Transparency vs. Privacy

[jurph]

There was a story on NPR yesterday about GIS and the fact that the census is planning to accurately GPS-map the front door at every residence in America two summers from now. A bizarre part of the US Census is that it is data collected by the government using government money (your tax dollars), but the data are also confidential. The arguments

Comments

[trunkbutt]

I don't think GPS mapping is bad, but where other matters of privacy are concerned I certainly don't trust government douches to refrain from attempting to regulate non-criminal, non-harmful-to-others stuff people do in their own homes. I'm pro transparency. Very pro.

I've never thought about my obligations to the government other than paying taxes and providing them with enough information to track my finances. They can take all the satellite photos of the outside of my house they like but I'd rather them not go beyond that.

[enth]

Assuming government transparency is a Good Thing because the government has an obligation to the citizen, why then is Privacy a good thing for the citizen -- doesn't the citizen also have an obligation to the government?

The unstated assumption here seems to be that the government is an end unto itself, rather than a means to the ends of the citizenry. That is not the case, though. "The government" does not exist; it is a collection of fellow citizens we elect and pay a salary to in order that they will uphold our will. From this perspective, your question is whether the citizen has an obligation to the collective will of his fellows. Is that a fair take?

My opinion is, of course he does. Man is a social critter and must treat his society with respect and esteem -- there is a word for a person who does not: sociopath. Still, it does not seem to be possible for the individual to put society's good ahead of their own at all times. Those who do tend to get nailed to crosses and that sort of thing. Perhaps sadly, our first

[geistesblitz]

The "half way" society that we currently have is indeed awkward.

I think there is nothing wrong with an absolutely open society where my friends and neighbors can watch while I use the bathroom, dance badly to music I wouldn't admit to listening to in public, and have deviant sex. However, this only works if I can also tune in to the cameras in the police station where prisoners are being beaten, board rooms where shady deals are being planned, and even rooms where my national security is being discussed.

On the other hand a society with personal privacy as an absolute right is not necessarialy a bad thing either. In the end we have a sloppy compramise where the citizens do have some responsibility to share information with their government (e.g. you must show your ID to a police officer, police can get a warrant for your personal property) and the government must also disclose some of its inner workings. Both get to keep some secrets. Pragmatism strikes again.

[unprotoize]

It is necessary for the government to employ transparency in what they do because they have all the guns and money.

It is necessary for individuals to have privacy because the government has all the guns and money.