This came up recently in my life, with a person who seems blissfully ignorant of any concern involving privacy.

For an obvious example, I said that putting up public notices (i.e. on Facebook) about your schedule was a bad idea. When asked why, my answer was that hundreds of people would be able to find you or tell others where you are. Try as I might, I have not been able to properly explain why that is a bad thing.

The topic is more general than that, including data privacy like photos, email, "home movies," or other personal information. On the internet, every company wants to be your friend, but their motives are never positive or even neutral.

So how do you convince someone of the basic idea that the vast majority of your personal information should be kept on a need to know basis?

link|improve this question
3  
Voting for closing; not related to scope of SU, and bordering politics (what do you care about other's believs and grounds on a certain subject). – ldigas Aug 17 '10 at 14:05
feedback

closed as off topic by ldigas, BloodPhilia, heavyd, Gnoupi Aug 17 '10 at 16:58

Questions on Super User are expected to generally relate to computer software or computer hardware, within the scope defined in the faq.

6 Answers

up vote 3 down vote accepted

It's very difficult to change other people's personal values and beliefs, and that's what you're asking about. Still, there are options:

First, understand the person's frame of mind. Why does he want to share in the first place? This is important because if you don't know the motives then you won't be able to address them properly.

Boot13's newspaper-frontpage suggestion is interesting. The concept is to take a simple matter and then exaggerate it to the extreme. This is like saying What if everybody tasted one grape in the store before buying? Then there wouldn't be any grapes left to buy, so it's wrong to taste. This exaggeration concept very often proves your point, but still the person doesn't want to limit himself, because he's thinking in all-or-nothing terms.

Now offer moderation. Suggest that sharing is fine if you know your audience, so find out how the sharing options (let's not call them privacy options) of the relevant websites work, then set them to a moderate level. This might be more public than what you'd like, but less than globally-viewable, so you've already won a small victory there.

But really, this is not about your privacy. It's not your decision, and it's not a decision that is based on your values.

Also, blissfully ignorant is a wonderful state of mind. Depending on the circumstances/websites/content, it might be okay that way.

link|improve this answer
1  
People with that wonderful state of mind tend to make problems for everyone around (and, of course, ignore them). – whitequark Aug 17 '10 at 7:18
2  
@whitequark: True! Let me qualify my statement: being blissfully ignorant about inconsequential things is a wonderful state of mind. Exaggeration: I can't improve mecahnical flight safety, so it's wonderful to be blissfully ignorant of the state of wear of the millions of mechanical parts. – Torben Gundtofte-Bruun Aug 17 '10 at 9:02
Yeah, that's a nice and important comment. – whitequark Aug 17 '10 at 9:24
feedback

Ask them how they would feel if everything they put online was on the front page of every newspaper. If they're okay with that, nothing you say will ever make a difference.

link|improve this answer
+1 I like this answer a lot.. picking the one below however. – Fosco Aug 17 '10 at 14:50
feedback

Your idea of what's acceptable to share may simply differ from theirs.

You may never be able to convince them otherwise. One day their house will get broken into, or their credit will be ruined, or they'll get fired, all because of information they gave out in the wrong place.

Unfortunately, something like that may be the only thing that teaches them to have the same level of caution you appear to feel is appropriate.

link|improve this answer
feedback

Here is a paper that analyzes some of the arguments about privacy: http://www.gab.ro/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/nothing-to-hide.pdf

Still, assuming one has nothing to hide, I myself do not understand why one would care much about privacy. Maybe someone here has an answer for this.

link|improve this answer
3  
Even when you have nothing to hide from "good" people (good at least in theory, like police), you definitely have something to hide from bad people (like thieves). Do you lock your house? Protecting your privacy may have the same reason. – Suma Aug 17 '10 at 8:40
1  
true. a perfect example of this is people who post on facebook about their house and where they live, then later post from their mobile "just arrived at the airport, cant wait to goto africa!" -... time to go rob their house methinks. – Sirex Aug 17 '10 at 10:10
feedback

On the internet, every company wants to be your friend, but their motives are never positive or even neutral.

That's simply false. A lot of companies want to have interactions with their customers that benefit both. I like the fact that I get invitations to dance parties via facebook from the companies who run those parties. I benefit from knowing about the party and the company benefits should I decide to attend the party and pay for it.

The central question is whether you believe that you are engaging in positive or negative sum games when sharing information about yourself. Sharing your private home video helps others to connect with you.

It's a human bias to attach a higher weight to negative experiences than to positive experiences. Why are you convinced that it's really a negative sum?

link|improve this answer
feedback

Stalk them and they'll know what privacy means to people.

link|improve this answer
feedback

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.