69 replies to this topic

[Lord of the Sword]

ShotenStar, on 08 June 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:

People need to re-think their definitions of 'personal' and 'private' information.  'Personal' information is that which is unique to me ... my credit card numbers, my phone numbers, my address.  None of these is 'private' because they are all readily available to those who need them or who look for them.  Indeed, I need to share this Personal information on a daily basis in order to conduct my life.  That includes call routing data.   'Private' information is what I do behind closed doors or the actual words spoken during a call.  Notice that NSA is not going after that with the data mining orders.  In order to target a specific caller and collect the actual conversation, additional warrants are needed.

*star*

Sorry it's taken me so long to get back to this. Pesky RL can be a pain at times.

As for data that is used to market specifically to you, done by Big Business. It's just as creepy, IMO, as what Big Brother is doing. But at least with Big Business, their purpose is clear...to try and sell me stuff. GOD himself doesn't know what Big Brother will use the info for.

[Lord of the Sword]

Bad Wolf, on 09 June 2013 - 12:44 AM, said:

And LOTS.  Am I allowed to count out the number of civilians who died in Iraq during Bush Jr.'s tenure and then say "Bush Jr. killed "x" number of civilians?"

Huh????  Can I???????  Please???????????????????????/  

By all means, knock yourself out.

[Lord of the Sword]

If Big Brother wants to monitor my emails, the very least he could do would be to get rid off the junk emails.

[Lord of the Sword]

http://www.foxnews.c...llance-program/

It's not often I agree with the ACLU, but this is one time I do.

The government spying program clearly violates attorney/client privelege. Not to mention I'm sure it probably also violates Doctor/Patient confidenality, and probably a bunch of others as well. And yet some will claim government has the right to do this, as long as it's "used to protect us".

Ben Franklin hit the nail on the head when he said: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."


Truer words were never spoken.

[ShotenStar]

Lord of the Sword, on 11 June 2013 - 06:52 PM, said:

Sorry it's taken me so long to get back to this. Pesky RL can be a pain at times.

As for data that is used to market specifically to you, done by Big Business. It's just as creepy, IMO, as what Big Brother is doing. But at least with Big Business, their purpose is clear...to try and sell me stuff. GOD himself doesn't know what Big Brother will use the info for.

So, you're OK with Big Business charging you more than the people a few miles away because their analysis says you might be willing to pay the higher price?  Or denying you access to a product or service because of your past buying patterns / life style choices?

These small actions, done in the name of 'profit' and 'marketing', are far more damaging to you as an individual, each day and every day,  than is NSA's data analysis.

*star*

[Lord of the Sword]

ShotenStar, on 12 June 2013 - 07:37 AM, said:

So, you're OK with Big Business charging you more than the people a few miles away because their analysis says you might be willing to pay the higher price?  Or denying you access to a product or service because of your past buying patterns / life style choices?

These small actions, done in the name of 'profit' and 'marketing', are far more damaging to you as an individual, each day and every day,  than is NSA's data analysis.

*star*

I'm NOT happy with it, no. But I still have the choice of whether or not to buy what they are selling. As for denying me something...businesses deny people products at the risk of lawsuits. Big Brother OTOH can lock you up.

[ShotenStar]

Lord of the Sword, on 12 June 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

I'm NOT happy with it, no. But I still have the choice of whether or not to buy what they are selling. As for denying me something...businesses deny people products at the risk of lawsuits. Big Brother OTOH can lock you up.

You have a choice only if you know there is a choice available.  Big Business can easily conceal that from you.  No knowledge, no law suit.  And Big Brother can lock you up only with due process, i.e., a specific warrant.

*star*

[Cait]

ShotenStar, on 12 June 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

Lord of the Sword, on 12 June 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

I'm NOT happy with it, no. But I still have the choice of whether or not to buy what they are selling. As for denying me something...businesses deny people products at the risk of lawsuits. Big Brother OTOH can lock you up.

You have a choice only if you know there is a choice available.  Big Business can easily conceal that from you.  No knowledge, no law suit.  And Big Brother can lock you up only with due process, i.e., a specific warrant.

