marriage

    Have you ever grabbed a childs private parts? NO of course not, because you INNATELY UNDERSTAND even though you are not a parent and don’t remember being one yourself. In fact you understand it so well that if you were to do so publcally, you’re putting your life at risk.

    CONCLUSION: They want access to your weaknesses and privates.

    EVIDENCE: Privacy Violation is a specific tactic meant to break people …IN PRISON…since they begining of time, Gulags.

    P.S. Stop showing nude baby pictures that is a serious privacy violation. In fact, just don’t take the picture, where did you even get that you lazy lubricated louse.

    • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      I agree with the first part of your comment, I don’t understand the second. Some sort of pedophilophobic rant?

      • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Not too sure about the middle part, but the end was pointing out that baby pictures of little Sally playing in the tub are not okay to share or take in the first place.

        Its a common enough situation where Ma is going through the baby album with your bride-to-be or a total stranger (mother-in-law) and there’s a bunch of photos of under-dressed children that would definetny make the wrong crowd happy to have.