Privacy at the Poker Table and in the Bathroom Stall -- Caring About Privacy When You Have Nothing to Hide

People talk often about privacy. They value it, often care deeply about it but may not have an explicit grasp of what it actually is and of why it is important. Importantly, privacy describes a state not the motive or reason for it being desirable, but the meaning of that state is a function of the motive. When you think of privacy, nudity is probably among the first things to come to mind, you want your privacy in the bathroom when you are getting changed, you don't want a wardrobe malfunction etc.. There are good reasons for this. Mostly around signaling and social norms.

On the other hand there is poker. Suppose for the moment that you have cowboys -- two kings -- certainly nothing to be embarrassed about! Nonetheless you probably still want to keep it a secret for the time being for just about entirely unrelated reasons! You may be a social outcast or signal a bit too much confidence if you play poker with your cards face up, but more proximately chances are you'll be a loser at poker! (Although, in a certain variant, nudity may coincide).

There is information revealed in the way that you play poker that informs the other players about what might be in your hand, you give it away but not for nothing. You make a strategic consideration of the value within the game you are able to capture by revealing it vs. the cost that you pay.

For the purposes of your poker it does not really matter if non-players (who aren't in communicative contact) see your hand. It is still private in the sense that matters – for being private from the other participants in the game. On the other hand spectators to our nudity would matter a great deal. What might not is a digital photo strictly on your phone and any purely local processing that might be done to it for all intents and purposes, your nudity would still be perfectly private since it does not impose on the motive for privacy. However if a phone's poker app engine knew your hand that would be a violation!

What is important regarding your data on the internet is privacy as at a poker table, not privacy as in a bathroom stall. On your apps you give or refuse to give location data, you accept or reject cookies, you post or don't on social media. You make decisions of what value you are getting vs. what it is costing you. The concern shouldn't be that an employee at a tech company will personally look at things, (basic controls should be preventing this although there are notable cases of failure). The concern should be the strategic importance and value of your data; that you are not being forced to give up value without need or due compensation.

Information content

In your interactions online, the considerations are different from poker. Your relationship with the various internet services and apps you use is generally not nearly so adversarial as are opponents in poker. For instance, when you are concerned about say health data, genetic data or down another vein, dark-web activities, it is generally clear that the appropriate lens is the strategic i.e., you could be adversely price discriminated against in the health care market on the former two provided that no laws (effectively) prevent it and your data is given to a relevant party. In the later case you or others could be politically or legally exposed. It may be strategically important for you as well to not be seen or pictured nude, in addition to being unstrategically embarrassing.

In the context of TOR and Signal privacy does not exist in isolation, e.g. if you have one Signal contact who in turn has a bunch of Signal contacts who only have othat person’s Signal contact, chances are pretty solid that they are a drug dealer without any further information. More broadly, if only drug dealers (or political dissidents etc.) used Signal, then using Signal at least does very little to mask their status.

You should consider what it does to the information content of you using Signal in the same way you should be mindful of the informational outlook of you making a bet when you bet big on a bluff. If you only bet big on a good hand, it is obvious when you have a good hand. Likewise, if you only use Signal when you buy drugs, it is obvious when you are buying drugs (from a network analysis perspective in any case).

Likewise: - If only people with bad actuarial health outcomes aren't using a DNA price discriminated insurance it is obvious... - If only dissidents and drug dealers use Signal it is obvious... - If only informed order flow hits the market then it is obvious…

The principled stances

Part of the crowd

Our privacy online depends critically on others. Currently privacy is mostly uncoordinated but in the future coordination could play a big role. Some people use Signal and TOR not because they have anything to hide but because they value the privacy created by their using it. Doing this directly affects the informational content therein. If you think that information should not be used in the way it is, you can directly reduce the amount of information others are able to receive, even without being party to the action at any given instance. In my opinion it is a damn good reason to care about privacy even when you have nothing to hide.

Checking corporate behavior

Another reason you might want to value your privacy is to give corporations reason to value it. There are myriad cases of companies asking for data they don't really need. You may not care about that data intrinsically for either personal or strategic reasons, however you may not want to live in a world where using services requires that amount or more data. You may think what they are asking for now is fine, but not more than what they are asking for. You may think it is fine for you to part with your information, but not necessarily for others. 

I think there is presently the rightful critique that individual action in this scenario is rather ineffective insofar as few people take this variety of principled stance and it is likely getting lost in the noise of varieties of user behavior. However there is a lot of potential for coordination/collusion among individuals. Jaron Lanier has championed the idea of data unions which could help address this.

Role of AI

We are entering an era in which more and more interactions will be mediated by AI which will come to be able to strategically use and capture information. I think there is a big role for AI to advocate for us as well and to mediate the information that is given to other actors on our behalf. Something along the lines of playing poker with your cards down, instead of black jack with your cards up, with your data against the companies you interact with on your behalf.

Conclusion

So there are multiple levels to look at privacy. If you look at it narrowly, you should care about your privacy. You shouldn't only exist in private "places" here such as Signal or TOR, when you have something to hide. Then more broadly you should consider the impact your behavior has on the broader strategic outlook, e.g. the information content for you and others of certain activities, the incentives for corporate behavior.