In the year since Snowden's revelations ...
Displaying poll results.15684 total votes.
Most Votes
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on February 28th, 2024 | 8479 votes
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 7373 votes
Most Comments
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 68 comments
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 20 comments
secure by default (Score:4, Insightful)
Snowden's revelations are old news. We knew this stuff was going on in the mid-90's.
Does it really matter? (Score:5, Insightful)
Anything I do on a network connected device is vulnerable to the NSA or other alphabet soup in some way. At the very least, the data is. As we have seen there is no real expectation of privacy; these guys are too deeply connected to everything that happens, they have too much data, and they sure as hell have enough smarts and computing power to decrypt whatever they want.
I still use cash when possible, when given the choice I use very long keys, anything important is encrypted, but to be realistic if "da gub'mint" wants to get me there's little I can do. Heck, unplugging entirely and living in an isolated cabin out in the far reaches of Alaska probably means I'm automatically labeled a terrorist which would draw even more attention. And if for some reason someone wants to create false records, who is to stop them? They will wave their "state secret" flag around and you won't even be able to question them.
So, realistically, there's not much one can do. Big Brother won. There's no way it will ever go away, either. Even if they say they will stop, or that they cannot defeat X, will you really believe them?
Re:secure by default (Score:3, Insightful)
Snowden's revelations are old news. We knew this stuff was going on in the mid-90's.
No, we didn't. Snowden's revelations have been a real eye-opener.
Re:secure by default (Score:5, Insightful)
You are right. Before Snowden, no one "knew" it was happening because there was no proof. Yes, many suspected it, and were probably accused of propagating conspiracy theories, but the proof was finally given with Snowden.
Although I am disappointed in the leaks regarding foreign nations. That IS NSA's mandate and they are supposed to spy on foreign nations (yes, both friendly and not friendly). That didn't have any business being leaked...but I realize journalists will release everything he gave, not just what is good for US citizens to know about.
Re:secure by default (Score:5, Insightful)
Although I am disappointed in the leaks regarding foreign nations.
You're disappointed that not everyone thinks foreigners are unpeople who have no rights. I'm disappointed that you're disappointed.
Re:It's not what's happening now. (Score:3, Insightful)
There is no safeguard that will stop them from abusing the data if they have it. You can't possibly keep this government and all future governments under control.
Not to mention, just them collecting the data violates fundamental privacy rights and the constitution, so that alone is unacceptable. You should be worried.
Re:secure by default (Score:5, Insightful)
I certainly don't consider myself a "scandal addict", and most of the manufactured "scandals" (Fast and Furious, Benghazi, Solyndra, IRS/Tea Party, etc., etc.), are indeed just throwing something at the wall and hoping it sticks.
This is not the same. This is collection of massive amounts of data on citizens who are under no suspicion of wrongdoing, let alone enough to get a warrant. That needs to be addressed, and it needs to be addressed in a similar way as wiretapping, where a warrant based upon individualized evidence of wrongdoing is required and the data collection is done so as to minimize the collection of data not related to the purpose of the warrant.
So, you're right about the majority of the "scandals". But not this one. This one is a serious problem. It's not the fault of any given administration, but it needs to stop with this one. I wish people would drop the idiotic faux-scandals and concentrate on this.
Re:secure by default (Score:4, Insightful)
She was every bit as bad and deserves no more credit than they do.
Re:secure by default (Score:5, Insightful)
You're mistaken. I am well aware that these scumbags think no one has any rights, and it's people like you who cheer them on. Innocent people in foreign countries also have inalienable rights, and shouldn't be spied on.
I don't give a fuck what the NSA's mission is, or how many countries conduct these immoral activities; it's immoral. The end.
Re:secure by default (Score:5, Insightful)
Get real. It's a nasty world out there. If all that ever happens to you is someone eavesdrops on your private conversation count yourself lucky.
"X is worse than Y, so you should just stop criticizing Y. Worse things exist! Get over it, whiner!" Not a particularly logical response to a real problem that impacts people's fundamental liberties. Or any problem, really. I'm not going to count myself "lucky" when a real problem like this exists.
And besides, I'm not sure you want to downplay the significance of the government being able to selectively oppress anyone who angers them with their massive amount of information. A police state would love this, and people who pretend that the government is full of perfect angels only inch us farther and farther away from being "the land of the free and the home of the brave."
With all the injustices in the world someone spying on me ranks about number 18,038,047. There's too much really bad shit going on for ranting over this crap.
