To be clear, I don’t subscribe to the idea of “Nothing to Hide.” It’s a bullshit argument. The reason why I’m asking this is because I want to be able to explain why it’s bullshit. I don’t like the fact that many people, including ones in my family, are willing giving up their right to privacy simply because they’ve become accustomed to convenience that modern technology has afforded them. I, myself, have been guilty of these but I’m actively taking steps to take back my privacy and potentially help others as well.
Bonus question: Many people will retort with things “Do you want criminals walking our streets?” or bring up an anecdote about how Flock, Ring or any other surveillance companies’ cameras helped solve a crime or found a missing person. Flock themselves have a blog post series called #SolvedStories where they list so-called “success stories” about their cameras solving a case. Of course, I don’t want criminals walking our streets and, sure, those stories might pull my heartstrings but what’s the bigger picture?
You do have something to hide, you just don’t realize it.
A motivated actor can easily spin innocuous details of your life into evidence that you are engaging in some kind of ‘bad’ behavior or are a ‘bad’ person.
The entire problem with the nothing to hide paradigm is that it inherently assumes you are innocent untill proven guilty.
It assumes those with access to your data are fair, impartial, motivated only by the idea of justice.
This doesn’t work when you are functionally, constantly under investigation, not for a particular crime, but for literally any and all possible crimes.
… anyone who has ever had a rumor or gossip spread about them, or just observed that happening to another person, should understand how this works.
You kind of have to be either an idiot or massively sheltered to not understand this.
Oh, there’s uh, also some legal precedent, if you’re USAsian:
As you can see, the only way to get around this is to just grant the government the ability spy on you by way of basically secret, persistent, broad warrants…
… Or, devise an entire society where the norm is you freely give away all your ‘papers and effects’, because you didn’t read the TOS, clicked the checkbox and then confirm, and that is taken to be a legally binding contract that waives your right to digital privacy.
(Both of those are commonplace, common practice, for roughly 20 years now.)