Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

David Brin on Privacy

Posted by michael on from the no-webcams-in-the-white-house dept.

David Brin is interviewed and provides some strong words on modern conceptions of privacy and why they're off-base. Brin asserts - and argues well - that a land with little privacy is a freer land.

3 of 271 comments (clear)

  1. privacy is a warm gun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    First shot through the heart!

  2. Absolute power... by Joe+'Nova' · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I won't insult intelligence.

    The main idea is defining a problem in such a way you can sneak in something so odious, it normally wouldn't pass, but, "What are you, some kind of terrorist?!" rings Ashcroft.
    Lemme see, in order to preserve freedom, we must suspend it? And, "The terrorists hate our freedom." So what do we do? We let our politicos take it freely(?).
    I see ratcheting like this all the time(WI). Tuition increases side by side with huge prison budgets make for a totally numb dumb society. You know the former Gov. as Health Secretary, and he started the prison craze. We, (Milwaukee), are the worlds #1 FSCKING EXPORTER OF PRISONERS! NOT CHINA, NOT RUSSIA, HERE! To the tune of 5,000+ inmates sent out of state.
    K, you are asking yourself, "What has this to do with the topic?" This-If you subsidize(sp?) prisons, get more prisons, less student grants-loans, fewer educated adults. The slingo around here is "The Brain Drain." Graduates leave in droves, and don't contribute back to the local system.
    It all starts with the politicians, make no doubt, he's right. They are entrusted with assuring domestic tranquility, but end up bleeding taxes on military/police/prison budgets. If we challenge these priorities, we are labeled liberals.
    The Big Brother of 1984 was supposed to be a benevolent government, but if you disagreed with it, you (read the book, this ain't cliff notes!)
    My point is he didn't extend the consequences and causes far enough, but I agree with what is stated.
    I'm convinced if they view liberty and freedoms as the priority, vs. we are tough on criminals/terrorists/Govt. of choice, we would hear different rhetoric.
    I think it comes down to control. People in prison are definately under control, but I haven't figured out how paranoia driving graduates out solves anything either, but it's definately on state agenda.

    --
    This mind intentionally left blank.
    The KKK a bunch of sheetheads? You decide!
  3. Dave is hopelessly naive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    Dave is a nice guy, but he is hopelessly naive. I met him a few weeks ago and talked with him about a number of subjects. He has a tendency to interrupt and talk over you, and never listens to the others around him. He's also about as aware and clueless to his surroundings as you can imagine. I mean we're talking in the middle of a group of largly gay (and very obviously gay) people and he suddenly asks me why there aren't any children around.

    Well DUH! He never once noticed in all the time there (8 hours) that 90 percent of the couples were all gay, so of course there wouldn't be children.

    So while he makes many valid points, I think it should be pointed out he's an acadmeic, and doesn't have much 'Real World' to go on. So his conclusions about behavior should be suspect.