*star*

Actually that is no longer true.  Big Brother can render you, lock you up, and throw away the key with the Patriot Act.  Sure, they "say" only enemy combatants would be treated thus, but it's all done under the cloak of secrecy, how do we "really" know what they are doing and to whom?  There is no due process under the Patriot Act.  That's actually the whole point of the Patriot Act, to subvert Due Process.  To think anything else, to argue anything, else is absurd.  

It doesn't matter how benevolent and righteous we like to believe our leaders are, the act actually gives our leaders the cover of legality to suspend due process and do it in secret.  Does anyone really [and I mean really] believe that the same danger doesn't exist with all this surveillance?  Because if you trust leaders with this much power unconditionally, just because the law reads that they must target only bad guys, I got some beach front property in Arizona I'd like to sell you.  The definition of bad guy changes politically way too fast for me to trust any politician with this kind of power.  At least I'm not going to be OK with a law that let's them do it legally. [and I'm not saying that any of them would not stoop to doing it illegally, but let's at least not give them the cover of legality.

And, just to be clear, as I said up thread, I do think Big Corporations are just as bad.  But not because they market to us.  I think they are just as bad as the government because they own the government.  They run it with lobbyists and big money to political campaigns.  Big Corporations and their marketing methods aren't the problem.  Big Corporations, and their data mining, and their collusion with the government, bother me a whole lot more.

​I find splitting hairs over whether a D or a R is worse in government, to be the same as splitting hairs over who is worse; Big Industry or the Government.   The government is the arm of force for Big Corporations.  We fight and have fought wars for Big Industry.  We die for corporations, and the leaders have no comp[unction at all doing so.  They have been in bed together since the beginning of the Republic and long before.  Splitting this hair in particular just doesn't seem relevant to me. [That's not to say that it's not relevant to others.  It's just not relevant to me because in the end,  it is all the same players in my mind.

But for our purposes here, the government is the entity we as people should deal with when it comes to a surveillance state.  If we reign in the government [and believe me I don't really believe that is possible any more] then we can get laws to reign in Industry.  It's never going to happen any other way.  And, like I said, I doubt there is a chance in hell of making a difference in any of this any longer.  The world is just too interconnected now and money buys elections.

[Bad Wolf]

^  It's not hair splitting, at least not at the national level.  Put the platforms side by side.  That's not a hair.  That's a chasm.

[Cait]

Bad Wolf, on 12 June 2013 - 02:21 PM, said:

^  It's not hair splitting, at least not at the national level.  Put the platforms side by side.  That's not a hair.  That's a chasm.

Oh, I should have made myself clear.  I think it is splitting hairs when talking about who is better or worse between the parties when it comes to the surveillance state.  I know there are differences politically and between platforms.  I just don't think there is much of a difference between a Republican spying on us and a Democrat spying on us.  Sorry for any confusions.

[Cait]

Just to prove I actually have a sense of humor on this topic ----- sometimes!

Attached Files

•  995691_10151637592628010_1851605081_n.jpg   48.6K   3 downloads

[Bad Wolf]

I'd rather have Hillary reading my emails than Rice.

[Cait]

Bad Wolf, on 12 June 2013 - 07:16 PM, said:

I'd rather have Hillary reading my emails than Rice.

LOL me too.  Guess that's one way to pick a leader.

[Lord of the Sword]

ShotenStar, on 12 June 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

Lord of the Sword, on 12 June 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

I'm NOT happy with it, no. But I still have the choice of whether or not to buy what they are selling. As for denying me something...businesses deny people products at the risk of lawsuits. Big Brother OTOH can lock you up.

You have a choice only if you know there is a choice available.  Big Business can easily conceal that from you.  No knowledge, no law suit.  And Big Brother can lock you up only with due process, i.e., a specific warrant.

*star*

Good point about Big Business concealing that knowledge. Cait already beat me to it with how the Patriot Act allows rendition of anyone, without due process or warrants.

[BklnScott]

OMG, he's one of us (one of us, one of us).  Snowden posted for years to the ArsTechnica message board under the name "TheTrueHOOHA" (uh-hem), is an autodidact, a gifted gamer, and knows what to make of an Odo reference when he hears it.  

