Privacy: Importance and Expectations

[tman]

Yeah government-forced economic equality is great.  That's why the USSR is the undisputed world leader and East Germany was so much more prosperous than the west...

[LigH]

Constitutions are outdated anyway, they were made by anti-fascists, they are socialistic, they need to be reformed.

Believes JP Morgan.

Not me. Neither Evgeny Morozov.

[Roled]

Constitutions are outdated anyway, they were made by anti-fascists, they are socialistic, they need to be reformed.

Believes JP Morgan.

Not me. Neither Evgeny Morozov.

Really insightful articles, LigH- thanks for posting.  More people in the USA might benefit from a deeper and broader view of social freedoms. 

[MishkaL1138]

I don't know, LigH, Spanish Constitution is pretty nice, it's just that nobody obeys it.

[LigH]

It's even more complex in Germany, Mishka. Do we have a Constitution at all, or just a (temporary - sic!) Basic Law, as former occupation zone after WWII and still no fully sovereign country, as some experts say?

Yet, we have a "Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution" (Verfassungsschutz) ... which pays neo-nazis for unreliably delivering vague information; one of the results was the NSU (National-Socialistic Underground) which killed at least 10 people, more or less under the surveillance of the office. Great success in protecting our constitution, I am impressed...

At least Germany had very strong political ideals while creating a new republic after WWII to avoid a repetition of the reasons how Hitler could "democratically" claim the power when the parliament of the Weimar Republic surrendered their rights.

Believe it or not, Germany is doing the same idiocy again, for the sake of economical growth and in fear of terrorism. The people have no lobby.

On a side note: If the government trades civil rights (and privacy is one of the most important) for "protection" by abusing the fear of terrorism, do they become terrorists themselves by definition (terror = fear of violence, in contrast to the violence happening)? Our Minister of the Interior declared security as "Super Basic Right" ... and I used to believe that all Basic Rights are equal to protect the people.

Sometimes I wonder if a politician needs to live in a parallel universe to fulfill his job.

[Eonwind]

Believe it or not but some of the european post WWII Constitutions are the most advanced document regarding human rights, freedom and equality.

In some country there could be the need to update part of them especially regarding the country organization but other than that their base principles should be an example for the rest of the world not the reverse.

[LigH]

No quarrels - no profit. Economy has different desires.

[Moja Aere]

  waited too much to read here... so I fear I'll go off topic, as the discussion evolved a bit since the 1st post...
Anyway...

What's funny is how quickly you can get used to not having privacy.

Even much more funny is how quickly you can get used not having rights, in general, so i.e. right to your own privacy or to have choices or whatever even if these seemed to be 'established' rights 'til a few years ago.
Otherwise people'd perhaps be able to answer and, I don't know, to perhaps find ways to invalidate spying programs' results with false or totally useless data… or not. I don't know. But I prefer to think that if people knew and wanted to, then, would be able to.

And, another thing… the reason is simply a silly lie to me, I mean:

I don't think being safe from terrorism or somehow ensure a greater "would-be-safety" is worth the freedom that's being given up in the process.

Safety to me is not actually a reason to anything here but a simple pretext to allow generalized control… essentially I can't see nothing for real linked to safety.

… but I'm probably paranoid as, to be honest, I also have so many doubts even on what terrorism really is, because to me, afterall, it looks like the new welcome fear, after the old cold war's fear was gone… so, yep, paranoid perhaps, but after all I think it might happen and it's not totally wrong when you have to deal with people or governments or companies or whatever which so seldom play fairly...

[Gilrond]

Privacy is important, and it in a big degree depends on the users. Surely governments will try to spy as much as possible, but you as a user shouldn't make it easy for them. I.e. don't use social networks which thrive on violating privacy (Facebook, Google+ and etc.). Use ones which respect it (Diaspora* and etc.). Use encryption where possible and so on. It's not a guarantee of security, but it's a necessary first step for those who care.

Some other examples: https://prism-break.org

[LigH]

More, please. The sleeper is awaking...

[Roled]

Yeah government-forced economic equality is great.  That's why the USSR is the undisputed world leader and East Germany was so much more prosperous than the west...

Government "forced" equality is written into the constitution of all democracies. Only fascist governments attempt to rely on neoliberal, libertarian concepts first espoused by Thomas Hobbes in 1651, and more recently articulated by Robert Nozick.  The wealthiest individual citizenries in the world are found in the Scandinavian social democracies, and they also have the highest personal and corporate taxes. Sweden. Norway. Finland. And Switzerland. 

"Today we launch the sixth edition of the annual Legatum Prosperity Index™, benchmarking 142 countries on measures of wealth and wellbeing. For Americans, the headline is a simple if unwelcome one: the US is a nation in decline. For the first time, the US does not rank among the top 10 countries in the world in terms of overall prosperity." The Harvard Business Review, October 30, 2012. 
http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/10/where_does_your_nation_rank_on.html

[Rigwyn]

We've had some sad leadership over the last decade or so. With George W and Obama spilling our money out the window like it was stale piss and the fed devaluing our currency, I'm not sure how much longer this can go on. I read somewhere that Obama wanted to raise the cap on the debt ceiling yet again ( as if he hasn't already spent enough ).

I'm no economist, but what the US is doing just doesn't seem to make sense. It looks to me like the hogs are rewriting the rules in their favor while the rest of us farm animals watch in dismay.

For a while I thought to myself, "If we the people don't need privacy, then by the same logic, neither does the government." Sadly, I think that if the government was fully transparent, we would just see their incompetence and dishonesty that much more. They would become more brazen and casual about breaking the law, lying and screwing up.

[MishkaL1138]

[Gilrond]

[bloodedIrishman]

Unconstitutional government surveillance has been going on since the dawn of the first world war. Since 9/11 it exploded. Senator Widen said what we're seeing now is the tip of the iceberg. This guy is on the House Intelligence Committee -- he's briefed on whatever he's allowed to be briefed on. Only he can't explicitly tell the American people what he's being briefed on by law. So if this is the tip of an iceberg that he doesn't even know that much about, then what the hell is the iceberg? Thus our lawfully elected representatives cannot legally inform us of the unlawful activities of unelected, militaristic organizations (NSA, CIA) who destroy our national character. Obama continues the legacy of Bush. Clinton was no better -- and he is credited with far too much.

And slight necro.