this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
498 points (99.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35884 readers
1224 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I know data privacy is important and I know that big corporations like Meta became powerful enough to even manipulate elections using our data.

But, when I talk to people in general, most seem to not worry because they "have nothing to hide", and most are only worried about their passwords, banking apps and not much else.

So, why should people worry about data privacy even if they have "nothing to hide"?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ghostwolf@lemmy.fakeplastictrees.ee 165 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Ask them to unlock their phone and give it to you. Chances are, you'll quickly find out they have things they'd like to hide.

[–] electrogamerman@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (9 children)

I have nudes on my phone. I honestly don't care if they leak one day, in fact, I have been to nudist beaches and I'm pretty sure there are online pictures of me naked already.

That's completely different to showing naked pictures of me to colleagues, etc.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] anaximander@feddit.uk 88 points 1 year ago (1 children)

One thing I often see is people not understanding the difference between secrecy and privacy. They ask why it matters if you're not doing anything wrong. A UK government minister actually said "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear", and then backpedaled when someone pointed out they were quoting Joseph Goebbels. The analogy I've seen is simple: I'm sure you don't do anything illegal in the shower, but I'm also pretty sure most people would be uncomfortable with a law that required you to have a police officer standing in you bathroom with a video camera to record you showering, just in case.

The other thing is the assumption that any information about you that the government actually has about you will only be used against you if you commit a crime, in which case you'll deserve it - if you're not a bad person then it's fine. This is a double fallacy.

First, we've seen that information can be used to do all sorts of things regardless of wrongdoing - if someone knows enough about you, they can use it to manipulate you. I don't mean blackmail or whatever, although that's an option. I mean that with a clear enough picture of your preferences and biases and habits, someone can tailor their actions and information to your psychology and make you think whatever they want you to agree with.

Second, it assumes that you won't ever commit a crime because crimes are bad things and you're not a bad person. This overlooks the possibility of you being mistakenly accused while innocent, but more importantly it overlooks the possibility that the government will change into something that holds different moral values to yours. Even in the modern world we've seen places outlaw abortions, or criminalise homosexuality, or pass laws on what religions you're allowed to follow. If that happens in your country and you find yourself on the wrong side of whatever arbitrary line they've now drawn, you may regret giving them so much information about you - information that lets them identify you, prove that you broke their new rules, and ruin your life in so many ways.

The default principal of any exchange with governments, businesses, or any entity taking your information should be to give as much information as is required for them to perform the operation you're requesting of them, and no more - and wherever possible to only engage with those entities that you trust to have that information; a trust that they earn by a verified and unbroken track record of ethical and trustworthy behaviour.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Little_mouse@lemmy.ca 63 points 1 year ago (5 children)

"But, when I talk to people in general, most seem to not worry because they “have nothing to hide”, and most are only worried about their passwords, banking apps and not much else."

Sounds like they have passwords and banking apps to hide, You should demand their bank account and credit card details to verify that they have made no illicit actions.

If they point out that they have no reason to trust you with that information, that's when you point out that police, government, or corporate groups are made out of people just like yourself. They might have some codes of conduct, or a vetting process, but it just takes one person malicious or careless enough for you to be severely impacted.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Flicsmo@rammy.site 56 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

I feel like the people in this thread saying you should ask for personal details are kind of missing the point of the 'nothing to hide' argument. It's not that they feel they have nothing to hide from everyone, it's that they feel they have nothing to hide from those with access to their data (governments/corporations). Knowing intimate life details of someone you know personally is very different from knowing intimate life details of some random person you'll never meet. I would argue something like this instead:

Unless you're a newborn, everyone in the US has broken thousands of laws in their life. It's unavoidable. If corporations/the government have records of all that, if people don't have privacy, the powers that be have the power to put anyone and everyone in prison for the rest of their lives at their discretion.

