Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It's interesting how people struggle with this argument. Just the fact that this guy needs to write a 30 page essay to explain the point tells you something.

However I tend to stop short of this kind of analysis, because it all seems to be trying too hard. My argument, is that in the end it's just biological. We're built this way (not all, but most of us). Perhaps for good reasons, perhaps not, but it doesn't really matter. We can't rationalize or deconstruct it any better than we can needing sex, fearing the dark or the extreme reaction a person has to waterboarding. It just is how it is - we evolved to want privacy, and now we need it and that's that. Trying to deconstruct "why" we want it at a deeper level might be interesting, but it is not useful for producing counter arguments to the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" argument, in fact it is counterproductive, because it values the most important argument of all with zero weight. Further it just prompts people to come up with "solutions" that address the lower level issues and still leave us with our biological sense of privacy invasion.



I'd be careful not to attribute unexplained aspects of our desires and behavior to biology alone. A lot of it can be a social construction. If you're used to having your privacy regularly invaded from a very young age, it's possible that you won't have any "biological sense" of privacy invasion.

Does our intuitive sense of biology come from our genes, or our cultural value of "personal space"? The fact that we have weird reactions to nudity and social norms that prevent us from sharing the most intimate details of our lives indicates that it may be a cultural thing.

Obviously, this just makes privacy invasion on a systematic level even more ominous.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: