The Utility of Privacy
Huge Cajones Remailer
nobody at huge.cajones.com
Mon Nov 18 11:53:40 PST 1996
At 6:55 AM 11/18/1996, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
> SANDY SANDFORT
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>On Sun, 17 Nov 1996, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:
>> >> Informally, I don't know anybody who has suffered due to a loss of
>> >> privacy.
>> >Your circle of associations must be limited.
>> Examples [of people who have suffered due to loss of privacy]?
>Phil Zimmermann often tells the story of a woman whose marriage
>was destroyed by the revelation of a long-past indiscretion.
>After her husband divorced her, she committed suicide.
Deceiving your spouse is not a good reason to protect your privacy.
>Any number of celebrities have been stalked, attacked and even
>killed by obsessed fans who found them through public records.
Unfortunately most readers of this list do not have this problem.
>Every year, children and business executives are kidnapped for
>ransom. The proximate cause of these kidnappings is a breach in
>privacy about the whereabouts and schedules of the victim.
Or this problem.
>Hitler's gun registration in Germany allowed the Jews to be
>disarmed. I'm sure you are aware of the ultimate consequences
>of that little invasion of privacy.
Not a bad example, but genocide happens rarely.
Those alert enough to protect their privacy in advance might be alert
enough to get out in time, anyway.
Subjective utility: low.
>The US Post Office co-operated in the identification and
>imprisonment of people of Japanese ancestry during the second
97,000 victims over a ~100 year period. Doesn't really show up on the
scope, sorry. (Plus downside bad, but few were murdered.)
>The problem with having a whole lot of private information about
>you floating around in public is not what damage it can do to you
>now, but rather the problems it potentially could cause in the
>future. Just about everyone on this list has been to university.
>Not long ago, a college education was essentially a death warrant
>in Cambodia. Prior to that, a degree was considered a good thing
>there. People saw no reason to hid the fact that they had been
>in school. Trouble is, things changed.
>And the trouble today is that things can change now, too. Think
>about the things that you have publicly done or advocated. Even
>if they are as legal as church on Sunday NOW, how comfortable
>will you be about them if there is extreme right or left takeover
>in the future? Start to get the picture?
These things CAN happen. Will they happen? Odds are low.
BTW, are you operating under your True Name?
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy