instead of making this (even more) illegal, which would solve very little as its still apparantly trivial to do, they should instead work on making that address book.
that way when everything is transparant, paedophiles can be caught and we might choose not to vote for somebody with a cocaine addiction.
Those articles either miss, or fail to emphasize enough, the best counterargument: what if you do have something to hide?
What if you're organizing a protest, a new political party, a business to compete with entrenched corporations, are a whistleblower (corporate or government), an investigative journalist (still needed in a surveillance society - those in power know better than to turn surveillance on themselves), or a union organizer?
Those are all activities (most) people would consider good, or at least necessary, and all require some degree of secrecy.
im not saying that because i am a hypocrite who says what he says because its in his best interest. its not. my interests are best served by secrecy. so i might suffer myself. but there are many good people.
im saying that because i think its in the interest of soceity that we know how naughty everybody is being. because people are being naughty.
of course there is a tradeoff. that example from ww2 is unsettling. For sure that is not my intention, but i doubt that is what would happen. ww2 is a long time ago. hate crime is down a lot. people should not be so pessimistic about modern soceity.
but some of our leaders are not people you'd introduce to your mother. and we need that kind of stuff to be out there.
that way when everything is transparant, paedophiles can be caught and we might choose not to vote for somebody with a cocaine addiction.