When we think about privacy, it's usually in the context of an individual being able to hide something, usually from the government, but also from lots of other entities. It's a security issue in the greater discourse because there are bad people that can and will use information about you to reveal embarrassing information, blackmail, or even steal from you.
This is not just true of criminals, but also of companies and even governments. They can and do use information about you to propagandize you or demand taxes from you. These are, of course, understandable concerns and good reasons to want privacy.

Status Games

But there's another aspect of privacy which is just as important, perhaps more important than these and it's the social dynamic at play.
Privacy, you see, is a necessary buffer between people to keep order. This is because people are, in the end social creatures and in every social group, there is a constant jockeying about for position, what I would call status games being played.
The problem with status games is that they are by nature zero-sum. Whoever is at the top is usually both admired and envied, while whoever is at the bottom is generally pitied. This is especially true when the participants can change their position, whether through achievement, violence or politics.

Envy and Resentment

Too much clarity on the status of individuals in the group causes strife in the form of envy. This is not just for people at the bottom, whose envy of everyone above them is understandable, but also for those near the top, who likewise will envy people above them. A big enough group of disaffected people in a status game will cause some form of revolution. In other words, strictly ordered status games are not stable.
Thus, too much information sharing is bound to cause bitterness and resentment which in turn causes unstable organizations because humans are very status-aware. Marxism tries to solve this by making everyone equal, but of course, this doesn't work because the entity which controls this equality ends up being higher status than everyone else. You cannot have full transparency and social order. There will be too many dissatisfied people.
This is where privacy is important because it gives groups ambiguity about where each individuals stand. For example, most social groups in the US have as a default, social standing that corresponds with their level of wealth. The richer you are, the higher on the status ladder you are and the poorer, the lower. A very strict pecking order where everyone knew exactly how many assets everyone had would breed a significant amount of envy and resentment. Any group where this level of transparency was required would be unpleasant to be in strictly for that reason. We need a level of ambiguity to socially interact in a reasonable way.

Decentralized Status Games

That's not to say that everything is completely obscured. Most people that have money signal in various ways, with their clothing, car, topics of conversation and so on. They signal with various levels of loudness and reveal status information to the people that they're targeted at. One of the features of "old money" people is that they're very good at identifying other "old money" people while simultaneously hiding their wealth from people that are not as rich as they are. In a sense, this is a survival mechanism because envy, bitterness and resentment are not pleasant to deal with and oftentimes dangerous.
Privacy is the ability to disclose information at our discretion, not someone else's and that's exactly what happens in groups to keep the peace. Privacy has deep social value because it gives individuals the discretion to reveal where they are relatively in status. That protects not just them from attack, but also protects the group from upheaval. The less envy, bitterness and resentment there is, the more cohesive the group can be.

