by Bruce Schneier
[This may be off topic, but hey, it is my random walk. Learning to deal with our basic human right is learning, right? :-) ]
Some clever answers: "If I'm not doing anything wrong, then you have no cause to watch me." "Because the government gets to define what's wrong, and they keep changing the definition." "Because you might do something wrong with my information." My problem with quips like these -- as right as they are -- is that they accept the premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong. It's not. Privacy is an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining the human condition with dignity and respect. [my emphasis]
Bruce has included some inspirational quotes:
Quis custodiet custodes ipsos? ("Who watches the watchers?")
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
"If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged."
and his own words:
Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. Liberty requires security without intrusion, security plus privacy. Widespread police surveillance is the very definition of a police state. And that's why we should champion privacy even when we have nothing to hide.
Also see here for those living in America for a bitter smile. I just hope that NSA's service is not extended to my country. Thank you very much.