All debates about privacy at company level tend to focus on individual rights against collective will to enforce the law. But this individual perspective collective vs is very asymmetric. Privacy is first and foremost a social benefit, not an individual privilege.
You can endlessly debate whether privacy is a right or a privilege, either absolute or relative, and what other concerns should balance it, if necessary. In most companies, it is considered an "absolute right" is always "balanced against other legitimate interests" (and therefore not a law at all, but a privilege, because it can be removed).
Recently, some aspects of privacy has been removed wholesale to every legislative opportunity, being framed as a more or less harmful privilege for criminals is in the way of enforcement. This perspective of privacy is completely false.
privacy is the collective ability of a society to evolve. It is a collective benefit much more than individual privilege.
in all societies, contemporary and historical, there were taboos. and in all societies, some of these taboos were completely wrong as a factual matter, morally, or both. the possibility for a individual having thoughts prohibited in the security of their own privacy allows these taboos to be challenged gently in all societies, and ultimately allows the company to grow to the point where he throws them.
a concrete example in living memory: homosexuality. People who are born homosexuals were criminals born around 1950, simply by having a criminal kind of wiring. This is what we should think about when legislators speak of "round organized crime": if these people had not been allowed to explore and express their personality in violation of taboo at the time, the company would not have evolved and homosexuality have always been illegal to date.
When you create a Panopticonal company that is able to prevent all crime until criminal thoughts (yes, evil thoughts will be made illegal the second such thinking "bad" can be located, prevented and applied), then the result is a huge conformism. A legislature that has no external pressure to change any laws, and can apply its entire law code, consider the company as its private dollhouse where its rules are absolute rather than the chaos that stewardship must be responsible. But as we know, a certain amount of diversity - of deviation from the mean - is necessary for a company to try new things
It is not just a matter of trying taboos ;. it is also all forms of entrepreneurship. People who do not find comfort in the tranquility of the familiar, but the frustration that no one has solved a particular problem better, so they go themselves. It also requires private life - real, the permissionless privacy. . Without this advantage, innovation and the stop value of the evolution
Privacy researchers argue that this was the real reason for economic stagnation and stopping Eastern Europe under Soviet rule after WW2: people were under so much pressure to conform to a certain school of thought that the spirit of efficient decentralized business became illegal, and therefore, the eastern Europe (and the Soviet Union ) relentlessly fallen behind companies to privacy that were allowed to operate at all levels.
privacy is an individual privilege; it is a collective advantage in that it allows the company to evolve. In this he pays in every way to protect privacy as an individual right.
0 Komentar