Big Brother is Watching You

[O Really]

This is fun...ought to make you think the NSA is pretty tame with their "intrusion" ...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamtanner/ ... picks=true

[Ombudsman]

...ought to make you think the NSA is pretty tame with their "intrusion" ...e

Only for people who comprehend it.

[Bungalow Bill]

When I was a kid, nobody wore bicycle helmets. If somebody had showed up
wearing one, they would have been ragged mercilessly. After supper in the
Spring and Summer we'd get on our bikes and go somewhere and then get
home just before dark. There was one part of the street that was pretty
straight and everyone in the neighborhood would come out and play baseball
until a car came down the road, then everyone moved to the side and when it
passed, it was back to playing ball.

[Ombudsman]

When I was a kid, nobody wore bicycle helmets. If somebody had showed up
wearing one, they would have been ragged mercilessly. After supper in the
Spring and Summer we'd get on our bikes and go somewhere and then get
home just before dark. There was one part of the street that was pretty
straight and everyone in the neighborhood would come out and play baseball
until a car came down the road, then everyone moved to the side and when it
passed, it was back to playing ball.

Well that's probably before the existence of really scary things like license plates.

[Ombudsman]

When the sky began to fall the NSA recorded it in 1080P but it was hacked by Anonymous and posted on youtube but Vrede was too busy smoking peyote and farting rainbows to notice...until it was reported three years later by a hipster on Alternet at which point she found a forum where she could show her outrage ad nauseum.

[Bungalow Bill]

License plates and maybe a small rock in the road. Oh no.

[Ombudsman]

Lions and tigers and national security...oh my!

[O Really]

So Snowden, noble protester of intrusive government, appears to have settled in Russia - not exactly in asylum, but out of the airport. Maybe while he's there, he can get some experience in what actual "intrusive government" is like...

(Not that this is current news, but recent...)
The Kremlin Takes Action against Political Activists
During the summer of 2012, the government began cracking down against political activists in new ways. Two new laws were signed by Putin. One law gave the government the power to shut down websites that have content which could be harmful to children. The other law increased penalties for libel. In July 2012, the Investigative Committee began criminal cases against Aleksei Navalny, an anticorruption blogger, and Gennady Gudkov, a lawmaker. Navalny, a leader of the anti-Putin protest movement which began in Dec. 2011, was found guilty of embezzlement and faced five to 10 years in prison.

Also in July 2012, three members of a Russian punk band called Pussy Riot were arrested and put on trial for hooliganism after they performed an anti-Putin song on the altar of Moscow's main Orthodox cathedral. During one of the most high-profile trials that Russia's had in years, the band members said their demonstration was political, not an attack on Orthodox Christians. The three female band members could face seven years in prison if convicted. In early Aug. 2012, during a sold-out concert in Moscow, Madonna voiced her support for the three women. "I know there are many sides to every story, and I mean no disrespect to the church or the government. But I think that these three girls — Masha, Katya, Nadya — I think they have done something courageous. I think they have paid the price for this act. And I pray for their freedom."

On Aug. 17, 2012, Masha, Katya, and Nadya, the three members of Pussy Riot, were convicted of hooliganism and sentenced to two years in a penal colony. At the sentencing, activists outside of the courthouse began to protest, chanting "Free Pussy Riot!" Police arrested dozens of protestors. Rallies supporting the three women were held in cities around the world, including London, New York and Paris. Immediately following the verdict, the United States, other governments, and human rights groups criticized the decision, calling the sentence severe. The women's lawyers said they would appeal the decision.

[bannination]

Feds put heat on Web firms for master encryption keys

Because those are going to be so useful for catching terrorists, I mean tracking Americans.

[O Really]

Feds put heat on Web firms for master encryption keys

Because those are going to be so useful for catching terrorists, I mean tracking Americans.

So what do you expect them to do with those Americans they tracked?

[bannination]

Feds put heat on Web firms for master encryption keys

Because those are going to be so useful for catching terrorists, I mean tracking Americans.

So what do you expect them to do with those Americans they tracked?

Who knows, depends what our government turns into in the future.

[bannination]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57595 ... passwords/

The government wants our passwords as well.

[O Really]

Feds put heat on Web firms for master encryption keys

Because those are going to be so useful for catching terrorists, I mean tracking Americans.

So what do you expect them to do with those Americans they tracked?

Who knows, depends what our government turns into in the future.

Not good enough. I wouldn't have thought you'd get caught in the generic-for-no-specific-reason fear of, ummmm, whatever.

