Because it's easier to store all the data now, and only access and analyze it when traditional investigative techniques identify a potential threat. It also eliminates the time wasted once a potential threat is identified going back and trying to reconstruct/recover/access data from many different sources. In other words, it saves time and resources; A counter-intuitive conclusion, given that most people look only at the costs and implications of gathering and storing all that data, but not very much on what happens after.

I'd prefer a world where people were only arrested when they've actually committed a crime, or there's strong evidence that they intend to. Mere capability is not sufficient to justify an arrest. At best, a knock on the door and "Can we come in and ask a few questions?" At best.

Actually, it isn't. There is no right to privacy in the US Constitution. And as far as the EU; They are a sovereign foreign power. The NSA has not just the mandate, but an obligation, to monitor foreign threats; Allies can become enemies, and when surveillance is pervasive and shared, it keeps everyone a bit more honest. And when it comes to international politics... dishonesty and rhetoric are pretty much the order of the day for everyone, allies or enemies.

There was an article not very long ago about a book published by someone who spent a considerable period of time investigating the culture of the NSA. His takeaway was that they do respect the Constitution. They also want to ensure as few Americans as possible become a part of some terrorist's political statement. Balancing these two goals is not so easy or cut and dry as internet pundits say.

Actually, I do. I am not overly concerned with the NSA reading my e-mail or even keeping a file on me. It will not adversely impact my life in any meaningful way. As long as it continues to not affect me, surveil away. I am far, far more concerned with commercial interests accessing and misusing my data; There is little legal recourse to such activities, and it is readily apparent to me that no matter how unethical people claim the NSA to be, corporations are several orders of magnitude worse in almost every measure.

But unlike the NSA, I believe we can, with the budget and resources available to the average person, mount effective defenses against those corporations. And I would rather people start taking the threat corporations pose seriously, instead of pointing to the NSA like (a) they're the biggest problem and/or (b) we can honestly hope to accomplish anything against them.

Ultimately, it's a question of practicality. I simply don't believe that I can defend against an organization with half a trillion dollars in assets and an operating budget bigger than that of the majority of the countries on the planet. But by happy coincidence, I do not feel they are a threat to me in any meaningful way.

Neither of which you'd necessarily be informed of. There's two ways to approach security; tamper-evident, and tamper-resistant. Everyone is focusing on tamper-resistant right now to deal with the NSA; "How do we stop them?" ... Have you noticed nobody is asking the question; How do we detect them? Sneakernet also had the benefit of being tamper-evident... if they broke down your door, you'd come home to a broken door. It'd be pretty obvious that something was up. Legal or illegal, when you physically search a property, you leave evidence behind that you did so. However, much of the technology the NSA is using doesn't leave any proverbial fingerprints behind.

This begs the question of why someone would want to get alternative viewpoints. Most people don't want to be regularly exposed to ideas, beliefs, culture, etc., that conflicts with their own. It creates anxiety, anger, and/or dissociation. The begged question, by the way, is also a rhetorical question. But it doesn't change human nature, and we are talking about Facebook here.

The "social network" is not simply a conduit for human virtues -- it is equally a conduit for human failures. And let's be honest with ourselves -- critical thinking is hard work. Even (perhaps especially) amongst the highly literate and/or intelligent, who are practiced at overcoming their own biases to keep an open mind, must still be deliberate and cautious.

On that note, for those who so desire to find alternative viewpoints social networks provide plenty of opportunity. Many of my friends and I debate on Facebook, each playing devil's advocate to the other in a semi-public venue. I have also found, painfully, that if one wishes to test how tolerant their friends truly are... post something unpopular and defend it. The results are both illuminating, and occasionally warrant making popcorn to witness the explosively violent ways in which people react to opposing views.

You steal the Rolls-Royce. Hundreds of millions of computers right now are part of one kind of botnet or another because botnets offer everything the poster is looking for. There are websites out there where you can purchase the resources of the botnet for cheap; Just gotta know where to look. As a bonus, they also offer a degree of anonymity and resistance to the kind of tracking the author is apparently worried about. If you want to be resistant to a search and seizure by a government, I can think of few things better than a massively decentralized, worldwide network with millions of potential servers to shift your data around within.

Excuse me... I didn't say just roll over and take it. But trying to solve a social problem like this with technology is the very height of stupidity. It's like saying if we take away everyone's guns, we'll solve that pesky violence problem. The gun is just the tool. Just like the internet. Just like a cell phone, a camera, a packet sniffer, a data center... all of these things that the NSA uses are not the problem! It's the people that are the problem, and the people alone.

