Protection of Private Life, a Challenging Exercise

Sten Schaumburg Müller

Recorded at GOTO 2015

Get notified about Sten Schaumburg Müller

Sign up to a email when Sten Schaumburg Müller publishes a new video

good morning um to y'all and thanks for
inviting me on thanks for this
opportunity to talk to other people that
I'm usually talking to said it's really
nice um I'm talking I'm going to talk
about protection of private life a
challenging exercise and as you can see
i saw the plan this was going to last
for 20 minutes because i thought i had
30 minutes but now i realized i'd have
15 minutes so maybe I should talk a
little bit slower but this is sort of
what I'm going to talk about and and by
way of introduction I'm a lawyer and and
coming from legal philosophy so I'm
dealing with some legal protection of
private life this is a private life
freedom of expression freedom of the
press freedom of the media these kind of
issues from sort of strictly sort of
legal approach but also a meatball sort
of general philosophical approach and
I'm not a technician nor an engineer and
some including my wife would probably
call me technically impaired so I'm not
very much into all these kind of devices
which may have a relation to private
life and which may threaten or
strengthen or whatever private life um
I'm also a techno optimist in the sense
that I think that ah that human beings
are brilliant at inventing technical
devices well doesn't really include
myself but generally human beings are
really brilliant at this and human
beings have done this for it well ever
since we started as being human beings
and all these devices that carry
potentials and menaces in which we then
have to deal with and I mean this is
just as an example an old an old
technical device like a car is really
smart it could take you around
a lot of things and it's really
practical but there are also issues that
hmm like for instance like 40 45 years
ago in Denmark there was about 1,200
people killed every year by cars that
has actually decreased to a very large
extent now with I think about the 33
double dribble amount of cars and the
number of dead had gone down it's still
you know too much one dead is one too
much but it's a and down to about 150 as
far as i remember this is just a general
point I want to make sort of saying well
we make inventions we make inventions
all the time they are usually smart
inventions but they usually also carry
with the problems that we should deal
ways but of course also legal ways a few
inventions we might have to ban it
doesn't come often and maybe not in the
field that you are working our butt for
instance land mines that they don't
really serve any sort of good purpose so
we have abandoned we have a convention
against land mines they actually be
outlawed but generally are technical
devices are smart and we just need to
adjust but we need to think because they
usually also have some some some menaces
that we have to deal with and I hope
this conference and what you are doing
from from my quite different perspective
um I'm going to deal with with private
life and I would like to take the
opportunity to introduce one of my
favorite philosophers the German jürgen
habermas he back in 62 I think he
started off his career by writing a book
called them this is an English
structural transformation of the public
sphere arm and was it actually also
relates to the private sphere I'm
getting back to that he was interest in
structuring of the public sphere in
Europe specially England Germany and
France specially he was focusing sort of
starting on the late 17th century
onwards and his point was that well
something happens here which is of great
interest a public sphere is emerging
it's transforming our sphere where we
sort of meet as equals discuss exchange
views and for him that it's it's a very
important factor just as an example
around the year 1700 in London there was
about 3000 cafes and they were all open
for the public they were with newspapers
they served coffee more than alcoholic
beverages which is important because you
know coffee tend to sort of sharpen your
mind whereas that it doesn't go for
alcoholic beverages so this is you know
people coming to cafes drinking coffee
reading newspapers discussing the news
and that was also they also discussed
literature are sort of reading from home
reading something and then you know
going into the cafes discussing the what
they have sort of learned or what they
have read in private was very important
um and this is this is what he then
takes into another sort of direction
which I'm not going into this this holes
or a political idea of this open
deliberation among equals that they had
we actually got we well people the
Europeans Germans the English lay the
the British the French I had this
experience of an open discussion with
peers and he later formulates this idea
of the unforced force of the better
argument this whole idea there's
something interesting about and a good
argument it's it kind of seems right and
it kind of forceful in an unforeseen
you're not forced to
except a better argument by somebody
puttin a pistol or threatening you or
whatever you're kind of forced because
hmm this is a better argument anyway
that will sort of takes that would take
us more in the direction of the
political I'm a little bit more sort of
turn towards the idea of public sphere
here um as this emergent public sphere
