[floydnoel]

I think this question boils down to individualism vs collectivism. If you think it is ok to override individual rights in order to "benefit the many" then you will be in favor of your proposal. If you view individual rights as _unalienable_ then you won’t value collective benefits over the individual rights to privacy & self-determination.

I don’t see how your particular viewpoint is any less "binary" than the other one. Collectivism or individualism is the binary option, where you land on the collectivist side of the coin.

It's mind boggling to me that people still resort to ad-hominem attacks when discussing viewpoints here on HN, when it's clearly against the rules. How do we even approach it?