About that board: http://web.archive.o...a.com/about-us/

And a link to a relevant sampling of his posts there: http://soupsoup.net/...ca-posts/

Note that the first post at the link actually mentions the NSA - and conveys Snowden's attitude about the organization (in December 2001) by invoking a genre idiom -- specifically, from the fascist satire Robocop.  

Quote

NSA's new surveillance program.

That's the sound of freedom, citizen!

There's more at the last link above.  A lot more.  

I always knew that message board people would destroy and/or save the world!  (Depending on your view.)

Discuss!

ETA: And here's the ArsTechnica thread about Snowden: http://arstechnica.c...?f=23&t=1208297

The OP in the thread reads: "I remember that guy.  He was kind of a d*ck."  

ETA2: A summary of his posting history by ArsTechnica's staff: http://arstechnica.c...n-ars-technica/

Edited by BklnScott, 13 June 2013 - 08:26 PM.

[Lin731]

I was talking to my daughter about all this back when the Patriot Act passed...aka...BAD, overreaching, easily abused legislation and it has been all that and more. It needs repealing. I don't care what letter is in front of the Presidents name, it's an invasion of privacy and abuse of power that can lead down a very dark road.

[Cait]

Courtesy of George Takai on FB.  Yes, I am trying to use humor to accept this whole mess.  Why?  Because the one time normal paradigms just don't apply here.  Usually, in theory at least, if we don't like what an Administration is doing, we vote the bums out.  But, this situations isn't likely to change with a new guy in charge. There is no one to vote out and get this changed or stopped, and I don't care what the partisans say.  Oh, they will try to paint the challengers in a way to lead us to believe it will be fixed, but it never will.  Congress just re-authorized indefinite detention for crying out loud.  It's a Republican Congress.  Political Party makes no difference on this topic.  think about that for a minute!

I don't like to invoke Godwin's Law.  I really don't.  But, any student of history can tell you that the rights of the German people did not disappear overnight with the initial election of Hitler.  It happened over time, even if by today's standards it was a short amount of time.  We OK rendition.  We trust that the only people rendered are "bad" guys, but we all know the definition of bad guy varies from year to year.  But, we gave them the power to do this.  We now have a non-stop surveillance state.  We trust that only suspects will be surveilled, but the definition of a suspect, like an enemy, can change all too frequently.  But, we allow this to take place.

Invoking Godwin's law doesn't mean I am saying Obama is like Hitler.  What I am saying is it is the slipperiest of slopes, and I said so back during the Bush administration.  And, here we are.  Even most of the upset is childish.  It's legal.  If the President does it, it's legal.  We can rant and rave all we want [and I certainly want to], but it is all legal.  We allowed the Patriot Act to be passed.  We allowed the permanent re-authorization.  It is law folks.  Do you know a single politician who is against the Patriot Act?  Why would they hate it?  It allows them to do whatever the like under the cloak of legality.  And, I don't believe we the people will have any effect in getting this changed.  No politician, and certainly no political party will ever give up the powers we gave them, and no election of new politicians will ever get our freedom back. [imo]

Attached Files

•  1002960_682373798458743_1694330522_n.jpg   30.27K   0 downloads

[Balderdash]

Quote

Invoking Godwin's law doesn't mean I am saying Obama is like Hitler.  What I am saying is it is the slipperiest of slopes, and I said so back during the Bush administration.  And, here we are.  Even most of the upset is childish.  It's legal.  If the President does it, it's legal.  We can rant and rave all we want [and I certainly want to], but it is all legal.  We allowed the Patriot Act to be passed.  We allowed the permanent re-authorization.  It is law folks.  Do you know a single politician who is against the Patriot Act?  Why would they hate it?  It allows them to do whatever the like under the cloak of legality.  And, I don't believe we the people will have any effect in getting this changed.  No politician, and certainly no political party will ever give up the powers we gave them, and no election of new politicians will ever get our freedom back. [imo]

This is exactly right.  Starting on September 12, 2001 our Government began the job of making us afraid of our own shadows.  Anyone of a certain
color, religion is automatically suspect and we don't want their Mosque's in our neighborhoods.  The panic, fear, bigotry, torture and racism is ok
because we're fighting a war against a tactic.  No politician wants to be on watch when  and if there is another "terror" attack.  9/11 happened
despite the bread crumbs being left and now we have the Patriot Act.  Instead of a steady hand at the helm after a truly scary event, we all, including
our leaders ran screaming into the night waving our hands in the air.  No politician wants to be on watch for the next event.  The terrorists did win
because we are not the same, we allowed them to change us.