Conclusion

Privacy is a necessary part of civilization because cooperation is hard and nothing destroys cooperation like bitterness and envy. And those two in turn are caused by too much clarity on status. Privacy is what adds ambiguity and empowers individuals to calibrate group dynamics.
Privacy: it's not just for cypherpunks anymore.
Privacy has deep social value because it gives individuals the discretion to reveal where they are relatively in status. That protects not just them from attack, but also protects the group from upheaval.
Well said. It’s also directly at odds with the attention economy and what we see in mainstream society today.
Most of the youth don’t know how to selectively reveal information, instead blurting everything out on the internet without a filter. Fewer & fewer secrets to guard. I’d argue the attention economy has created this competitive spiral of posting & consuming more. Less & less careful consideration, thought & self reflection as to why. No wonder everyone is so peeved. They don’t know how they got on this 100mph hamster wheel, of pretending they are more deserving or knowledgeable than others.
The lack of privacy is almost as bad as the lack of a suitable money. It’s leading to too many people talking and comparing themselves and not enough people listening and developing instead.
reply
That was quite a rant from my side.
As highlighted with this post, normalising privacy will normalise society once more. Less being shared will mean less judgment, less envy & more acceptance.
I’m very curious when we will see the technology properly propagate & swing towards privacy without inconvenience. Might do a new post on positive privacy trends to demonstrate it is happening. The tech is there for those that seek it, but currently comes with significant trade-offs.
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @abeng 11 Apr
also they sell our interest to showing us Ads
reply
110 sats \ 5 replies \ @k00b 11 Apr
Thus, too much information sharing is bound to cause bitterness and resentment which in turn causes unstable organizations because humans are very status-aware.
I wish this weren't true but it is. I remember, years ago, experiments with transparent compensation within tech companies. While it's ideal wrt people not feeling like information is being hidden, it breeds resentment. It's a lot like polyamory in that seems ultra-rational in one framing, but it's a mess in practice.
One of the features of "old money" people is that they're very good at identifying other "old money" people while simultaneously hiding their wealth from people that are not as rich as they are.
I watched Born Rich, a documentary by a J&J heir, not too long ago which provided a similar insight.
reply
I think salespeople are transparent about salary and bonuses
Maybe salespeople are weird lol
I think law firms are transparent about salaries: partners, associates, paralegals etc.
reply
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 12 Apr
I think its because sales are a little more naturally zero sum.
Law firms have transparent pay? Maybe because everything is a billable hour?
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @nym 12 Apr
Yea, a salary versus a commission can make so much difference in lifestyle.
reply
Partners in a law firm know everyone compensation
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 11 Apr
This also reminded me of Orlovesky's Inevitability of cypherpunk for a proper civilization which says similar things in the context of inter-civilization privacy:
The only way to technologically enable the second option is to put a foundational laws into the universe design which enables "hiding" of less powerful agents from more powerful - i.e. privacy.
It seems that the Universe we live in enables that – at least existence of such mathematical constructs as hash functions and discrete logarithm problem for elliptic curves suggests such an option.
Thus, any civilization striving for a long-term survival needs to develop privacy technologies and (as a consequence) censorship-resistance at the scale of inter-agent communications.
The above also gives a perfect explanation to the Fermi paradox: the evolved civilizations must hide behind cryptographic systems which makes them for the external observer to be indistinguishable from the rest of cosmic background.
In this context, and perhaps all contexts, privacy is security.
reply
Very important to society and personal rights.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @Car 12 Apr
Too much clarity on the status of individuals in the group causes strife in the form of envy. This is not just for people at the bottom, whose envy of everyone above them is understandable, but also for those near the top, who likewise will envy people above them. A big enough group of disaffected people in a status game will cause some form of revolution. In other words, strictly ordered status games are not stable.
This is especially true the longer I stay working in Bitcoin. It’s something I am proactively try to stop myself from doing. I do not remember feeling this way in the fiat space. It’s far too easy for me to fall into this trap. I have also seen this work the other way as well…people proposing to others they have less to receive more.
💬 Great insight Jimmy I would be curious to know how you go about avoiding these traps? Also is there anything else besides privacy one can do from a position of “the top” to others “below” to ease the pain.
reply
I have an episode coming up that inspired this post which will delve into this exact topic: dealing with envy. Stay tuned!
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Car 12 Apr
Nice! Looking forward to it.
reply
3 sats \ 0 replies \ @nym 12 Apr
I'm stoked to hear the episode also!
reply
This was a great read! Do you see privacy though as a right? Or just a social good? I was recently asked this by a coworker and while I immediately went its a right I then got hit with the conundrum of well if I am using the internet for example it feels like it has lost the status of being a right since you have to really sign it over.
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @Car 12 Apr
✅ Privacy to me these days is a mindset.
Most people around the world are far too worried about food, water, shelter to give a 💩 about their privacy.
reply
Agree with you there! Given all the wild stuff going on now a days I look at it from the stand point of what is going to keep me alive. I love me some privacy but it won’t feed me
reply
Well said!
A peaceful society definitely needs the privacy that it once used to have. Not sharing much of your views makes you less subjected to a dogma of beliefs and judgemental for others, which in turn saves you from the imposing of unnecessary feudalism. Privacy is freedom and freedom is the real requisite for social order.
reply