presupposes at least two things one a
technical device or whatever you call
the technical invention may be a better
word gooden back and the printing the
whole that the whole idea of the whole
thing of like going to cafes discussing
was apart from the coffee apart from the
public that everybody could go there was
also this the printing this invention of
printing that you could actually read
our and then go into discussions and
deliberations on what you have read this
about the reading thing is actually
quite important just a few days ago I
spoke I was at another conference
dealing dealing with language and law
and other things and I was discussing
with a professor from Nigeria and he was
saying hmm the whole the whole the whole
reason why Europe is presently sort of
more advanced is because of the
invention of writing and printing the
idea that you can actually pass on
information in other ways etc so that is
quite important anyway that's one thing
the second thing important for my talk
here is that it's not only meeting in
popping and discussing with peers it's
also that it presupposes a private
sphere it presupposes that if you're
going to discuss literature which was in
fashion by then then you have to do some
reading first you don't you sit at home
maybe or maybe at the cafe reading you
may be read the newspaper or you may
read literature doesn't really matter
but you read and you do that sort of
well sort of on your own you do that
sort of privately undisturbed otherwise
you won't get them otherwise you won't
understand what's going on and this is
this sort of first step or step before
the public sphere maybe the private
sphere that you do something on your own
you sort of read mmm you consider you
may have some ideas some some provision
Airy ideas before bringing into the
public which you can then discuss with
your peers at the cafe or wherever
you're discussing them of course also in
the newspapers etc um so so the point is
that in order to participate in the
public sphere private life is necessary
we need time to read and understand we
need to gather information we need to
focus we need to develop our own views
our own ideas even if provisionally in
the sense that we can get some ideas and
then we start talking to peers about
them and then let me say well you know
this is stupid because blah blah blah oh
hey this is a good idea because blah
blah blah which is which is what it's
all about the point is that in order
sort of to come up with with ideas a
certain sort of protected sphere certain
private sphere is necessary because if
there is no private sphere at all you
don't have the chance to well read
getting into things maybe even getting
ideas so there's this interdependence
between private life and the public
sphere arm so the whole thing Habermas
was on and of course he was more sort of
interest in the political side not so
much in the technical side but I think
to a large extent this also goes for for
for technical things so it was not only
a restructuring of the public sphere
restructuring in the sense that from
around 1700 that was an emergent of this
public sphere where people could meet
peers discussing an equal level sort of
room you know just exchanging views with
sort of non hierarchical
a horizontal relation rather than a
hierarchical relation there are no
nobody could issue all there's nobody
could tell you well this won't do the
church like Winston the trick could not
Taylor well you know the earth is flat
or whatever they were telling people by
the time so don't come up and make all
these kind of inventions or whatever it
was on an equal basis exchanging views
discussing and the and my point is that
that also requires proposes a certain
private life of certain protection in
emergence of private life um in order
not to get into what i would call the
amsterdam syndrome I've couple of years
ago and amsterdam and i've read a
tourist guide and I don't know whether
the story is true which is not really it
doesn't really matter but anyway the
story went that in Amsterdam previously
they did not have any curtains because
you know they were all very nice people
so they didn't need curtains everybody
could see what was going on um and then
of course nothing of interest when you
know the limits to what people could do
when the curtains were drawn so so
everybody looked nice and conform pure
conformity nothing special happens this
is what i'll call the Amsterdam syndrome
there well of course we need some
publicity but we also need privacy we
also need a private life because
otherwise it would be totally conformity
we would just you know do what is
expected of us are and which is not a
good thing so interestingly when backing
up which i would use all of it as a
lawyer and then the legal field also
backing up the public sphere that we
need this transparency we need the
possibility of exchanging views this of
course also goes for the scientific
community for technical community but
that doesn't imply that it we need to
love one hundred percent transparency on
the contrary we also need
some kind of well maybe not privacy but
you know get ideas I do things that may
not at least to begin with medley meant
for whoever is it would be interested um
I just I'm just about reading a glenn
greenwald no place to hide he was the
journalist dealing with Snowden going to
Hong Kong and and and getting all these
things out and one of his comments all
of his just in passing he mentions his