[offworlder]

update - Snowden
BBC world news
http://www.bbc.co.uk...europe-23021237

he's landed in Mosva, helped by gov and by Equador embassy, on his way again, possibly to Cuba, then possibly to Venezuela, then try for home assylum in Equador

my idea on this guy, he wants to be a somebody, he wants a visible profile, didn't want to be a hidden paeon trudging away in ones and zeroes, digits and data only, wanted to become, a figure wannabe - so now he's on the run, and not only find a home, but find a celebrity in a safe home, where he can continue to 'bring it', to Make it Happen - but that's only my take on't

BBC are replaying video, recorded earlier, the Guardian camera interview, the airport vids, the airport reporters et al

more pastes-in laterz

add- http://www.usatoday....g-kong/2449879/

http://www.cnn.com/2...itics/nsa-leaks
' In a statement Sunday, Justice Department spokeswoman Nanda Chitre said Hong Kong authorities had informed U.S. officials of Snowden's departure.
"We will continue to discuss this matter with Hong Kong and pursue relevant law enforcement cooperation with other countries where Mr. Snowden may be attempting to travel," she said.
The U.S. government had also asked Hong Kong to issue a provisional arrest warrant for Snowden, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region said in a statement. But HKSAR officials said there were problems with the request.
"Since the documents provided by the U.S. government did not fully comply with the legal requirements under Hong Kong law, the HKSAR government has requested the U.S. government to provide additional information," Hong Kong officials said.
Because Hong Kong didn't have enough information, "there is no legal basis to restrict Mr. Snowden from leaving Hong Kong," the government said.
A Justice Department official said Sunday that the United States had met requirements with its request, disputing the assertion from authorities in Hong Kong.
"They came back to us with a few questions late Friday and we were in the process of answering those questions," the official said. "We believe we were meeting those requirements. As far as the relationship with Hong Kong goes, this raises questions and we will continue to discuss with authorities there."
Hong Kong's lack of intervention came after Snowden told the South China Morning Post that U.S. intelligence agents have been hacking computer networks in Hong Kong and mainland China for years.
'

IS This getting as good as the OJ highway drive with the cop convoy?

NOW US Is warning Russia, and applying for Cuba, Venezuela, and oh hell just the whole world to NOT Let this Man into their countries, apprehend at
airport or not even let the plane hook up to the gate? sheesh
http://www.guardian....liticians-react

Edited by offworlder, 23 June 2013 - 02:51 PM.

[offworlder]

and here's more on the issue, including the irony, 'espionage' on the espionagers?
huh? [ Guardian opine columnist on security and liberty]
(do let me underline a couple words)

' The essence of that extremely broad, century-old law is that one is guilty if one discloses classified information "with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation". Please read this rather good summary in this morning's New York Times of the worldwide debate Snowden has enabled - how these disclosures have "set off a national debate over the proper limits of government surveillance" and "opened an unprecedented window on the details of surveillance by the NSA, including its compilation of logs of virtually all telephone calls in the United States and its collection of e-mails of foreigners from the major American Internet companies, including Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Apple and Skype" - and ask yourself: has Snowden actually does anything to bring "injury to the United States", or has he performed an immense public service?

The irony is obvious: the same people who are building a ubiquitous surveillance system to spy on everyone in the world, including their own citizens, are now accusing the person who exposed it of "espionage". It seems clear that the people who are actually bringing "injury to the United States" are those who are waging war on basic tenets of transparency and secretly constructing a mass and often illegal and unconstitutional surveillance apparatus aimed at American citizens - and those who are lying to the American people and its Congress about what they're doing - rather than those who are devoted to informing the American people that this is being done.

The Obama administration leaks classified information continuously. They do it to glorify the President, or manipulate public opinion, or even to help produce a pre-election propaganda film about the Osama bin Laden raid. The Obama administration does not hate unauthorized leaks of classified information. They are more responsible for such leaks than anyone.
'
http://www.guardian....pionage-charges