

Where “nothing to hide” fails as logic - DASD
http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2013/06/10/nothing-to-hide.html

======
heliostatic
I really like Daniel Solove's paper on this question, "I've Got Nothing to
Hide" and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy. In it, he cites the kind of
response most people here have given as common and effective in the extreme
case, but also notes that the flip responses such as "well then, let me read
your email" don't work for stronger, subtler versions of the "nothing to hide"
argument.

The gist of the paper is that the easy answers already concede too much; they
admit a very narrow definition of privacy. Namely, that privacy is the right
of seclusion. Instead, he advances a broader conception of privacy (from his
longer Taxonomy of Privacy) and identifies societal goods from privacy.

[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565)

------
alan_cx
I might have have plenty to hide:

Hemorrhoids Herpes Depression I like to pick my nose I have a sort bit on my
cock I don't wash much I hate pensioners/seniors I hate work I like Justin
Beiber I hate my boss I hate my wife I hate my kids I think all policemen have
issues I don't like how Jews mix race, religion, and politics I'm irrationally
scared of black people

Enough?

Now, if all or some of that were true, none of it is illegal, I would keep
quite and always act appropriately despite my possible opinions, but like hell
would I want people close to me or people I work with knowing any of that, let
alone the government.

I have plenty to hide, maybe the above, maybe not. So, yeah, I have plenty to
worry about.

Any one else?

~~~
chr1
Everyone has stupid things like that. But the reason for hiding, is that if
only your secrets are unveiled, other people will use them against you!

But if everyone's secrets are unveiled, everyone benefit's. (e.g. you might
learn that your wife hates you too, and that everyone likes to pick a nose:)

The problem isn't that people loose their privacy, the problem is that
government get's to keep it's privacy, and government shouldn't have any
privacy in the first place!

~~~
cjh_
> But if everyone's secrets are unveiled, everyone benefit's.

I may be misinterpreting you, but I don't believe this is true. It only works
if you find out other's have a similar or compatible secret.

If everyone found out you pick your nose and eat it, but no one else does it,
how does that benefit the nose picker?

If bob finds out his boss hates him, and his boss finds out that he has racist
tendencies, how does that benefit bob?

~~~
vfrtgbnhy
If no one else picks its nose that means that nosepicking is not within the
norms. Depending on what everyone else thinks about it might even be
unacceptable. With that knowledge he can decide how to behave without
bothering others.

In the second case openness might be the first step to a better relationship
between both.

~~~
itsybitsycoder
If it bothers others that Bob picks his nose when he's alone, maybe they
should stop digging around in his personal business. Or does every moment of
our actions & thoughts, no matter how small, need to be put before a public
jury now?

------
justinlloyd
People who claim they have nothing to hide never grew up in a small village or
community.

People love to politick. People love to gossip. People love to single out
those that are different. People love to be busbodies in other peoples'
business.

Are you black? Are you slightly too white? Are you female/ Are you male, over
the age of 19 and don't have a girlfriend yet? Do you not get up before 10AM?
Do you work odd hours? Do stay up late at night? Do you like "those" kinds of
movies that aren't our kind of movies? Do you prefer to sit quietly and read
books? Do you not like killing small furry animals just because...? Do you
prefer playing with computers? Are you fat? Are you not pretty? Aren't you
cool? Do you not like the manly, healthy pursuits like hunting, team sports
(but only the ones we play) and fishing? Do you drive the wrong kind of car?
Do you eat the wrong kind of food? Is your hair not quite the right length?

People that say they have nothing to hide never grew up being persecuted for
things that were perceived as different. There is a reason that in Amish
communities shunning is an effective punishment.

Beware not of the dictators of this world. Be afraid of the little Hitlers
instead for the world is full of them.

~~~
will_work4tears
I'm strongly against this whole idea of PRISM, et al, but I don't get this
leap of "the government is going to know everything about you" to, "it's going
to be posted for all to see." The latter is simply not true, unless you know a
whole lot of NSA employees with access to that information. Not saying it's
all ok since that is true, but all of the arguments that bring up the "going
to be public knowledge" argument is just a straw man.

