“
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.
—
Schneier on Security: My Reaction to Eric Schmidt (via toldorknown)
The “nothing to hide” argument has been pretty much destroyed for some time now (just read the Daniel Solove essay). Anyone who still brings up this argument is being disingenuous or just plain ignorant. The fact that Google’s Eric Schmidt is bringing it up is worrisome, and I would advise him to read some history regarding the methods used by dictatorships and police states to wield their power. Latin America is a good place to start.
Reblogged from Told or Known
