• Avicenna@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Also even if this argument worked it would only work in a country where the laws don’t change overnight to prosecute people who oppose fascism and genocide

  • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Whenever someone gives me the “Nothing to hide, nothing to fear” statement, I always ask to see their phone, unlocked. If they have nothing to hide, they should have no problem with me looking through that, right? Messages, pictures, browser history…

    And when they refuse, it helps make the point that maybe privacy is important, and not wanting to get spied on doesn’t equate to guilt.

    • Axolotl@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 day ago

      I usually say “why don’t you just shit in a bathroom without walls then?” But i guess your is more effective

    • bedwyr@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      Truly in a rational world the statement that if you don’t have anything to hide you should submit to total government surveillance would not warrant a response, not in the west with our history of relative freedom.

  • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    If some random guy had a 24/7 mic, camera, and GPS access to my daughter, it’d be obligated to go shoot him. Why should a company be treated any different?

    Another reason I give, that’s less “boogyman gonna get your kids”, is we close our windows when talking about money so the neighbors don’t here us. Not because we’re doing something bad, but because its none of their business. That’s what privacy is.

    • TheEmpireStrikesDak@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I like the line, you’re not doing anything wrong by using the loo, but you still lock the door when you do.

      Anyone who unironically uses the “nothing to hide” argument can stop using curtains, and keep a live feed of their screens online for everyone to see every text, email or photo they share.

    • village604@adultswim.fan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      I like to ask those people if I can go look through their underwear drawer.

      Because I wear pants to protect my genitals from cat claws.

  • Eternal192@anarchist.nexus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 day ago

    Citizen tracking is for shitty governments that want to stay in power while making everyone’s lives hell and they want to know if anyone disagrees so they can remove any opposition.

  • bufalo1973@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Nothing to hide? Then the government will show EVERYTHING they do, right? They don’t have anything to hide, right?

  • Alexfire@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Democracy is only as free as its citizens’ minds. Without the education and critical thinking to understand what’s at stake, the people don’t govern, they get governed. That’s the shared claim of Aristotle’s “democratic education” and Sagan’s “otherwise the government runs us” are the same argument.

  • gegil@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    “Nothing to hide” is also stupid on another way. For example, you may have some personal secrets which you want to keep to yourself. They are not in any way illegal, but that does not mean that you dont want to hide them.

    “Nothing to hide” usually refers to sonething potentially illegal, like you dont need to hide your activity if its not criminal. But now think another way, would you like to tell random people on internet your real name, your address, your other personally indentifiable infornation? No? Then why have double standarts?

    • mirshafie
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I would go further. I think an optimal society needs a little bit of crime. The boundary between legal and illegal shoudn’t be fully enforced, because the definitions of legal and illegal are somewhat arbitrary and should be subject to change. A functioning society needs to have some sort of margin of error to allow the laws to evolve over time.

      What I mean is that there isn’t anything wrong with having things to hide. Laws aren’t perfect and not all change can happen fully in the open fron start to end.