~~~
superuser2
>The latter is simply not true

Until the government decides you are inconvenient and "leaks" embarrassing
data to the press.

Or, alternatively, how long before a socially conservative Congress decides
parents/friends/potential employers have a right to know if someone is engaged
in un-Christian behavior? The fear alone could make a more moral world (and
depending on your level of crazy, help cut the deficit as we won't have to pay
to clean up after natural disasters, God's punishment for immorality). We
could end homosexuality, abortion, pornography, sexting, and atheism by
ensuring their practitioners are too afraid to communicate. Texting and the
internet paved the way for the moral decline of America, and this lazy,
entitled generation is running amuck with no fear of God. We can fix that! We
could even publish a registry of romantic relationships which don't lead to
marriages. A list of who's had an abortion (horray for electronic health
records!). Parents could retain control of their children through college and
early adulthood by threatening to cut them off if electronic communications
reveal undesirable behavior. You could have tax incentives for businesses that
hire straight, monogamous churchgoers (geofencing) who don't watch porn.

None of this would run afoul of the Constitution, as there is no restriction
of speech or religious freedom, just the sharing of third party business
records.

Or, alternatively, how long before a liberal Congress decides people have a
right to know if politicians and employers make racist remarks by text message
or post pseudonymously on neo-Nazi forums? Which lobbyists call them, how
often, and for how long? If the children of anti-gay rights campaigners are
secretly gay? You could surveil private businesses to make sure they're paying
their workers equally, and not talking about trying to cheat safety or
monopoly regulations. Imagine an inside look at the discussions behind _every_
hiring decision!

Yeah, it's a little farfetched. But we seem to be okay with intercepting this
data and using it in our collective interests. So far, that's just security,
and my objections aren't terribly strong. But I encourage everyone to look at
the incredible power of rural America in Congress (see corn subsidies) and
think hard about what else the Values Voters and Focus on the Family might get
written into law as our best interests.

------
lotharbot
_" a witness may have a reasonable fear of prosecution and yet be innocent of
any wrongdoing. The privilege serves to protect the innocent who otherwise
might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances."_

\- Slochower v. Board of Education - 350 U.S. 551 (1956)
[http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/350/551/case.html](http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/350/551/case.html)

 _" we recognized that truthful responses of an innocent witness, as well as
those of a wrongdoer, may provide the government with incriminating evidence
from the speaker’s own mouth."_

\- Ohio v. Reiner - 532 U.S. 17 (2001)
[https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/532/17/case.html](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/532/17/case.html)

This is why "nothing to hide" fails as logic. Even the innocent can be
misrepresented or misunderstood in ways that appear criminal.

------
Zenst
One way to look at the "nothing to hide" argument is that it is always told by
people who wear clothes, from there the paradoxical arguments will carry on.

"I have nothing illegal to hide" is what they really meant to say. But laws
change and what was illegal today could be legal tomorrow and vice versa.

You can also view this as a variation of schrodinger cat, in that your data is
inside a box and the question is are you a terroist with the answear being you
are both a terroist and not a terroist until that box is opened. With that the
NSA or whoever will not know if you are or not until they look.

