brin’s opening statement: both sides want same goals:
suspicion of authority
preservation of human diversity
core question: how do we maintain a decent human society? the 4 problem solvers of our civilization: markets, courts, science
brin believes that privacy will be closer to home. the future will be like the village of old, the privacy will be in the home sphere “the european privacy activists want to generate oceans of privacy legislation. this is a lousy basis to base your freedom on.” the core issue is accountability. asked about faking names for subway cards: “i game the system too. do what it takes to prevail in the age of ashcroft”.
templeton opening statement:
you don’t care about your privacy until after it has been invaded. You must protect other’s privacy to protect your own. Transparency has virtues: accountability, open flows of information. BUT: Transparency will be subverted. The aristocrats are too strong. For valid reasons of national security, global competition. For fake reasons: national security and global competition. What if encryption gets taxed or outlawed? Enforced transparency has not worked: campaign reform anyone? Where is the fully transparent company? Is criticism the only antidote to error? Never mind Bob Woodward’s book, Bush still got reelected. The truth can be buried in the noise. Also, surveillance has never worked completely: Even in China or prison camps. The oppressed always win, at least in the small. But surveillance is always abused.
Brin counteracts: In the transparent society, there is an example of a company with completely open books, visible to all employees. The company is very successful. Another example: There was a release of a toxicological substances. Within a year, the top polluters worked to get their name out of that list. The need for the wallet is gone if you can get anyone and assess their reputation, just like the village of old, with a handshake, only that this time, your eyeglasses scan the credit history of your counterpart. Also, it is easier, epistemologically, to verify what you know than to verify that someone does not know. “i am an equal opportunity offender.”
for a much more eloquent writeup head over to worldchanging.

• Uncategorized