Obama On Cryptocurrency

in #privacy5 years ago (edited)

President Barack Obama commenting on unbreakable encryption available for citizens. This was, I think, in connection with the dispute between Apple and the federal government on providing users with encryption without a back door in 2016.

My comment on the issue is that secret communication is nothing new. People have always been able to talk to each other out of anybody else's earshot or use some sort of coded language in communication potentially being listened in on by third parties. Cockney rhyming slang comes to mind as an example.

What is new is surveillance, mass surveillance in particular. The UK, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are not allowed intercept the private communications of their own citizens without a court order but what they do is circumvent their laws by spying on each other's citizens. Last year, I discussed privacy with a couple of friends of mine and they said that they'd prefer a society of total non-privacy as it would "level the playing field" and that maintaining privacy was a lost cause anyway. I completely disagree on both counts. First of all, fine tuning levels of privacy and security as well as sharing different levels of meta knowledge can be achieved using cryptography. Also, there are very good reasons to restrict the powers of the government as modern states are millions of times stronger than individual citizens. Even in a case where wrongdoings by the government were out in the open, the government can and sometimes does simply go on committing them despite all protests as it is immensely more powerful than any other actors.

Sort:  

You're right, privacy must remain private. No one should do the opposite, and there will always be a way to maintain that, here on the platform there is a way to send private messages without others being able to see it.
Since there are things that can only be treated between two or more people but only among those people who want it.

The supposedly utopian "society without secrets" presents an interesting problem to me. Let's set aside the issues of personal liberty and agency for a moment. Let's assume for a moment that we can all agree: no privacy, no secrets, and everyone knowing everything is just safer. We have run the magical calculations and we can be absolutely sure that the government will be kept in check. (It's ridiculous I know; bear with me.)

Okay. But we are human beings. We value our privacy, whether we know it or not. We evolved that way. There is a reason intimacy involves sharing things we usually hide from others. In a society without secrecy, what would it mean to "get to know" someone? What would it mean to fall in love? Would we even get to do that anymore?

Imagine what that world would be? A world without the excitement of meeting and discovering over time who someone is. I am not saying this is definitive proof that privacy advocates are objectively correct. It is simply something to think about.

Excellent points.

Posted using Partiko Android

Hi @markkujantunen!

Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 3.711 which ranks you at #5226 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 234 places in the last three days (old rank 5460).

In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 222 contributions, your post is ranked at #146.

Evaluation of your UA score:
  • You're on the right track, try to gather more followers.
  • The readers like your work!
  • You have already shown user engagement, try to improve it further.

Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.30
TRX 0.12
JST 0.034
BTC 64513.75
ETH 3146.11
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.95