Tough issue and one that is about as easily answered as knowing the life signs
of a cat in a box without opening or interacting with the box.

~~~
miguelrochefort
I would prefer not to have anything to hide. However, the society pretty much
forces me to hide who I really am. Why? Social stigma.

People are used to live in a society where people hide what's not socially
accepted, as well as their "problems". After a while, people tend to
intuitively think that these "problems" don't exist, and become much more
judgemental when they witness an instance of them. This reinforce these social
stigmas and people do more and more to hide everything that could be used
against them. This is a problem on its own, artificially created by the
society we live in.

Ideally, we would become more and more open, up until a point where we don't
have anything to hide. Protecting privacy for the sake of privacy is foolish.
Privacy is only necessary as long as we decide to remain close-minded and
blind to reality.

------
vy8vWJlco
One variation on the " nothing to hide" theme I hear (usually when I bring up
Internet surveillance to non-tech friends) goes something like: " _I only use
Facebook for public things anyway_ ," or " _I only want to Skype with my
grandparents once a month_ ," or something else along those lines.

It's hard to say anything to that since they are only making a decision for
themselves; they have every right to.

What I would like to say, if I can afford to alienate them, is something like:
"Well, thanks. Thanks for making it harder to speak out or be different.
Thanks for making surveillance OK. Thanks for making it OK for employers to
ask for my passwords... Thanks." _facepalm_ (I try to tone it down, but
_sheesh_.)

RMS's personal FAQ touches on this regarding Facebook, using the name _victim-
coperpetrators_ : [http://www.stallman.org/rms-
lifestyle.html](http://www.stallman.org/rms-lifestyle.html)

------
ianmcgowan
I wish there was a snappy response to "but I've got nothing to hide!". This
article is not it. The slippery slope/thin end of the wedge arguments rely on
a potential "they will take advantage" event at some future unspecified date.
And it's a matter of faith to believe that will or will not happen.

The arguments about sharing your email/going naked are missing the point - you
may have plenty to hide from your neighbours, but given a level of trust in
the government you might be ok with them collecting data that might help
thwart terrorist plots. I don't personally think that level of trust is
reasonable, at least over the next 40 years, but my conservative friends
certainly do.

------
kanzure
Nothing to hide, everything to lose.

IIRC, there's supposed to be a good counter-argument to "nothing to hide" that
involves something about privacy being an integral component of maintaining
the power balance in a society (ostensibly-)organized around individual
freedoms and protections/checks against its government and inevitable
government bullying.

I just can't seem to find any recent evidence of people remembering this from
the recent articles/comments/etc.

------
m_darkTemplar
I don't know, I still don't mind if the NSA has access to my data if they're
not allowed to share it.

I accept that things that I share on the cloud/with big tech companies are
probably accessible by someone. I don't have any guarantee that the top people
at Google/Yahoo aren't looking through my stuff--they certainly have the
ability to do so.

As long as you're storing your data in a service like this, someone will have
access, probably multiple people. This new PRISM stuff just tells me that a
few more people have access, it doesn't really change much for me.

If you are concerned about this type of privacy I'd suggest living like
Stallman then. It's not as if you don't have methods to keeping your data
private.

~~~
brymaster
> I still don't mind if the NSA has access to my data if they're not allowed
> to share it.

Some day you may regret that sentiment.

> If you are concerned about this type of privacy I'd suggest living like
> Stallman then.

No. I shouldn't have to completely disconnect in order to be safe from
government spying.

I'm a private citizen and they are public servants: get that through your
head.

~~~
m_darkTemplar
Stallman isn't completely disconnected, I see an email from him probably every
other day. He's very aware of what's happening in the world. He still has
email and he can get the news through various websites as long as they don't
require non-free software.

I have trust that they are indeed public servants, apparently a lot more than
people here. I don't see them going after the every day person with the data
they have. For that to happen a lot more bad laws would have to be passed.

~~~
brymaster
> I don't see them going after the every day person with the data they have.
> For that to happen a lot more bad laws would have to be passed.