Even if you're not worried now, once your data is out there it's not coming back. You may agree with the policy of government and corporations now, but can you be sure that'll be the case in ten years? Twenty? Thirty? Who knows how laws and regimes will change, and through all that, they'll always have power over you.

[–] Dnn@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

While this is far more elaborate, I agree it's the best approach if the other person is willing to have a discussion.

You may sprinkle it with actual examples of what's happening in China with their point system: not getting bus tickets or loan grants or whatever because you not even mentioned something critical somewhere but are associated with someone how did.

They may say it's unrealistic but 30 years ago Eastern Germany was the same. They just lacked the tech and needed to recruit regular people as spies.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Ambiorickx@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ask them for their social security number, mother’s maiden name, favorite pet, favorite teacher, high school mascot. It should start to dawn on them

[–] chagall@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ask them for their kids’ social security number, DOB, etc. I’ve done that a couple of times and it always gets a reaction.

People are less concerned about themselves, but generally very protective of their children… and rightfully so.

[–] parachaye@lemmy.world 45 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Saying "I don't need privacy because I've got nothing to hide" is like saying "I don't need free speech because I've got nothing to say".

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] derelict@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Data privacy isn’t to protect you from getting caught doing wrong things, it’s to prevent malicious actors from having the information to manipulate you. You don’t want phishers to have access to your life details that security questions ask about, even if each one is nothing to hide. You don’t want scammers to know where you went to school, who your teachers were, and what clubs you were in to build up a convincing backstory for their facade. You don’t want someone who wants to get something out of you to know who is important to you and threaten or impersonate them. It’s not about having something to hide, it’s about hiding personal details from those with malicious intent

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Lumidaub@feddit.de 36 points 1 year ago

You may have nothing to hide now but what if your (political) opponents reach a point where they have access to your data and the (political) power to use it? What happens if they don't like your opinions which (you think) you don't have to hide now?

My opinions may mostly align with the current general consensus in my country and since I'm not politically active I am rather unlikely to be harmed because of my opinions in the foreseeable future (unless I call someone 1 Pimmel). But there are certain developments that are troubling and there are people who don't like what I've said on the internet (duh). Now, I'm not exactly anyone important and realistically there are far more important targets than me personally. But still, it's not unthinkable that the things I've said (things I've looked at on the internet, things I've bought, things I've like/upvoted) might be used to my detriment if certain people came into a position where they have access to any stored data on me.

This applies regardless of your political leanings. If data exists, no matter how harmless it may seem, there's always the possibility of people who REALLY don't like it getting access.

[–] sebi@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Edward Snowden remarked:

Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say.

There is a wikipedia article regarding this argument

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 33 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I feel like most replies here are missing the point.

The entire premise of the statement is that privacy is about defending your dirty secrets. When people say "nothing to hide" they're really saying "I'm not going to post about anything I want to hide", but that still misses the point.

For me it's the subtle principles of advertising. I don't want to be advertised to, at all. I certainly don't want some blog to know what adverts I'm likely to engage with, because that is simply none of their business.

That's it. If that doesn't bother some people, that's entirely fine. I'm a bit weird, and the whole idea of being tracked to figure out what things I might want to buy makes me very grumpy.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] GodOfThunder@lemm.ee 32 points 1 year ago

Edward Snowden, a former National Security Agency contractor and government whistleblower, has been credited with the quote "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say". Snowden has argued that privacy is a fundamental right and that without it, individuals cannot have anything for themselves. The "nothing to hide" argument has been used to defend the collection and use of government data beyond surveillance and disclosure, but critics argue that it is inherently paradoxical and that what is hidden is not necessarily relevant. Snowden has also stated that the burden of justification falls on those seeking to infringe upon human rights, and that nobody needs to justify why they "need" a right.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (17 children)

Cite historical examples of seemingly innocuous and public information falling into the wrong hands.

e.g. The Nazis used demographic records (marriages, births, christenings, etc.) in conquered lands to ID Jews and other "undesirables".

