The importance of privacy

Technological advancements in recent years have focused mainly on connecting people and information. This includes connecting people with information about other people, such as on social media, and connecting people with general knowledge, such as Wikipedia and other informational websites. These connections already existed before the digital era, through gatherings, newspapers, flyers, and similar means, but technology has made them broader and faster, allowing them to span the world in milliseconds.

These technological advancements have brought innumerable benefits, mainly through a faster and more democratic spread of knowledge, both in terms of human connections and access to information. Among other things, this has led to faster scientific progress and an overall increase in quality of life. While the positive effects of these advances are obvious, it is also important to consider their downsides. They have reduced our control over personal information: privacy.

There are three main actors that help explain why this loss of privacy has occurred. The first are companies, which benefit from collecting and analyzing data about their customers to increase profits. The second are governments, which aim to ensure national security and prevent crimes such as terrorism, pedophilia, and others through the collection and analysis of citizens' data. Finally, there are individuals, who have voluntarily shared their personal information over time. The alignment of these three actors around the collection and exchange of personal data has led to a general decline in privacy. The motivations of companies and governments are clear, as both are acting in their own interest. Less obvious is why individuals have been willing to give up their information. I believe this is due to a combination of three factors: trust in democratic institutions, lack of technological education, and a preference for convenience. I will explore each of these in more detail.

Individuals have played a key role in this process, sharing their personal information voluntarily for a combination of reasons. In most Western countries, people tend to believe they will always be protected by their government. This creates a general sense of safety, leading them to overlook small threats to their privacy. In contrast, individuals living under authoritarian regimes are much more cautious about sharing personal information, as it may be used against them.

Another factor is the lack of technological education. Technological tools are used by people who do not fully understand their implications. For example, the average age at which U.S. citizens sign up for social media is 13. While these platforms are powerful tools for spreading information, a 13-year-old is unlikely to fully understand what should and should not be shared. This issue is not limited to children: the same happened, for example, with adults in the early days of the internet.

Finally, convenience plays a major role. The connection between people and information can happen in two ways: centralized or decentralized. In centralized systems, a single entity collects and manages data, making the experience simple and efficient but at the same time centralizing control over information (e.g., social media platforms). In decentralized systems, data is distributed among users who retain control over their personal information. However, decentralized systems are more complex to navigate and often slower in processing (e.g., Tor, Bitcoin, …), leading individuals to prefer centralized solutions over decentralized ones.

At this point, the reasons behind the erosion of privacy should be clear. Governments, companies, and individuals have all, for their own interests, contributed to the sharing of personal information with very little control.

So far, I have focused on explaining this phenomenon. In this final part, I want to address individuals (the only group we all belong to) and suggest why they might want to reconsider their choices.

Privacy is control over our personal information. It is the condition that allows individuals to decide what information to share and with whom. Without it, we become public figures: every action and form of expression (body, speech, writing, …) is exposed to public scrutiny. Many argue that if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide and should therefore be willing to share everything. This would be a valid argument if the only consequences of sharing were legal. In reality, the consequences are much broader. A person who shares everything is constantly subject to the judgment of others, and as a result may avoid experimenting, thinking differently, or expressing themselves freely.

Over time, this leads to a homogenization of what people share and what they are exposed to. In turn, this produces a homogenization of ideas, creating a vicious cycle that moves toward a more static and controlled world. By contrast, the right to privacy allows individuals to think and act without fear of judgment, even when it means going against common beliefs. This freedom often leads to innovation and progress (e.g., Galileo Galilei against the Church doctrine).

I therefore want to encourage people to be more careful with their personal data, even if this means less safety for governments, less growth and fewer profits for companies, and a more complex world for individuals. The right to privacy is what allows each person to remain unique and in control of their own ideas and actions.

15/03/2026