comment then that he know what is that
or and he's referring to studies which I
haven't checked admittedly but he's
referring to start is that says that
being watched when people are being
watched it tend to be more sort of
confined more cautious which of course
for you know conventions ideas you know
stupid things whatever is not so good so
we need this we need to be out of
spotlight at least sometimes and at
least to a certain extent um obviously
private life may serve as sort of a
fireball protecting illegal activities
so private life not only is it a
necessity but it's it you know it may
also be sort of a menace or a threat or
something I could be ranging from child
abused to illegal economic activities
also technical activities like making
bonds or suicide bombs or whatever
people would like to do and they would
like to have some privacy so that nobody
can see what they're actually doing so
private life is on the same in the same
way as sort of we don't need total total
transparency is not a very good idea
but sort of absolute transparency
doesn't work because we need this roof
of you know thinking up ideas and
reading inventing things etc but of
course private life which is then
necessary doesn't work if it's absolute
in the sense that we know for sure that
nobody would never get in here because
we've unfortunately things that we don't
like to happen may happen yeah that
includes and this may be more
interesting from from the legal point of
view that implies that there should be
no absolute protection a private life
this is actually I call a private life
rather than privacy but I'm getting back
to this in a moment ah there should be
no absolute protection of course be some
protection we need protection by law and
also I'm a little bit in down here but
probably also by use of more sort of
technical devices that we need some
protection from spying etc so there
should be no absolute protection in the
sense that would some places where
nobody would ever look because hmm then
we know that things I don't like to
happen my actually happen so it's a
little bit complicated because we need
this balancing rather than absolute
protection um when I put this in oh yes
here um getting a little bit on private
life versus privacy and I'm a little bit
in doubt not being a sort of native
English speaker or American speak at
then I don't know whether this is
totally true I got it from the europe
european commission of human rights they
were dealing back in the 70s they were
dealing with our with the right to
private life mmm just a little bit more
piece of information I can give you
since I'm not social time as I have
thought the European Convention of Human
Rights back from from after the second
world war with like so 10 15 or basic
rights of which the right to private
life with one arm and in the course of
time the Commission and later the court
started receiving complaints and until
of dishing out
decisions judgments as to whether
private life was actually violated or
not and one of the first cases that were
they were dealing with was x vs iowa
iceland of back from seven to six it was
actually kind of a funny case because it
dealt with a person who said that he
wanted to keep a dog and in the
apartments where he was living dogs were
not allowed and says this is an
intrusion of my private life so he
brought that before the under the
European Convention of Human Rights he
brought that before the Commission um
the Commission said well this is not
really an infringement but interesting
for our purposes here they made a
distinction are in saying that well it's
not only privacy as they are talking
about in the anglo-saxon the sort of
fields it's not only sort of fencing in
it's not only a question of no
trespassing this is private property
sort of keep out private life the
Commission stated goes much further
private life includes that we have the
possibility develop relations with
others shouldn't be total transparency
that everybody knows who we are seeing
all the time we should have this chance
of developing relations which you know
at the beginning may sometimes be a bit
sort of of vulnerable or fragile we it's
also developed the personality develop
personal autonomy these are parts of
private life and these are part of what
is protected under the European
Convention of Human Rights so it's not
only sort of private lives total fencing
in keep out kind of thing but it's also
a having a sphere where you can actually
develop your own personality develop
ideas these kind of things which i think
is a very important goes very much in
line with the Harbormaster idea I wonder
whether they read him I don't know but
it's kind of this the same approach that
we need
private sphere in order to be able to
you know go out in the public sphere and
and be sort of growing up persons with
idea with ideas and personality and
inventions etc arm so it's not merely
the right to be left alone but the right
to develop as an individual but you know
ideas etc in order to be able to
participate in social life and now I'm
forwarding I hypothesis and I'm I don't
know whether it's it holds but there's
some interesting thing going on here in
relation to China China has definitely
much law protection of private life I
think there's no doubt about that um it
also seems to me but I'm not very
knowledgeable in this field but also
seems to me that that Chinese production
is much more copying then it's actually
