some arguments for privacy

[Bryce]

One of the most compelling consequences of strong privacy is
pseudonymity, i.e. the ability to conduct business and personal
affairs without allowing others to learn your physical identity or
location.  This is a very strong protection against extortion, 
kidnapping and all other kinds of physical violence.


(Its lesser cousin, anonymity, also protects again physical
violence, but it has limited usefulness in business and/or personal
affairs.)


(For example, if a business magnate wishes to manage a vast financial
empire while still allowing her children to grow up in a safe and
open environment, there is probably no better solution than that she
manage her vast financial empire pseudonymously, so that would-be
thugs will not know _who_ to kidnap in order to extort ransom.)


Perhaps Wei Dai should apply his sharp mind to analyzing the net
effect on society of _that_ phenomenon.


The benefit for the individual thus protected is clear, but, as the
Unmentionable Topic shows, it is arguable that the net effect on 
society (as it were) will be less than optimal.


Regards,

Zooko Journeyman

Disclaimers follow:  I am not a cypherpunk.  NOT speaking for 
DigiCash or any other person or organization.  No PGP sig follows.