[–] cynetri@midwest.social 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And (if they're American) when they go "well, MY government wouldn't do that!" counter with how Meta has already, numerous times, gotten people arrested for talking about getting abortions on Facebook

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
[–] JoeClu@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago

They are appealing to the fallacy that hiding things means bad behavior.

Not true. There are plenty of good reasons to hide things. Social security numbers, income, bank account info, even personal preferences.

Privacy != bad

[–] BeautifulMind@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

Maybe you don't think you have anything to hide today, but what about the future? Millions of women gave their period-tracking apps that kind of personal/private data when Roe was in effect because at the time, states couldn't use it to prosecute women who miscarry or get abortions. Now that Roe is gone, that data is out there and can't be recalled.

By the same token, everyone who went out and got a 23-and-me genetic test gave their genomes to private companies who can legally sell that information to insurance companies that can use that information to hike their premiums or terminate their policies if they think your genes predispose you to some expensive-to-treat condition. Also those family trees don't lie about whose kids are the product of adultery, hahahahaha

You do have things to hide in the sense that they're nobody else's business.

Also, some countries have established digital privacy as a right (in particular, EU countries) and that's not just about protecting your dirty stinky secrets, it's also about preventing social media being weaponized as political or information warfare vectors based on private information obtained without your consent. (the same profiling used to target relevant commercial ads to you is also usable to target information warfare and propaganda to your susceptible relatives, and they vote in addition to giving racist rants at holiday dinner)

In other words, your privacy is intrinsically valuable- if it wasn't, exploiting your private information wouldn't be a multi-billion-dollar industry

[–] jocanib@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] cuerdo@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

Ask them how much they make or their medical record.

Tell them you will pay google several cents for that info.

[–] Blaze@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The awful story from that mother and daughter that had their private conversations send to court for abortion by Meta: https://techcrunch.com/2023/07/11/teen-and-mom-plead-guilty-to-abortion-charges-based-on-facebook-data/?guccounter=1

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] 86d@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

It is like saying you don’t need free speech if you don’t have anything to say. *corrected hide to say.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] fernandu00@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I use a monetary argument.. If my data can become revenue to the company then I must have a part of this revenue ..if they are not paying me for my property (my data) then I should keep my data from them

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sethayy@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 year ago

I got nothing to hide in my asshole either, doesn't mean I want you rifling around through there. Its creepy

[–] BaroquenRecorder@lemmy.studio 21 points 1 year ago

“You have nothing to hide until the government decides you do.” And by then it’ll be too late to hide it.

[–] nix@merv.news 20 points 1 year ago

ask for their passwords

[–] UnknownQuantity@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I generally ask the person whether they close the door when they go take a dump. Everyone does it, everyone knows why you're going into that room.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Noktpapilio@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

I usually reply with "Cool, you won't mind if I install a camera in your bathroom then"

[–] nothacking@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If you have nothing to hide, you wouldn't mind handing me your unlocked phone so I can scroll through your texts and search history, go ahead.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] rufus@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 1 year ago (29 children)

Just ask them a bunch of indiscreet questions. Do you watch porn? What category of porn turns you on the most? Do you think it's appropriate to have sex in a room on the ground floor without curtains? What? You own curtains? What is your salary? What's the amount of money in your savings account? Why do you have so many loud disagreements with your partner? Don't you like visiting your in-laws? What's inside the drawer at the bottom, next to your bed? Have you had any embarassing and cringy moments in the last few years you'd like to share?

Of course this is only the beginning. It's not like the corporations collect data and then don't do anything with it. You'd also have to be okay with them deducing information about you. Try to use that information to manipulate you into giving them attention, buying the stuff they want you to buy. That system is in place to nudge you into thinking what the algorithm wants you to think. App developers are actively trying to make the apps more addicting so you spend more time with them... People just get exploited with the help of all of that data.