innovative the revelation I tend to
think there is a relation this is
hypothesis I but I don't know whether
this is true but I tend to think it's
true that because if they're sort of a
you know continuous surveillance
continuing some checking on conformity
are then ah we may become very good at
copying because it's easy to see what
the others are doing but we may not be
so good to be inventive to come up with
in Vince's because you need some space
you need some some room for you know
allowing sometimes stupid but sometimes
very good ideas and who knows which are
stupid and which are which are good if
you don't come up with them in order to
keep in line and you know don't and try
to look a little bit like your neighbor
anyway this is this is the point that we
need to protect private life not in an
absolute sense but in some kind of
relative and of course difficult since
the challenges then what are the
challenges to private life and I think
there are constant challenges it's not
new it's not that once upon a time back
in 1700 then that was private life and
it was perfectly
protected and nothing was wrong of
course that isn't the case that has
always been attempts and intruding
private life they're reading wiretapping
on all sorts of things so private life
has been sort of challenged or infringed
continuously what I think is new
probably is that we have new technical
devices new technical inventions that
may sort of Menace or threaten private
life in new ways so we have to think
that over and and to you know to be
aware is the amps and I'm syndrome
blooming is about be does it seem like
we're getting in trouble here that every
they're all we can trace whatever we are
doing forever we are meeting everything
is transparent which according to this
idea from Harbor Mars etc I think is
dangerous so let me just sort of try to
make it brief outline of what I see as
the challenges and those are become I
think basically for all of them from see
three sides one sort of the private I'm
not talking about companies but sort of
private person uploading it comes from
state surveillance and come from private
companies with all sorts of commercial
interests in knowing exactly what we're
doing and what well preferences are at
cetera so one private uploading arm the
internet and especially social media are
is emerging as a sort of a semi public
sphere semi-public in the sense that
it's not really private it's not totally
public in the sense that you know you
usually have friends and you have to
sort of you know accept them and these
kind of things and apparently people are
loading all sorts of picks and flicks
pictures and videos which was previously
CA conceived as very private but
apparently not anymore people are
uploading their their you know sexual
experiences etc what is this I
I don't know actually is that drawing
back the Amsterdam curtains so that
everybody can see what's going on or is
it actually which I would come soon to
see that's a little bit on the negative
side or is it rather sort of bringing
personal experiences to the cafe this is
kind of a new cafe for common
contemplation and maybe even
consideration you know well you know
have ideas this is how we do it maybe
you should do in the same way or you
should try another or whatever I'm a
little bit in in in doubts here but my
main sort of the underlying point is
that privacy the the notion the
perception of private life is changing
and what used to be very private it's
not so private anymore um recently those
book out by jon jon ronson about public
shaming and he's which happens or a lot
on the internet on tape you could be
publicly shamed one example was actually
some if you're getting bored I hope you
or not but if you're getting bored then
some of you may made you know a little
bit sort of sarcastic remark or
something and that was actually done in
some kind of a talk at some technical
university in the United States and the
remark was also a little bit sort of
sexist but it was only from like one
Paul to the other then just on the next
row there was a person taking a picture
of them and uploading the remark which
was you know when he was out in the
public it was kind of stupid you know we
say all sorts of stupid things well at
least I do well I wasn't involved in
this one though but but the point is
that what we do in private that all of a
sudden it's out there in this public
sphere and actually the guy making the
remark he ended up being fired because
of course is his employer couldn't
accept having you know this man with the
sexist remark on on his payroll she was
actually fired so all this about sort of
perrin see and not being able to make
stupid remarks is it's quite important
on the other hand getting back to Jon
Ronson who was investigating this yo he
also realized that well then there were
and he have some examples on people who
had their sort of said mmm not obviously
normal sexual I've sort of transpose
there was one the guy from Britain who
had like six with five in uniforms and
you know everything and that was
uploaded and it was like what happened
not much and had that been 50 years ago
you know he couldn't have kept his his
wealth keeps his job or anything I'm
quite sure anyway Ronson's point here or
maybe the point that I'm getting out of
Ronson is that this notion of what is
private and what we cannot accept is
changing but they're still all as all
the time something that we do not accept