You're not making the connection. These people have access to everything
without supervision and want to completely destroy online privacy. It only
takes one corrupt person to abuse the system and use that information against
you. Why, just by going online I can gather about you that-

\- Your name is Ryan Cheu and you study Computer Science at MIT
([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4735907](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4735907))

\- I have your photo and work history ([http://www.linkedin.com/pub/ryan-
cheu/13/95a/b69](http://www.linkedin.com/pub/ryan-cheu/13/95a/b69))

\- You are a Christian and very vocal about it
([http://en.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/m30cy/to_ratheism_fr...](http://en.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/m30cy/to_ratheism_from_a_christian/c2xpzu4))

\- You are attracted to Asian women
([http://en.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/j3ogo/girlfriend_l...](http://en.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/j3ogo/girlfriend_learning_starcraft_2_after_realizing/c28vmsq))

\- You play a ton of Starcraft and even run a team at MIT where you can be
reached at starleague-officers@mit.edu
([http://en.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/11iwc5/recruiting_...](http://en.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/11iwc5/recruiting_thread_for_collegeuniversity_sc2_teams/c6mw7mn?context=3))

\- You didn't want your Reddit account to be linked to your Github but it was
easy enough to find:
[https://github.com/ryancheu](https://github.com/ryancheu)
([http://en.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/1679go/new_red...](http://en.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/1679go/new_reddit_gold_feature_filter_subreddits_from/c7tpkue?context=3))

This is just the information I had access to from a basic search. Imagine what
they have.

So, does any of this bother or scare you? Could any of this information be
taken out of context and used against you? Are you getting the picture now?

~~~
m_darkTemplar
No it doesn't, a lot of that info is actually in my Hacker News profile, you
can just click on my username. If that did scare me, then I shouldn't have
that info up there, right? Because people will have access to it someway or
another if you have it online like that. That's my whole point. Just trusting
no one will ever find your info is not good practice if you're actually
concerned about it, regardless of what laws are in place.

I'll also note that it doesn't take just 1 person to go corrupt, it also takes
laws to change to let them act on that info and a court system that sides with
them.

~~~
brymaster
Oh right, "nothing to hide, nothing to fear." Sure.

> Because people will have access to it someway or another if you have it
> online like that. That's my whole point.

Yes, the shit you post in public online, not the private (PMs, email, phone
calls, logs of your activities, etc). It's private and none of their business.
That's my point.

We're not just talking about public posts on reddit profiles here.

------
ksherlock
My theory is that people who say that do have something to hide. For example:
the NSA. It's a perfectly reasonable statement from their perspective.

------
CurtMonash
Two words: "Chilling effect"

When I googled to see if anybody else had made that connection, my main find
was a DOD paper from 2004.

------
Millennium
"Nothing to hide" fails by the simple application of time. What qualifies as
worthy of hiding or not changes over time, sometimes drastically and suddenly.
By the time this happens, it's too late to undo whatever you did that was
considered perfectly appropriate at the time, and as unfair as it may be to
blame someone for that, people WILL go after them for it. It happens every
time.

Will this happen to you? Maybe, maybe not. Unless you can foretell the future,
the only safe way to go is to assume that it will.

------
KaiserPro
If you have nothing to hide, then you'll kindly hand over your bank details,
passwords, don't skip your porn stash.

Also I'd like your significant other's mobile number. I'd like to see if I can
get a topless pic.

Everyone has something to hide.

~~~
chr1
This completely misses the point

What you say isn't something to hide, it's information you can use against me
if you are able to hide how did you use it.

But if i can know who tries to access my account anytime, i don't need that
password in the first place! Try doing something fishy, and i'll track you
down:)

~~~
KaiserPro
No but it doesn't.

Everyone on the internet has something to hide, and that's their passwords.
The problem with the "use normal information for blackmail" case is that its
very difficult for the public to understand.

They often have never been bullied, and don't have the imagination where they
can see a point where normal conversations can be used against them.

The bank account argument is far easier to explain and grasp

------
nano111
"Another interesting observation is that if the government claims to have not
broken the law and has nothing to hide, why are they getting all mad from the
leaks?"

------
wavesounds
Its interesting I was also thinking 'man I wish I could have all the
information on me the government probably has, that could come in handy'.
Relates to the personal API someone posted last week [1]
[http://x.naveen.com/post/51808692792/a-personal-
api](http://x.naveen.com/post/51808692792/a-personal-api)

