<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>mannykannot</author><text>&amp;gt; It&amp;#x27;s more of an appeal to emotion than a rational reason.&lt;p&gt;It sounds more respectable if you call it an &amp;#x27;intuition pump&amp;#x27;. Whether or not it is rational to want to defecate privately, this point may lead some fraction of those whose mind was previously made up to reconsider their position. In those cases, it can be the beginning of a conversation.</text><parent_chain><item><author>nearbuy</author><text>I never found this type of argument satisfying. It&amp;#x27;s more of an appeal to emotion than a rational reason.&lt;p&gt;In our culture we feel deep embarrassment if someone sees us using the toilet, but this is not universal across people and cultures, and honestly, it shouldn&amp;#x27;t be embarrassing. There&amp;#x27;s nothing inherently wrong with pooping. We irrationally feel embarrassment when we shouldn&amp;#x27;t have to.&lt;p&gt;This argument doesn&amp;#x27;t show any negative consequences of invasion of privacy. It&amp;#x27;s also not clear how it extrapolates to situations that don&amp;#x27;t involve toilets or nudity. If the problem is embarrassment, and people don&amp;#x27;t feel embarrassed that Facebook collects data, does that make it okay?&lt;p&gt;Obviously there are other arguments for privacy that do show potential harm. I find these more compelling.</text></item><item><author>542354234235</author><text>&amp;gt; I was never able to gain an inch on his argument until I asked him why he has curtains on his living room window.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m not doing anything wrong, but I still close the door when I take a dump. The idea that someone wanting privacy means it is nefarious or wrong is ridiculous.</text></item><item><author>bonestamp2</author><text>Agreed. I think the audience matters too -- different messages appeal to different people.&lt;p&gt;My dad is one of those old school guys who thinks law enforcement can do no wrong and nobody needs to hide anything unless they&amp;#x27;re doing something wrong. Even if that were true and I think it is true that many law enforcement personnel are trying to do good, that doesn&amp;#x27;t always mean the results will always reflect their intentions. When the sample size of facts is too small, as is often the case with mass collection, it&amp;#x27;s too easy for your sample to get mixed up with someone else&amp;#x27;s. Maybe your phone is the only other phone in the area when a murder is committed. That doesn&amp;#x27;t mean you did it, but it sure makes you look like the only suspect.&lt;p&gt;I was never able to gain an inch on his argument until I asked him why he has curtains on his living room window. I mean, it faces North, so there&amp;#x27;s no need to block intense sunlight, yet he closes them every night when he&amp;#x27;s sitting there reading a book or watching TV. Why? He&amp;#x27;s not doing anything illegal, yet he still doesn&amp;#x27;t want people watching him. He said he would not be ok with the Police standing at his window all night watching him. That&amp;#x27;s when he finally understood that digital privacy is not just for criminals, but for everyone who wants to exist in a peaceful state and not a police state.</text></item><item><author>40four</author><text>I think this is a good example of how pro-privacy arguments should be framed. It is takes the varied aspects and complex implications of tracking users across the web (or even in the real world), and distills it down into an easy to understand concept.&lt;p&gt;When you think privacy of in in the terms of &amp;#x27;social cooling&amp;#x27;, or consider things like China&amp;#x27;s &amp;#x27;social credit&amp;#x27; system, I can&amp;#x27;t help be think we are much closer to the world depicted in the last season of Westworld than we might want to admit.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Social Cooling (2017)</title><url>https://www.socialcooling.com/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>n4r9</author><text>It&amp;#x27;s not just embarrassment. It&amp;#x27;s the loss of dignity that comes from having no control over who is allowed in your own personal space.</text><parent_chain><item><author>nearbuy</author><text>I never found this type of argument satisfying. It&amp;#x27;s more of an appeal to emotion than a rational reason.&lt;p&gt;In our culture we feel deep embarrassment if someone sees us using the toilet, but this is not universal across people and cultures, and honestly, it shouldn&amp;#x27;t be embarrassing. There&amp;#x27;s nothing inherently wrong with pooping. We irrationally feel embarrassment when we shouldn&amp;#x27;t have to.&lt;p&gt;This argument doesn&amp;#x27;t show any negative consequences of invasion of privacy. It&amp;#x27;s also not clear how it extrapolates to situations that don&amp;#x27;t involve toilets or nudity. If the problem is embarrassment, and people don&amp;#x27;t feel embarrassed that Facebook collects data, does that make it okay?&lt;p&gt;Obviously there are other arguments for privacy that do show potential harm. I find these more compelling.</text></item><item><author>542354234235</author><text>&amp;gt; I was never able to gain an inch on his argument until I asked him why he has curtains on his living room window.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m not doing anything wrong, but I still close the door when I take a dump. The idea that someone wanting privacy means it is nefarious or wrong is ridiculous.</text></item><item><author>bonestamp2</author><text>Agreed. I think the audience matters too -- different messages appeal to different people.&lt;p&gt;My dad is one of those old school guys who thinks law enforcement can do no wrong and nobody needs to hide anything unless they&amp;#x27;re doing something wrong. Even if that were true and I think it is true that many law enforcement personnel are trying to do good, that doesn&amp;#x27;t always mean the results will always reflect their intentions. When the sample size of facts is too small, as is often the case with mass collection, it&amp;#x27;s too easy for your sample to get mixed up with someone else&amp;#x27;s. Maybe your phone is the only other phone in the area when a murder is committed. That doesn&amp;#x27;t mean you did it, but it sure makes you look like the only suspect.&lt;p&gt;I was never able to gain an inch on his argument until I asked him why he has curtains on his living room window. I mean, it faces North, so there&amp;#x27;s no need to block intense sunlight, yet he closes them every night when he&amp;#x27;s sitting there reading a book or watching TV. Why? He&amp;#x27;s not doing anything illegal, yet he still doesn&amp;#x27;t want people watching him. He said he would not be ok with the Police standing at his window all night watching him. That&amp;#x27;s when he finally understood that digital privacy is not just for criminals, but for everyone who wants to exist in a peaceful state and not a police state.</text></item><item><author>40four</author><text>I think this is a good example of how pro-privacy arguments should be framed. It is takes the varied aspects and complex implications of tracking users across the web (or even in the real world), and distills it down into an easy to understand concept.&lt;p&gt;When you think privacy of in in the terms of &amp;#x27;social cooling&amp;#x27;, or consider things like China&amp;#x27;s &amp;#x27;social credit&amp;#x27; system, I can&amp;#x27;t help be think we are much closer to the world depicted in the last season of Westworld than we might want to admit.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Social Cooling (2017)</title><url>https://www.socialcooling.com/</url></story>