and so therefore we still need a certain
protection of a private life so that's
the private uploading they're definitely
also problems relating to sort of
privates uploading from others and I
think of that various issues at stake
here the rapidity um that's this idea of
Thinking Fast and Slow we are sometimes
where we are very good at you know doing
things very fast which is a good thing
otherwise we wouldn't have survived but
sometimes you also have to think and I
guess you all know this you know
thinking through a problem at you know
it's really burdensome and we have to
think it over and it's troublesome and
we well anyway the the problems relating
to private uploading is that apparently
it often happens quite fast without
really sort of considering things and
fast and intuitive thinking is often
mistaken so so there are some issues
here in relation to the challenges of
private life excuse me secondly it's for
free I mean you can sort of comment on
everything you can have ideas on
it's for free doesn't cost you anything
certain I don't know your political idea
whatever then you engage in it and you
spend time on it and maybe spend also
some of your money on it but here on the
internet you can just sort of upload an
opinion on something and it's totally
free there's no need to be engaged and
there may be a problem I'm a little bit
in doubts here but I think we may face a
problem of concentration and focus which
may be a problem for a new generation
who always do one thing two thing three
things at a time checking you know
checking the iphone checking the the
email chicken whatever people is doing
and of course that's possible to some
extent but the concentration and slow
thinking which is needed also sometimes
may be in jeopardy so that's one
challenge that apparently we just do all
these things ourselves we tend to to
threaten private life actually then of
course they are the states the big
brother is watching you in the often
very often in the name of security I
think all especially with at least all
sort of Western liberal democracies have
in the past 15 years expand or in the
name of security all sorts of
surveillance things are not only in the
United States also in Denmark in France
I haven't checked this sort of therapy
but definitely there are issues here
technology runs both ways in the sense
that you know we can do surveillance but
privacy protection can also be sort of
secure or helps or assisted by technical
devices but there are some challenges
here legal challenges as well as
technical challenges is it possible is
it actually possible to protect private
life anymore just one minor example
maybe not minor but at least or in the
local example in Denmark use the
personal what you call that you know you
have a personal number which is used
with personal identification and you go
there and you can get
so you know it's social insurance and
these kind of things and they have been
traditionally seen as very private they
shouldn't come out in the open but now
that you know in their leakages and all
of a sudden 100,000 of these figures are
out and and it seems to be very very
difficult to keep them secret to keep
them private what do we do about it I'll
try to keep them private or maybe just
say button down on that private but then
maybe we should detach or whatever
should be done I don't have definitely
don't have all the answers but there are
some challenges here quite sure how to
strike a balance between surveillance
which I think we need some kind of
surveillance and an in private life it
should be done by law also by public
opinion and I don't have I don't so much
have the answers but just sort of
suggesting that here are some challenges
in going from the point that we need
some protection of private life and as
the last one commercial interests it's
kind of privatizing the public um couple
months ago those who I think a
provocative headline in the newspaper
saying is there any public space left on
the internet sort of thing isn't it all
private it's also commercialized you
cannot enter the internet without sort
of and in order to get there you had to
check off cookies and you have to check
up you accept all kinds of things that
you haven't the slightest idea what you
are accepting I for for various more or
less sort of well understood commercial
interests ah this may also be a problem
going back to Hamas this would be would
say in in a later work of his he was
talking about the system world world of
system colonizing the private world
world of life for the e call it human
life um so is this actually a way of
colonizing that that we have hardly any
space left for a human being but it's
all being carmelized either bye-bye
state power or bye-bye money power okay
that's that's where I will end I don't
have so many answers but hopefully a
little bit of ideas the importance of
protecting private life and also at
least some of the issues involved yeah
and we have time for you no questions
know that there may be some sort of sort
of virtual things but also in real life
so let's just take them from front of
some anonymous speech I know some places
on the internet participate in
discussions anonymously any observations
I probably tend to be a little bit
skeptic but maybe that's because I'm
old-fashioned because I tend to think
they're okay once you're discussing then
you should be there in the open this is
the public you know you on the cafe in