If people really are that tame and have no secret fantasies, no sensitive data, no shame, no personal shortcomings they'd like to forget... And they don't care about the annual security breaches of big platforms people use willingly, but that information then gets used by people who use it to send you spam or impersonate you and trick your grandma to send her retirement to some scammer... And they like to be shoved around by big corporations like cattle, used to fuel the capitalist system... ...I myself tend to leave them alone. There is nothing that can be done at this point. Those people are lost, and they don't want freedom for themselves.

load more comments (29 replies)
[–] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ask them for nudes, their porn habits, what toys they have and what their dirtiest kinks are.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] jbrains@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's not what you have to hide, it's how they want to use what they can see. They can weaponize anything and the only reason you don't care yet is that they haven't made you a target yet.

Continued good luck.

[–] Pyrozo007@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What you need to hide now is not the same as what you will need to hide in the future.

[–] Ondergetekende@feddit.nl 15 points 1 year ago

In the 1930s, the Netherlands kept detailed records of ethnicity for every citizen. No one thought this was unnecessary, as ethnicity wasn't something that could ever be used against you.

That line of thought ended when the Germans took over in may 1940. Unfortunately those records still existed, and aided the most efficient genocide in human history. Without those records, many jews, sinti and Roma would've been able to deny their ancestry and evade being murdered.

Privacy from government and corporations will one day save lives.

[–] Alimentar@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Show me the man and I'll show you the crime" Lavrentiy Beria, Stalin's secret police chief bragged that he could prove criminal conduct on anyone, even the innocent.

Before Hitler, why wouldn't you put down you were Jewish.

You may have nothing to hide now. But who knows how it'll be used against you in the future. The less people know about you, the better.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"How often do you and your wife fuck?"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jzefbeio54@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Then I can place a camera and mic in your house and watch you all day ? No ?

[–] Fangslash@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

"Take your pants off and walk outside"

[–] pozbo@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Right on, so let me rifle through your nightstand"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] OddFed@feddit.de 16 points 1 year ago

"Okay, unlock your phone, open WhatsApp and hand it to me."

[–] JDBowden@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ask them: How much money do they have in their bank account? How often do they have sexual relations?

Data privacy? I have nothing to hide. Freedom of speech? I have nothing to say.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 567PrimeMover@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I mean, if you have nothing to hide, then surely you don't need window blinds or a bedroom door? It should also mean that it's okay for guests to rifle through your closet and dresser drawers, right?

[–] peto@lemm.ee 15 points 1 year ago

Realistically there isn't one. People dropping that argument are not interested in a dialectic.

It ultimately doesn't matter if you have nothing to hide. Some people do and have good, ethical, reason to. Universal privacy is the only way to ensure necessary privacy.

[–] Michal@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 1 year ago

People who wear clothes automatically lose this argument.

Lock you house? Close your window blinds? Lock the door when you go to the bathroom?

Yep, you've things to hide.

[–] XPost3000@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

They don't choose what they need to hide, if their government outlaws woodworking tomorrow, then any carpenters today go from "having nothing to hide" to "I need to hide my entire career and hobby" overnight and in their sleep.

And then the government threatens Facebook to hand over messages from any user suspected of woodworking, and then they get persecuted and arrested

The government threatens Google to hand over all browser history from suspected woodworkers, Apple for all iCloud photos from suspected woodworkers, Amazon for all woodworking related purchases

It goes on

If the carpenter cared about privacy from the start, then the government just wouldn't be able to find them and arrest them for simply woodworking

But the carpenter didn't care about privacy, they "had nothing to hide" yesterday, so when that law goes into effect tomorrow the government will have a really easy time finding them

[–] Hangglide@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have nothing to hide but I still don't want you watching me poop.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AlboTheGuy@feddit.nl 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

One very good point I heard once is this: You have nothing to hide NOW, but what if a government raises that somehow views you as a menace? What if you don't agree.

What if something that you can't change about yourself, say your religion, your sexual preference etc. This has happened before and is happening right now in some countries.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›