Dragon Age: Inquisition (PC)
MOGA Pocket Controller for Android
JBL Synchros E10
Gionee Elife S5.1
Far Cry 4
6 reasons to buy the Huawei Honor 6
Ford's David Huang talks about in-car infotainment and AppLink
How I ended up buying fake Xiaomi earphones from Amazon India
How Digital India initiative can revive the education sector
GOSF 2014: A very ordinary affair so far
How tech is taking football to the next level
Classic FPS games are a dying breed
Slowly gathering steam...
The obsession within
Carmick Shift: Can John Carmack and Oculus Rift change the world?
6GB RAM, 12000mAh battery: Leaked Sony tablet boasts insane specs
Micromax Canvas Tab P470 dual-SIM 3G tablet launched at Rs. 6,999
Lumia Denim update rolling out in India and Europe
Anonymous social app 'Secret' gets revamped, adds new features
Micromax Yu Yureka goes up for registration right now
iBall Slide 3G Q7218
Spice Dream Uno H Mi-498H
Intex Aqua V3
Intex Aqua R3
How to Install an SSD in your desktop or laptop PC
How to optimize SSD performance in Windows
Case Study: Building an award winning multi-touch enabled music app
Case Study: Developing a Health App for Windows 8
Case Study: Developing an augmented reality app for Intel based devices
Nokia Lumia 830 Review
Top 5 Compact Smartphones.mp4
Top 10 Budget Smartphones.mp4
Flying Drones in India.mp4
Xiaomi Redmi Note - First Look.mp4
Brand new Android apps and games that you should try
8 things you didn't know your phone is doing right now
How to improve your Firefox browsing experience
First look: Micromax YU Yureka
MIMI MI-W2 Unboxing and First Impressions
Intel Developer Zone
Intel Windows Developer Zone
Dsk International Campus Zone
I see that Eric Schmidt is back in the news with an erroneous assertion that if you've got nothing to hide, you should not worry about your privacy.
I'm always stunned when a billionaire with a private life goes on about how trivial privacy is. And he is not the only one. I often hear people say, "if you are not doing anything wrong, then what's the fear?" Scott McNealy famously said, "Privacy is dead. Get over it."
All these folks miss the point time and time again. Privacy is not about just you and me. It in itself is a milieu—one that needs nurturing, not a lax attitude.
Privacy is not important because I do or do not have something to hide. I would argue that lack of privacy regulations, whether by rule or agreement, creates total societal corruption. A Soviet-style state. Orwellian, like 1984.
Privacy laws protect the public from government officials whose personal lives may be compromised, for example. Say a public official has a sister who is a hooker. Someone finds out through some slack privacy policies. Only a few people know this, but they blackmail the politician into voting for laws that do not represent the public sentiment that he or she is supposed to regard. That's a problem. It invites corruption.
This is a silly but valid example. Spies and snoops operate in the world for a reason. Are we supposed to make their jobs easier with lenient policies?
OK, how about stock market manipulation? With slipshod privacy, how easy is it to eavesdrop on certain investors to figure out what they are up to and invest ahead of the curve? Apparently nobody sees this as a problem, either.
And what is with Eric Schmidt anyway? I wonder if he is even sincere about all this. Some years back, a CNet reporter did some Googling and dug up a bunch of personal information about Schmidt, including his home address, which he then published. Not happy about this, Schmidt banned the publication from all Google events. Based on his own attitude toward privacy, why would he care?
In some cases, you do want your personal privacy protected for honest reasons. Sometimes you do have something to hide. You are working for Company A and are up for a raise. In the meantime, Company B has been talking to you about coming to work for them. If that information got back to Company A, you might not get the raise but instead get fired. It's not corrupt, but it's certainly information you'd want to protect. How does this make you a criminal? How is this something you should not do?
Or even the more mundane: you are throwing a surprise party for your wife and would like to keep it a secret. But Schmidt says, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." Really? I shouldn't be throwing a surprise party?
Is everyone completely whacked out over the simplicity of privacy and why it is important? How did protecting privacy somehow only become associated with criminal activity? By reducing the argument to the simplistic "what have you got to hide?" you have created an incredibly poisonous argument that has nothing to do with the need for privacy. How about asking whether you would you like a government camera in your bathroom? Why not? What have you got to hide?
Seriously, reject these discussions. Protect privacy because it is the right and civilized thing to do. Eric Schmidt, Scott McNealy, and the others should be ashamed of their patronizing attitude toward privacy and the public. Stop it!
Copyright © 2010 Ziff Davis Publishing Holdings Inc