your do you know and it's for you can
you know deal with your opinions arm
sort of back in the old days with with a
professional media but the journalists
etc then they had and they have special
protection so that if you want to pass
on some information or whatever to
journalists you can do that I mean of
course you have to trust the journalists
but then the journalist is protected by
law which said you'd sort of ninety-nine
percent you don't have to reveal your
sources and the thing that actually that
makes a lot of sense then discussing you
know just uploading all sorts of
opinions anonymously I tend to be very
skeptical because why do you need this
and on what's that called and
non-limiting why do you need this I mean
you're only its opinions and you know we
have at least I'm talking about on
Western world denmark you know we have
freedom of speech so unless you've you
really you know go in for it and you
know this minister should be killed i
have the devices and i'm going to
tomorrow which is illegal under Danish
line probably on the most law in the
world unless you don't want to do these
things you're actually quite free to
discuss all sorts of things so I don't
really see the need for doing it
anonymously apart from you know being
well having the liberty to to infringe
on the law and I don't really see the
point yeah I have a column of marks you
were mentioning the CPR yeah yeah I mean
the whole issue about that that is based
on the implements of the people doing
that the CPR system was never intended
to have some sort of security that was
about uniqueness so any discussion
relating to that it's not the system
it's the people they're doing it wrong
and it's just a bad excuse because they
did they're handing this wrong it's not
the system another just make a brief
remark not being very much into this you
know what whatever happened with the CPR
system but I have a slight service I'm
feeling slightly uneasy when it's kind
of it's not the system with the people
because if you have people working you
always have people working system and
nobody told them that it was that it was
supposed to be a secret and it does I
mean it's the same as saying that your
license plate on your car is a secret
how stupid is that I mean it doesn't
make sense it makes sense to people that
doesn't care or aunt Belle educated but
it doesn't make sense it's at okay let's
pretend it's a secret well things are
not a secret it wasn't secret 20 years
ago and it's definitely not a secret
today license plates of course I mean of
course I'm not secret that doesn't make
sense but there's still some issues
there I give for instance you take
photographs and in the public sphere
which you're allowed
do then if you're uploading it you may
have to go at least you consider whether
you should actually sort of blur the
license place but you know hey you know
this was actually the neighbor visiting
is it you know these kind of things so
of course it's not a secret but still
there may be a certain element of
private life which need to be protected
and this is of course you know where it
gets complicated yeah another thing
another exam is the cookie no I mean
thinking that that implementing
something called a cookie dough cookie
as a way of identifying people is like
old school you can do much better thing
we wasted so many money so many years on
something so useless as a coup below
that's just my opinion but but the last
thing I would like to talk about is that
we talk about privacy but I as I see
that the most important thing is that
have a seat at some point became a
commodity I'm paying for the convenience
the usage of the internet with my
privacy I can either do it I can and I'm
accepting that every time I visit a
website you everytime install an app I'm
saying okay I'm paying with my privacy
nobody's discussing this I mean that's
the biggest issue and if we all say it's
okay to have privacy as a commodity well
what's the problem the problem is the
Amsterdam syndrome so that that is more
of office saying that's more safe I
wouldn't like to show off stuff I don't
see that as a question of policy that's
basically say 20 years ago it was okay
to to go topless on the beach today it's
not an intro
is ok to topless again I mean in this
case I think it's it's not a pop privacy
that's someone say tomorrow I don't
think it's a I think but then I don't
actually think we exist agree that much
but my point is that if we if we sort of
commodified privacy and and I think
you're definitely a heavy points yeah
but I think the problem is that and
there's a certain paternalistic approach
here admittedly that what whatever we
accept may not be sort of for the mutual
benefit and selling off private life I
think in the end does have does imply
problems if we can whatever we are doing
on the internet I mean and we are on the
Internet can be traced and can be used
against us isn't that my personal
decision saying I'm willing to play with
that another thing I mean you can hinder
me from doing that difficult to think
I'm stupid amazing I'm try pain with my
policy that's I can also choose to good
pay the website some money and buy that
I'm relieved of commercials that are
trying what they might do etc but it's
it's a choice whether I choose to
believe on the people saying I I'm not
sitting out your movements or whatever
though your writings
yeah yep it's it's it's a it's a
relevant discussion and I tend to be a
