[hawkharris]

Your argument has two parts: 1. Ensuring one's online privacy is hard. Very hard. 2. Because of this premise, the days of anonymity are over.

I take issue with the second point. It reflects a common post-NSA scandal sentiment, which is that we should throw up our hands and give up because security is hard and spy agencies are brazen.

Like invasions of privacy, rape, murder, bank robberies and traffic accidents will inevitably occur, no matter how hard we and our communities establish defenses against them.

Yet we keep trying to confront these serious societal problems, year after year, and if we can help or save just one individual, the effort has been worthwhile.

So, let's focus on gradually improving our security through action and education. It's time to do away with the spirit of apathy and hopelessness that is starting to pervade discussions about online privacy.

[john_b]

> "Like invasions of privacy, rape, murder, bank robberies and traffic accidents will inevitably occur, no matter how hard we and our communities establish defenses against them."

The crucial difference between invasions of privacy and the rest of your list is that strong deterrents exist for the latter part of your list. Even if you ignore the legal consequences of rape, murder, and bank robberies, all expose you to the risk of violence in response to your actions. Traffic accidents are by definition both unintentional and unexpected, whereas most invasions of privacy are not.

These things have all been minimized to soceitally acceptable levels because of specific deterrents that are in play. Presently, there are few deterrents to both public and private invasions of privacy by large companies or institutions. Until strong deterrents exist, the violations will continue. This is why a few changed rules at the NSA and a slap on the wrist for senior intelligence officials won't prevent privacy violations in the long term. Until jail sentences start getting handed out that are comparable to those for robbing banks, large institutions will continue collecting troves of data and using it to rob people of their privacy.

[hawkharris]

The main point I take away from your comment is that the fights against rape, murder and bank robberies are more mature than the fight against invasion of privacy.

A look back in time reveals that the deterrents against these violent crimes have been established gradually, through education, civil organizing and political lobbying. For example, contrast the perceived consequences of rape in the 1940s with those in 2014.

The United States has also made considerable strides toward the right to privacy. For example:

- Weeks vs. United States, establishing Americans' right against unreasonable search and seizure - Lawrence vs. Virginia, which reinforced couples' rights to privacy concerning sexual conduct - Griswold vs. Connecticut, which solidified the right to marital privacy.

I don't dispute that protecting personal privacy is hard. Nor do I dispute the fact that agencies such as the NSA have cast an ominous shadow on the United States' hard-won victories in the privacy arena.

But American history is full of victories concerning privacy, some of which seemed far-fetched in their times. The silver lining of the NSA scandal is that it made everyday Americans more aware of privacy issues. That awareness should be leveraged in a positive way, to demand accountability and build on deterrents against snooping.

[diminoten]

Protecting your privacy is literally impossible. People will squirm, people will say they do it, but none of it is true. People just hate to not be in control, and so they'll justify their inane behaviors as "protecting my privacy!" when in reality, there is literally no successful known way to do such a thing.

If there were a successful way to protect information, it'd be known and used.

But there isn't. All you can do is make it harder. It's not apathy, it's reality.

[hawkharris]

I protect my privacy dozens of times every day: closing my blinds, signing out my email account, encrypting some personal documents, locking my car doors.

This is not to say that a government agency couldn't crack my encryption, or break into my car, but I take small reasonable steps to protect my property and information.

Protecting and guaranteeing beyond a doubt are two distinct concepts. When people create a false dichotomy between these things, they give themselves a license to not even try.

[diminoten]

That's, almost literally, what I just said.

[kordless]

From a technical perspective, if you were lurking just inside a black hole's event horizon you would be completely anonymous. :)

[twobits]

"the days of anonymity are over"

Are they over for the NSA? No. That's what should change.