[bannination]

Feds put heat on Web firms for master encryption keys

Because those are going to be so useful for catching terrorists, I mean tracking Americans.

So what do you expect them to do with those Americans they tracked?

Who knows, depends what our government turns into in the future.

Not good enough. I wouldn't have thought you'd get caught in the generic-for-no-specific-reason fear of, ummmm, whatever.

Well I think *not* knowing is the reason for the data collecting is enough. There is no use in getting SSL keys for tracking non-terrorists, you think they trust SSL certs from major corporations? No way, not when it's crazy easy to self sign your own certs anyway.

Do you think the drafters of the 4th knew every intention they were trying to prevent? Nope, they were catching the cases they could *not* think of.

[O Really]

Do you think the drafters of the 4th knew every intention they were trying to prevent? Nope, they were catching the cases they could *not* think of.

Some would argue that the 4th was drafted to address a particular, specific, and known issue, that of abusive use of the writ of assistance. Those would also argue that the emphasis in Fourth Amendment cases on privacy is relatively recent. Not that that matters to me - I'm one of those who cares more about what the law actually is, as defined by the Supreme Court, than what somebody else might or might not have thought about 200 years ago in entirely different time and circumstances.

But hammering on NSA for what they "might" do is like hammering on your server because she "might" bring you bad food. The real "cook" here is PATRIOT and for most, that's getting lost in the NSA red herring.

[bannination]

Do you think the drafters of the 4th knew every intention they were trying to prevent? Nope, they were catching the cases they could *not* think of.

Some would argue that the 4th was drafted to address a particular, specific, and known issue, that of abusive use of the writ of assistance. Those would also argue that the emphasis in Fourth Amendment cases on privacy is relatively recent. Not that that matters to me - I'm one of those who cares more about what the law actually is, as defined by the Supreme Court, than what somebody else might or might not have thought about 200 years ago in entirely different time and circumstances.

But hammering on NSA for what they "might" do is like hammering on your server because she "might" bring you bad food. The real "cook" here is PATRIOT and for most, that's getting lost in the NSA red herring.

What it might do should be a concern for the future, what it *is* doing is a concern for everyone right now. Why does the government need to read every single bit of my data? They need a warrant to enter my house, why shouldn't they have to have a warrant to read my every day encrypted data? Granted I don't trust any certificates authorized by a third party and the government could not actually read my encrypted data, but that's pretty much the point, they're going after "average Joes", not terrorists. (... not saying I'm a terrorist, I see how that read.....).

I see this as a potential means to go after copyright violators, file sharing, etc on behest of large corporations that seem to be the ones actually running the show.

I see your point, there are no obvious large abuses that we know about, and that law is very much reactive rather than proactive. This is one instance that the population can prevent abuses from happening in the first place, especially since it's so obviously going to be abused. You're certainly right about the Patriot Act not getting the coverage by the media that it should be getting.

I know we are beating a dead horse, but what would it take to convince you? At what level would it finally become unacceptable for you?

[O Really]

I know we are beating a dead horse, but what would it take to convince you? At what level would it finally become unacceptable for you?

OK, in a gross oversimplification and understanding that others theoretically more knowledgeable than I disagree with fundamental terms - here's the short version.

I don't personally believe that information about data that I use some corporations's system or website to toss out into what used to be called "cyberspace", that is viewable by hundreds of people and places in servers all over the world is exactly individually "private." So I don't have a problem if the NSA looks collectively at everybody's data to look for patterns or whatever. If they find suspicious patterns, I don't have a problem with them passing the data along to some law enforcement for further investigation.

On the other hand, instead of collective analysis of data, they picked a specific name and looked without reason into their records, I would find that objectionable. Not as objectionable as hacking into a computer for files that had not been sent anywhere, however.

Summary: data that is collected and held by a corporation, made up of information I've knowingly tossed out to the cyberworld, and analyzed collectively doesn't bother me. Data collected about me personally, and made up of information I've made a reasonable effort to keep private does. If the paper is in my desk in my house, you can't look at it. If it's in the garbage bag on the street, have at it.

[bannination]

Lawmakers Who Upheld NSA Phone Spying Received Double the Defense Industry Cash

[O Really]

Here's a new one: Feds close access to Blue Ridge Parkway crack. http://www.citizen-times.com/article/20 ... ed-viewing

What are they hiding? What don't they want us to know?

[bannination]

Google Engineer Wins NSA Award, Then Says NSA Should Be “Abolished”