People problems can only be solved by people. I know that seems like a stupidly obvious thing to say, but it's clear to me that when article after article posted is variations of the question "What technology can I use to stop the NSA from spying on me?" There isn't any! You stop the NSA by getting off your ass and participating in the democratic process. You cannot fix this by keyboard warrioring.

Really? The Japanese government has elevated revisionist history to an art form. Many school children have no idea why China has a problem with them, for example, because their textbooks don't include anything that Japan has done wrong. Like, for example, the Nanking Massacre. Which goes back to my original point about their culture: They are really hard up about admitting failure. Remember, it took not one, but two nuclear attacks before the Emperor surrendered.

I could continue with more examples, but I think just one is sufficient to drive home my point; This abstract concept of "honor" you're on about the Japanese having more of is something we could argue back and forth about until the cows come home; It's the perfect shifting goal-post argument.

Really? The entire government? You can speak authoritatively on the 96 or so million people that work for it and can confirm beyond any doubt that all of them view "the constitution as an obstruction, not an ideal"?

Really? Fun fact: The Germans killed about 6 million jews, and 20 million Russians. The Japanese have them beat though: They killed at least 23 million chinese during the war, and another seven million from nearby Malasia, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc. Go ahead and explain how that was "true to the principle of self defence and peace". I'll get the popcorn!

No, they're prevented by a treaty they signed as part of the terms of their surrender after we nuked their asses. Twice. That treaty is still in force, but it has expanded to a mutual defense treaty. In exchange for the protection of the United States military, the Japanese have given up the right to have their own army.

The US Constitution has been amended 27 times so far. It was intended to be a living document; and the precise meaning and application of a document which is over two hundred years old is one of the major functions of the Supreme Court. And don't think for a New York second that other countries don't have their own secret courts. Secret courts are a part of every major government's history.

Really? Because just today the Japanese PM stepped up the rhetoric, telling citizens that China is a major threat and they should be vigilant against it. They have also recently approved a treaty of shooting down any drones that enter its airspace... and recently civil defense forces were called to clear out citizens threatening to turn violent amidst rising chinese-japanese tensions regarding ownership of some of the Senkaku Islands.

I have gotten incredibly sick of the tin foil hat brigade putting the NSA into every one of their conspiracy theories, and equally tired of the idiot replacement editors from Dice rubber-stamping submissions like this that even most bloggers wouldn't post. You wanna talk about hosting providers? Okay, let's talk. Obviously you are concerned about your data being intercepted and stolen.

Do you guys honestly think, for one second, that you can hide from these guys if they really want you? Any of you? This is the largest, most powerful government on the planet, with resources you could only dream of. Even businesses the size of Google can't keep them out; And if you believe any press releases to the contrary, you're an idiot.

The only way you're keeping your data safe is in a physically secured facility, with the computer locked in a faraday cage and with no access to the internet. Just about anything else and the data will be vulnerable at some point to a legal intercept of it. You can manage those risks, limit them, but ultimately, if they want it they're gonna get it.

So please guys, stop asking for NSA-proof [insert thing here]. There are only two defenses when your opponent has a half trillion dollar budget and you got twenty bucks and a cracker; Anonymity (ie, don't get on the radar), or don't do anything that would be interesting to them... or if you must, for the love of fuck, minimize your electronic footprint. Forget the credit card, the cell phone, the wifi-enabled anything. Go off grid, stand in the woods in the middle of nowhere, and then do whatever it is you're keen on doing without the government being aware of it.

There are no high tech solutions to this that are within your budget, ok? Just... deal with it already guys.

Sounds like it's the same phenomenon to me. You're confusing a property with an effect.

Where are the moderators?? You are SO offtopic. STFU and GTFO.

And mod me down, too.

Both main parties are almost entirely corrupt; people shouldn't vote for either.

Either? In the last election there were 5 parties on enough ballots to win. You have friends and relatives who smoke pot, why are you voting for people who want them in jail?

And if they did this study and published results that didn't support the ideas of 'cyclical' climate change, would they be fired? Would the study be censored? why shouldn't they consider an alternative view and possibly (probably) disprove it?

Sounds to me like the "scientists" are playing "politics".

If AGW really is the ONE TRUE WAY then I'm sure one more study won't change that.
You aren't worried are you?

No, I doubt I'll be alive 50 years from now, it won't bother me. But "me" is the least of my worries.

They should be taken out and shot.

Rational much?

I think you've misunderstood the GP. And, uh, I think the GP did, too.

I'm fine with that, you selfish prick.