Right. So let's just drop everything and tackle world hunger.
We can tackle more than one problem at once. Furthermore, ignoring actual problems and letting scumbags get away with their injustices just makes you part of the problem.
Re:secure by default (Score:5, Insightful)
2. There are international agreements about human rights that the USA did sign. It's really bad that people like you pay your taxes expecting your government to break these agreements and think that's their job.
3. It's a very Nazi position to think it's OK to do to others everything you don't want on yourself or your equals.
4. There is a big difference between spying foreign nations and spying on actual security threats. If there is a threat on a foreign nation, go spy those specific targets. If there is no threat to your security, don't do it for the sole purpose of disrespecting people's rights, laws, constitutions, sovereignty, etc. just because they're not Americans (isn't it a Security Agency?).
I keep telling people there are many decent Americans (my best friend is American so it's hard on me when people generalize) and that we can't treat them like they are all your type of people, but it's really hard to make that point when we see this kind of speech.
FYI, I'm from Brazil, a country that hasn't been in wars for 200 years, that states in its constitution that we'll not have nuclear weapons, that did suffer from an US implanted dictatorship and never did retaliate. Also a country that, just like the USA, did sign the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Our people doesn't expect our government to disrespect other country's laws or people. That's not being awesome, it's just having morals and not being Nazi.
Re:secure by default (Score:3, Insightful)
You're an idiot. This is a blatant violation of the highest law of the land, and our fundamental rights. They can use this information to harass anyone questions the status quo (like MLK, who was spied on) and find ways to destroy them. Yet, this obvious move towards a police state doesn't bother you. And don't say it does, because if it actually did, you wouldn't be trying so desperately to downplay the issue as if it's nothing.
The mass violation fundamental liberties and our constitution is one of the biggest problems of today.
Re:secure by default (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:secure by default (Score:2, Insightful)
Get real. It's a nasty world out there. If all that ever happens to you is someone eavesdrops on your private conversation count yourself lucky. I don't much like it either but your reaction is way over the top. With all the injustices in the world someone spying on me ranks about number 18,038,047. There's too much really bad shit going on for ranting over this crap.
Except that the really bad shit happens after they eavesdropped on you. The whole eavesdropping is not self-serving but is done for the purpose of making bad shit happen.
Re:secure by default (Score:4, Insightful)
It must be nice to be so idealistic.
Like "the land of the free and the home of the brave" is supposed to be? That's not an insult.
There's nothing immoral about it.
I think it's quite immoral to haphazardly spy on innocent people, wherever they may live.
Re:secure by default (Score:4, Insightful)
You're the moron. To play this issue as the be all and end all of importance.
It's one of the biggest issues we face today. As I said, any police state would love to have these capabilities, and this just moves us significantly further in that direction.
There is no guarantee of privacy in the US Constitution.
You've finally revealed your true colors: Someone who doesn't understand the constitution, or care about it. Read the fourth amendment. It doesn't take a genius to realize the NSA's activities are a blatant violation of the spirit of the constitution, which is something we refer to time and time again as times change.
If you say, "Well, the constitution doesn't explicitly mention it!" then you've missed the entire point of the constitution, and the principles of this country. It definitely doesn't give the government the power to spy on nearly everyone's communications.
Get a grip.
No, you get a grip. You're setting up all these false dichotomies and pretending as if we have to ignore blatant violations of the constitution and our freedoms simply because you think that the mass violation of the highest law in the US and our individual liberties is no big deal, and that there are bigger things that are happening.
Multiple times now you've tried to downplay this significant issue, and at the same time, you pretend that you want to live in a free country. It does not seem that way.
Re:secure by default (Score:5, Insightful)
They collect metadata, times of calls numbers etc.
They could just as easily collect the actual data. Why is the metadata any more private? Furthermore, metadata *is just data*; it can't be anything else.
They shouldn't be collecting a damn thing. We kill people based on "metadata." Metadata could have been used against the founding fathers, and to find Paul Revere. This mass surveillance is a tool for oppression, and nothing more. Metadata matters. [eff.org]
So while they're supposedly not listening in on everyone's calls, what they're doing is just as evil.
(that's where it starts to get sticky with the broad leeway a government can and will allow itself to monitor a conversation - aka a slippery slope)
Nope. The mere collection of this so-called "metadata" is a violation of the constitution and people's individual rights. That's where it gets sticky.