bit more sort of on The Skeptical side I
don't think we are able to to make all
either a joke force identifies our only
defense I mean I am asking you a
question now but this is going out
youtube so this question is actually
asked for the whole world to hear my
only defense is that nobody knows I am
where yeah but that you have probably
questions that you wouldn't put maybe
not I tend to think so that there are
certain questions that you wouldn't put
in a public audience it may also be I
don't know it may also be a question of
giving a customer to it well you know it
doesn't really matter as this guy with
sexual things there they on the
front page of the guardian of what would
you have a newspaper wasn't you but then
yeah it was like okay a few years ago of
you about you is asking question isn't
congressman great would be a very sure
way to end up in prison in u.s. mm-hmm
so it can be a political discussion that
12 off yeah and and you know perhaps are
the discussions but I'm not so sure I I
don't have a definite you don't have all
the answers but I have this a certain
tendency to think that we need at least
in certain areas not to sort of be
totally transparent and how this is done
I cannot answer but I have and I think
you know for this discuss these kind of
issues I have no problem at all and
usually when people in my students you
know can we you know tape this and I
knew that my sort of elder colleagues
they would say no no no no don't take a
look you know but I'm just you know tape
it I don't
I don't I don't mind I'm a you know I
made swear and i may look stupid and it
doesn't we i don't think that really
matters but then on the other hand there
are things that I would never say in a
public audience anyway so and but I
still need to do that sometimes you know
talking about colleagues and I think
that are stupid and I wouldn't say that
in public because you know I have to
work with them and that was really you
know so they were I still think we need
this area in and we need to protect it
in one way or the other hmm ok ok yeah
mmhmm yeah oh there's a lot of kick yeah
okay one two three so could the
Icelandic Yankees oh no it was decided
night and that he couldn't any brought
it before the european commission by
then it was and they decided that it's
not i don't make sep is like it's not a
serious intrusion of the private life
you know after all he could move to
another place where he actually could be
but keep it all maybe if the icelandic
legislature had made no dogs then it
could have been another matter but this
was kind of a restricted area here you
cannot keep dogs in those apartment and
you know there are other people and they
don't want people you know if dogs
barking at night and all these kind of
things so there was this weighing of
interests and the Commission stated that
it sits well it but the main point is
that well this is relevant for private
life and then they said but then it's
very it's okay you know to make that
infringement or whatever to make that
trespassing yeah yeah also think about
children privacy is a difficult concept
to understand how to to get them to know
this before they will get to active on
the internet you know a little bit i
think just a little bit of information
when i was young in school we were
taught a little bit about traffic law
you know riding on bicycle and put out
your hand and stop and these kind of
things so that we would
be run over and maybe we were run over
but probably it helped a little bit and
I think our two miles sort of intuition
there's very little knowledge of just
big you know they just put up whatever
their without realizing so I think you
know a little bit of information that
you know maybe you should be a little
bit careful you know like like when
you're going on the streets and all of a
sudden their cars and you know the cars
are nice and they are smart but the mice
Matthew and the same thing about
internet and whatever that yes it's nice
use it of course don't don't be too
afraid but on the other hand we need to
teach our children to be a little
cautious that would be sort of my aunt's
student to that there was one up here
yeah yeah I was interested in your views
on whether the role of the state is
changing relation to this community in
the Nordic countries and in a way we
traditionally had a trust relationship
with the state it's our state and that
trust that they do good come here it
wasn't other cultures it's more person
them and it's the power again but you
see this changing here
issues on I don't think I would be the
right one to answer i think it's
difficult because I I'm also sort of
biased in the sins that I think we
should it's something to be you know
kept it's a good thing that we have a
certain amount of trust not a certain
also a little bit of skepticism but a
certain amount of trust which makes our
society function quite good you know I
can go to at least I lost my driver's
license and I went to you know to the
cumulative office and you know thanks
for done and and you know smoothly and I
think that it I think that's actually a
very good thing whether it's changing on
well difficult to say sort of in the
long run tend to think that these things
if we take care you know things are
changing but it may not sort of law the
trust much but a lot of things are
involved here and and I wouldn't be the
one to to predict I think we are out of
time okay but thank you yeah okay thank