On Monday 01 September 2014 02:42 PM, ck raju wrote: > Our "privacy" may be less valuable that the "privacy" of celebrities, > corporates etc. In expending our efforts to highlight the issue and > redress it, aren't we subsidising other institutions towards securing > private information ? Just thinking... >
In Malayalam there is a saying "സ്വന്തം സഹോദരന് ചത്താലും വേണ്ടില്ല നാത്തൂന്റെ കണ്ണീരു് കണ്ടാല് മതി" which roughly translates to "I just want to see sister in law's tears even at the cost of your brother's death". (I agree there is a gender bias in the statement, but I guess you get the point, even if it hurt us we are happy to see tears of our enemy). Are we so stupid to give up our freedoms of it means some powerful or famous or bad people will also lose them (it is a different matter altogether than the whole system works for them and its always the common man that takes hit by these laws)? Isn't it the most common argument to take away our freedoms, appeal to our emotions by telling us you need to give up your privacy to get safety from these bad people? Benjamin Franklin sums up the issue very sharply, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." If we give up privacy in the hopes that powerful people will also lose them, we will lose our privacy but our system won't dare to touch the powerful. So instead of giving up what freedoms we already have, we should fight to protect them at the least and fight for more freedoms ideally.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
