Depersonalization and Guarded Privacy vs. Unsafe Transparency
For the public good (Lokahitham), sharing information in groups should prioritize depersonalization to protect privacy while fostering safe communication. Depersonalization means masking identifiable details to share insights without exposing personal or traceable information, aligning with principles of Priyam (pleasantness), Mityam (truthfulness), and Lakshyam (purposefulness). Conversely, personalization for individual benefit (Swahitam)—like repeatedly sharing specific personal details—can conflict with these principles and compromise privacy.
Example:
- Personalized Info (Unsafe): “I live in Bengaluru, in a glass house at Lalbagh, wearing a blue jean jacket.” This reveals traceable details, akin to sharing your Aadhar card in a group (avoid this!).
- Depersonalized Info (Safe): “A friend in an Indian city lives near a park and wears a shirt.” This masks specifics, maintaining privacy while conveying the essence.
Why Depersonalize?
Per GCC guidelines and industry standards like the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, sharing personal info risks privacy breaches and unsafe transparency. Depersonalized communication ensures guarded privacy, allowing contributions to group welfare without exposing yourself or others. For instance, using a fictional character’s masked details (e.g., a generic Aadhar example) is safe and effective. The NIST CSF emphasizes protecting sensitive data by implementing access controls and monitoring third-party interactions to mitigate risks.
Key Takeaway:
Avoid sharing traceable info about yourself or others. Depersonalization promotes security and aligns with ethical communication. It’s easy to blame group admins, but understanding and following these rules is everyone’s responsibility.
Learn more about privacy guidelines: bit.ly/3zMlXJh
References:
GRP_VCare2Dare 