Nexus23 Labs View :
Being in the privacy sector since decades, being aware of the Privacy Problems
described by superb writers like Orwell, Huxley, Kafka, etc.
we always fought the mass surveillance of the Government and its mobs allies.
Opposite to most of people that ,as highlighted in the article below,
when Privacy Theme is launched in the desk come up with their
“I’ve nothing to hide” we fight to make them understand that
“Yes , you have something to hide , your life” .
Personal data shouldn’t be shared
with anyone that is not authorized , known , or close to own family and strict friendship’s circle. The Privacy Data , nowadays famous as metadata , are ours whole lives in numbers and names.
Cut and paste applied to them and your life will be misled to another one,
“Hey that’s not me” doesn’t matter ,
for advantage reasons of Government ,or Corporations that control these data,
“Now that is you! And you are an Enemy of the State”.
The Government may ask yours money but it can not enslaves
or try to enslave you in yours deepest thoughts by its All Seeing Eye.
The potential impact of the Metadata Control is scary ,and also the motto
“We watch with our Eye to Protect you ”
is a double weapon and it can be reversed like:
“We watch with Our Eye to Control you”.
Do you see the schema ? It’s obvious , citizens are being assimilated like
“Private properties of the State” and the Government can dispose of you
as it wishes and thinks in its will to “fix things” .
There’s nothing to fix , there’s all to hide ,
Freedom and Happiness are owned since birth by all humans
in every corner of this planet,
Governments has no right to impose restrictions on these fundamentals rights
that come with us , ours lives aren’t demanding protection
by sacrificing highest gift we got .
Since now on think to include in yours Ethical Skills and Principles that:
“Yes , I’ve something to hide , my personal life, my loves, my hate, what regards me and only me, my hidden life “.
>SOURCE.
[Extracts[..]]
When the government gathers or analyzes personal information, many people say they’re not worried. “I’ve got nothing to hide,” they declare. “Only if you’re doing something wrong should you worry, and then you don’t deserve to keep it private.”
The nothing-to-hide argument pervades discussions about privacy. The data-security expert Bruce Schneier calls it the “most common retort against privacy advocates.”
It’s an “all-too-common refrain.” In its most compelling form, it is an argument that the privacy interest is generally minimal, thus making the contest with security concerns a foreordained victory for security.
On the surface, it seems easy to dismiss the nothing-to-hide argument. Everybody probably has something to hide from somebody. As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn declared, “Everyone is guilty of something or has something to conceal. All one has to do is look hard enough to find what it is.”
On the surface, it seems easy to dismiss the nothing-to-hide argument. Everybody probably has something to hide from somebody. As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn declared, “Everyone is guilty of something or has something to conceal. All one has to do is look hard enough to find what it is.”
“If you have nothing to hide, then that quite literally means you are willing to let me photograph you naked? And I get full rights to that photograph—so I can show it to your neighbors?” The Canadian privacy expert David Flaherty expresses a similar idea when he argues: “There is no sentient human being in the Western world who has little or no regard for his or her personal privacy; those who would attempt such claims cannot withstand even a few minutes’ questioning about intimate aspects of their lives without capitulating to the intrusiveness of certain subject matters.”
Privacy is a plurality of different things that do not share any one element but nevertheless bear a resemblance to one another. For example, privacy can be invaded by the disclosure of your deepest secrets.
To describe the problems created by the collection and use of personal data, many commentators use a metaphor based on George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. Orwell depicted a harrowing totalitarian society ruled by a government called Big Brother that watches its citizens obsessively and demands strict discipline. The Orwell metaphor, which focuses on the harms of surveillance (such as inhibition and social control), might be apt to describe government monitoring of citizens. But much of the data gathered in computer databases, such as one’s race, birth date, gender, address, or marital status, isn’t particularly sensitive. Many people don’t care about concealing the hotels they stay at, the cars they own, or the kind of beverages they drink. Frequently, though not always, people wouldn’t be inhibited or embarrassed if others knew this information.
Another metaphor better captures the problems: Franz Kafka’s The Trial. Kafka’s novel centers around a man who is arrested but not informed why. He desperately tries to find out what triggered his arrest and what’s in store for him. He finds out that a mysterious court system has a dossier on him and is investigating him, but he’s unable to learn much more. The Trial depicts a bureaucracy with inscrutable purposes that uses people’s information to make important decisions about them, yet denies the people the ability to participate in how their information is used.
Yet another problem with government gathering and use of personal data is distortion. Although personal information can reveal quite a lot about people’s personalities and activities, it often fails to reflect the whole person. It can paint a distorted picture, especially since records are reductive—they often capture information in a standardized format with many details omitted.
[…]
>If you like this article then you should read : My Hidden Life 2
You must log in to post a comment.