[ben_w]

/s aside, politicians need privacy for the same reason the rest of us do: they work with sensitive information and it's really important they don't get blackmailed.

Simultaneously, they need a light shone on their private lives for the same reason they want to do that to the rest of us: to make sure they're not abusing their access to sensitive information, getting blackmailed, or otherwise being nefarious.

I have absolutely no idea how to fix this apparent paradox. Perhaps it can't be done. Even if it can, tech is unstable and this is all a moving target — the way GenAI is going, I suspect that we'll all have to carry always-on cameras that log and sign everything just to prove we didn't do whatever some picture or video shows us doing.

[petre]

> they work with sensitive information and it's really important they don't get blackmailed

You mean railway station locker codes for bags of money from Quatar?

[ben_w]

You've quoted two things there, so that's a two-part question.

For blackmail I mean e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kompromat and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_research

For sensitive information, I mean e.g. a whistleblower has contacted them, or they're working out the finances for next year and there's potential for market manipulation based on the discussions so far, or they're discussing an emergency (health/economic/military) response that will be unpopular with someone no matter what.

If you are with your example referring to some specific example of them committing crimes, I refer you to my second paragraph in the original message:

> Simultaneously, they need a light shone on their private lives for the same reason they want to do that to the rest of us: to make sure they're not abusing their access to sensitive information, getting blackmailed, or otherwise being nefarious.

[wkat4242]

> I suspect that we'll all have to carry always-on cameras that log and sign everything just to prove we didn't do whatever some picture or video shows us doing.

Yeah good luck with that :')

PS: A change to "guilty until proven innocent" policy would require a serious constitutional change in most countries.

[ben_w]

> A change to "guilty until proven innocent" policy would require a serious constitutional change in most countries.

Indeed, though there I was thinking more the court of public opinion which loves hearsay and rumour.

The actual law? I have no idea. Tech will change the world before the law can catch up with yesterday.