I like privacy! But freedom is paramount.The opening line (above) is just a little misleading. I don't argue against privacy. If we remain a free, cantankerous and sovereign people, we'll be able to demand a little privacy, no matter how pervasive the technologies of surveillance become. My emphasis in the book is that freedom must come first in our list of priorities. And history shows that only one tool has enabled people to maintain liberty. That tool is accountability -- the power to make sure the mighty (whether governments, aristocrats or any other elite) must answer questions and reveal their schemes. In other words, we have one answer to Juvenal's old question: 'Who will watch the watchmen?' The answer must be... us.
This topic is just beginning. Let's argue like a free people, and don't fall for easy assumptions. In the long run, light will protect us better than secrecy or masks. END
A respected futurist advances an argument sure to cause debatein a wired world, the best way to preserve our freedom will be to give up our privacy.. In The Transparent Society, award-winning author David Brin details the startling argument that privacy, far from being a right, hampers the real foundation of a civil society: accountability. Using examples as disparate as security cameras in Scotland and Gay Pride events in Tucson, Brin shows that openness is far more liberating than secrecy and advocates for a society in which everyone (not just the government and not just the rich) could look over everyone elses shoulders. The biggest threat to our society, he warns, is that surveillance technology will be used by too few people not by too many. In New York and Baltimore, police cameras scan public areas twenty-four hours a day. Huge commercial databases track you finances and sell that information to anyone willing to pay. Host sites on the World Wide Web record every page you view, and smart toll roads know where you drive. Every day, new technology nibbles at our privacy.Does that make you nervous? David Brin is worried, but not just about privacy.
He fears that society will overreact to these technologies by restricting the flow of information, frantically enforcing a reign of secrecy. Such measures, he warns, wont really preserve our privacy. Governments, the wealthy, criminals, and the techno-elite will still find ways to watch us. But well have fewer ways to watch them. Well lose the key to a free society: accountability. The Transparent Society is a call for reciprocal transparency. If police cameras watch us, shouldnt we be able to watch police stations? If credit bureaus sell our data, shouldn't we know who buys it? Rather than cling to an illusion of anonymity-a historical anomaly, given our origins in close-knit villages-we should focus on guarding the most important forms of privacy and preserving mutual accountability. The biggest threat to our freedom, Brin warns, is that surveillance technology will be used by too few people, now by too many.A society of glass houses may seem too fragile. Fearing technology-aided crime, governments seek to restrict online anonymity; fearing technology-aided tyranny, citizens call for encrypting all data.
Brins shows how, contrary to both approaches, windows offer us much better protection than walls; after all, the strongest deterrent against snooping has always been the fear of being spotted. Furthermore, Brin argues, Western culture now encourages eccentricity-were programmed to rebel! That gives our society a natural protection against error and wrong-doing, like a bodys immune system. But social T-cells need openness to spot trouble and get the word out. The Transparent Society is full of such provocative and far-reaching analysis.The inescapable rush of technology is forcing us to make new choices about how we want to live. This daring book reminds us that an open society is more robust and flexible than one where secrecy reigns. In an era of gnat-sized cameras, universal databases, and clothes-penetrating radar, it will be more vital than ever for us to be able to watch the watchers. With reciprocal transparency we can detect dangers early and expose wrong-doers. We can gauge the credibility of pundits and politicians. We can share technological advances and news. But all of these benefits depend on the free, two-way flow of information.