𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠

  • 0 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 16th, 2023

help-circle

  • The “Nothing to hide” argument isn’t really an argument, it’s more of a conclusion. That conclusion is then taken to support mass surveillance. It’s also not a logical fallacy (even if it’s wrong). It may be “proven” using logical fallacies, but that doesn’t make it a logical fallacy on its own. So I think it’s correct to remove the logical fallacy text.

    I think the more effective defense against this one is to provide counterexamples for why you might care about mass surveillance:

    • People do have something to hide. E.g. browser history, religious/political beliefs, etc…
    • You may not have something to hide now, but in the future you may wish it was still hidden. You can’t unpublish information these days.
    • People you care about may have something to hide, and not caring about mass surveillance puts them at risk.
    • Relatively harmless individual datapoints can be combined to create harmful datasets that allow for mass exploitation.
    • Governments may abuse mass surveillance, whereby you may experience negative effects from journalists/political dissidents being silenced
    • Etc…