Re: some arguments for privacy

[Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>]

At 1:15 AM -0800 4/8/97, Wei Dai gave some arguments pro and con privacy:
>Privacy as Restriction on Signaling
>
>....  Consider a possible future where every
>room in every house is wired with a camera that continously broadcasts to
>the Internet.  Life would certainly be very uncomfortable in this future,
>as every trivial action must be carefully considered in order to preserve
>one's reputation.

Or peoples expectation about the range of private behavior will change to
be more in line with the reality.  Those whose behavior is 5 standard
deviations away from the norm will be screwed.


>Possible Benefit of Non-Privacy Limited
>
>This is more of an argument for privacy technology, rather than privacy
>per se.  Suppose that privacy-invading technology becomes much cheaper
>than privacy-enhancing technology.  Given the arguments above it seems
>inevitible that governments will pass laws to restrict the distribution of
>certain kinds of information about individuals.  But of course this will
>not keep the information out of the hands of those governments themselves
>and other resourceful organizations.

Such laws will support monopoly use of personal information, and as such be
very unlikely to contribute to the good of society.

At CFP '97, David Brin gave a lunch talk where he argued against privacy
and in favor of accountability.  The example he used was the cop and the
driver, both with the secure recording TV cameras on their shoulders.  Of
course the crypto-anarchist view is you can use any information you can
get, and I can use strong privacy technologies to keep you from getting it.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | God could make the world   | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | in six days because he did | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | not have an installed base.| Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA