Privacy

42823 readers

469 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

195

The "Nothing to hide" argument is (still) a logical fallacy (lemmy.ml)

submitted 5 days ago by Charger8232@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Almost one year ago I made this post about how the Wikipedia page for the "Nothing to hide" argument removed the text stating that it is a logical fallacy. I advocated for it to be added back. Three days after that post it was added back.

Exactly one year, to the day, after the logical fallacy text was removed, it got removed again. On October 19th of this year, a different user removed the text from the Wikipedia page, despite plenty of evidence that the "Nothing to hide" argument is a logical fallacy.

I am back here, once again, advocating that the text be added back.

P.S. It's an absolutely crazy coincidence that the same edit happened to the same page on the same day exactly one year apart.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] narr1@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

it seems to me that people are arguing over semantics why it shouldn't be listed as a "logical fallacy". kinda reminds me of people arguing about semantics on why i shouldn't call people nazis when they're not actually members of the NSDAP. fucking infuriating.

[–] Ferk@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

It's more like calling "nazi" to all forms of authoritarian positions, even the left-wing authoritarians in the opposite side of the spectrum.

There's a distinction between "informal fallacy" and "formal / logical fallacy". Both have separate articles in wikipedia as well. Why not just call it "fallacy" without categorizing it into a specific subcategory it does not fit anyway?

[–] narr1@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago

This seems a good answer, let's go with this!