The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Unpopular PrivacyWhat Must We Hide?
Abstract
Can the government stick us with privacy we don't want? It can it does, and according to this author, may need to do more of it. Privacy is a foundational good, she argues, a necessary tool in the liberty-lover's kit for a successful life.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Informational privacy guarantees peoples' freedom to think, communicate, and form relationships, among other essential human activities (Rachels 1975;Allen 2011).”
From The ethics of algorithms: key problems and solutions (2022) · cites this paper as Allen 2011
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Items 101–105 of 105
Metaphysics as Conceptual Engineering
Thomasson, A. L. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780197787830.003.0008
Gumusel, E. (2025) · Journal of Education for Library and Information Science · doi:10.3138/jelis-2023-0090
Surveillance Capitalism and the Right to Medical Privacy
Nuckols, L. (2025) · The International Library of Bioethics · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-94690-5_15
Bishwal, E. (2026) · Gender, justice and legal feminism · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-06470-7_8
Francis, L. P., & Francis, J. G. (2017) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/wentk/9780190612269.002.0003
Metadata
- Authors
- Allen, A.
- Corresponding author
- Allen, Anita
- Venue
- Oxford University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2011-11-01
- OpenAlex
- W410020276
- Cited by
- 105
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 4.78
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Law, Rights, and Freedoms
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Law and Evidence
- Social Sciences › Law › Legal Rights and Human Rights
- Keywords
- privacy, government surveillance, civil liberties, individual liberty, personal data protection
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
