Libertarian Discussion

247 readers

1 users here now

Place for discussion from a Libertarian perspective, meaning less top-down control and more individual liberty. In general, the intent is discussion about issues and not a discussion on libertarianism itself or any of its branches.

Be sure to respect the instance rules, and please keep discussion civil and backed by high quality sources where possible.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works

Should there be a right to digital privacy? (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 7 months ago by sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works to c/libertarian@sh.itjust.works

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm thinking something along the lines of the GDPR where companies must get consent to track you, and must delete your data upon request.

I see a few arguments here:

yes, websites are like stores and have the obligations of a store to protect user data (IP address, HTTP headers, etc)
no because the internet is "the commons," so no expectation of privacy (no expectation that the website follows your local laws)
no because you're voluntarily providing the data, but you're well within your rights to block tracking attempts

So, some questions to spark discussion:

does data collection violate the NAP?
does sale of personal data (without a TOS in place) violate the NAP?
if no to each of the above, is it worth violating the NAP to enforce a right to digital privacy?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Rottcodd@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I think the whole idea of a "right to privacy" is misleading and destructive, since it places the focus incorrectly.

The question shouldn't be whether or not people have a "right to privacy," but whether or not other people should have the right to violate their privacy.

And the clear answer to that, IMO, is no.

So for instance, if you provide personal information to a website, the concept is that they have the right to do as they please with it unless and until you are declared to have a right to maintain the privacy of that information.

But I think that starts with a flawed presumption - the company should NOT have an inherent right to do as they please with that information. That information is not their property - it's yours. You shared access to it with them for a specific purpose, and the presumption right from the start should be that the only right THEY possess regarding that information is to use it for that specific purpose. You shouldn't need a right to stop them from doing any more with it because they shouldn't be seen to have the right to do so in the first place.

Of course that's not going to happen in our surveillence autocracy - the last thing in the world the wealthy and empowered few want is to have to make a case for a right to every abuse they want to pursue rather than being able to do as they please save for the bare handful of rights to be free from abuse that they grudgingly allow us plebes to claim, but still...