Slashdot Mirror
Why Privacy & Security Are Not a Zero-Sum Game
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Ars Technica has up a nice article on why security consultant Ed Giorgio's statement that 'privacy and security are a zero-sum game' is wrong. The author reasons that, due to Metcalfe's law, the more valuable a government network is to the good guys, the more valuable it is to the bad guys. Given the trend in government to gather all of its eggs into one database, unless more attention is paid to privacy, we'll end up with neither security nor privacy. In other words, privacy and security are a positive-sum game with precarious trade-offs — you can trade a lot of privacy away for absolutely no gain in security, but you don't have to."
I concur. It is based on the Law of Conservation of Happiness. If you punch somebody in the nose, you transfer their lost happiness to yourself. It is a universal law of nature. Our government, education, and financial systems know that and use it the extreme. While you may think that being anally probed by airport security sucks, the airport workers love it as do the Members of Congress who use it to get reelected.
Sure ... now we wait and see if you get that +5 Insightful.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.