Good point, but even if the loss of privacy was symmetrical, it would still be a problem. Somewhat smaller problem, perhaps, but still a very serious problem.<p>In a world without privacy, the only things you could do&#x2F;say&#x2F;write would be the things that would offend nobody. You could not drink alcohol, since that would offend the teetotalers. You could not fly somewhere on vacation, since that would offend the environmentalists. You could not watch pornography or hire prostitutes since that would offend some feminists or religious conservatives. You could not eat meat, since that would offend vegans. You could not drive fast since that would offend those obsessed with safety. You could not make much money, since that would offend the socialists. You could not eat potato chips or drink soda since that would offend the health nuts. Etc. Etc. Etc.<p>Because, if you offend someone, that person will like you less and punish you in various ways. Not hire you for a job, not rent you an apartment, not invite you to a party, not cooperate if you&#x27;re a co-worker, not have sex with you, not do you a favor, not do business with you, not greet you, not open the door for you when you have your hands full of groceries, not hold the elevator when they see you coming etc. etc. etc.<p>A world without privacy, even if that lack of privacy was totally symmetrical, and you could observe everything the government did, would be a world where you could not do&#x2F;say&#x2F;write a whole lot.