Comment That is not the point (Score 1) 353
The number of times the system has been used is not the point. The point is the system itself and the potential that lies in a system like this for abuse.
Anyone watch 'Cops'? I have seen an enforcement officer pull up to a car where two people are talking, take them into custody and search their persons. Why? They are talking in an area known for its drug traffic, so obviously, they meet the burden of probable cause. The fact they are guilty makes everything fine in the eyes of its viewers. The fact that two people taken into custody simply because they are conversing in a place known for its drug traffic does not dawn on the average viewer that something has gone wrong. A criminal was removed from the street. The fact that constitutional rights were disregarded is immaterial.
A system like this, however, is even worse. Why?
Lets consider the need for a 'warrant'. OK, so to use this to target one individual a warrant needs to be obtained, and then they can only study one individual. Fine. This works out. Down the line as the technology improves, they begin to probe more. Instead of searching for one person, they code into the system to search for the target person, and certain keywords. This will be an easy step to make, since the courts already have given the power to use the technology. Does anyone know that this happens? Not on your life. Does the FBI begin to open more files based on "anonymous tips". I would be willing to bet so.
Now, lets consider the current 'defacto standard' of the executive branch of reasonable probable cause. While scanning the packets for the targeted individual, the start seeing an increasing number of encrypted packets in mail as concerned, law-biding citizens begin to protect their digital information. Do these go to the individual being investigated? Are they going to an accomplice of the individual? Don't know, but we should capture them and analyze them to determine what these packets are. These individuals have something to hide, because they are taking 'extraordinary' steps (that will be the word they use in court to defend their actions, if they ever are caught using this information) to hide obviously illegal activates from law enforcement. The simple fact that these extraordinary steps are being taken will be viewed as sufficient probable cause to investigate further. Again, no one will know, but the case files opened with an anonymous tip at the Bureau will be increasing and the Bureau will hold press conferences showing off their latest and greatest conquests in the name of upholding the law.
The system can process gigabytes of data an hour. With today's modern storage, no one will ever know if the box they carry in is capable of storing exabytes of data. Well, now the data needs to be stored and studied off-site, since the broadband users are becoming more prevalent in our society. The simple explanation will be that creating a system like this capable of analyzing the information in real-time and remaining portable is a technological impossibility. A much more thorough analysis can be provided in the facilities in Washington, and will only look at data that is in direct relation to the warrant and the targeted individual. Problem is, no one knows what data they actually are analyzing. If the data can be sifted through this data looking for information related to the targeted information, how large a leap is it for this same system to look for other trends, keywords, etc. It does not cost the taxpayers any money, and additional man-hours are not needed to do this research. The new cases opened in the weeks following the investigation were all a direct result of law biding citizens providing anonymous tips. The fact that this system is in use has nothing to do with the increasingly concerned anonymous citizen of the country.
And one day, we will be asking ourselves with the technology that is available today, how does one actually deliver a tip to the FBI that is anonymous, since they have tapped the phones, can trace snail mail and have video record of any person within 500 feet of any Bureau office? Yet, with all this technology, an amazingly increasing number of law biding conscientious citizens are managing to provide the anonymous tips to remove criminals from the streets, so everything is alright, isn't it?
Anyone watch 'Cops'? I have seen an enforcement officer pull up to a car where two people are talking, take them into custody and search their persons. Why? They are talking in an area known for its drug traffic, so obviously, they meet the burden of probable cause. The fact they are guilty makes everything fine in the eyes of its viewers. The fact that two people taken into custody simply because they are conversing in a place known for its drug traffic does not dawn on the average viewer that something has gone wrong. A criminal was removed from the street. The fact that constitutional rights were disregarded is immaterial.
A system like this, however, is even worse. Why?
Lets consider the need for a 'warrant'. OK, so to use this to target one individual a warrant needs to be obtained, and then they can only study one individual. Fine. This works out. Down the line as the technology improves, they begin to probe more. Instead of searching for one person, they code into the system to search for the target person, and certain keywords. This will be an easy step to make, since the courts already have given the power to use the technology. Does anyone know that this happens? Not on your life. Does the FBI begin to open more files based on "anonymous tips". I would be willing to bet so.
Now, lets consider the current 'defacto standard' of the executive branch of reasonable probable cause. While scanning the packets for the targeted individual, the start seeing an increasing number of encrypted packets in mail as concerned, law-biding citizens begin to protect their digital information. Do these go to the individual being investigated? Are they going to an accomplice of the individual? Don't know, but we should capture them and analyze them to determine what these packets are. These individuals have something to hide, because they are taking 'extraordinary' steps (that will be the word they use in court to defend their actions, if they ever are caught using this information) to hide obviously illegal activates from law enforcement. The simple fact that these extraordinary steps are being taken will be viewed as sufficient probable cause to investigate further. Again, no one will know, but the case files opened with an anonymous tip at the Bureau will be increasing and the Bureau will hold press conferences showing off their latest and greatest conquests in the name of upholding the law.
The system can process gigabytes of data an hour. With today's modern storage, no one will ever know if the box they carry in is capable of storing exabytes of data. Well, now the data needs to be stored and studied off-site, since the broadband users are becoming more prevalent in our society. The simple explanation will be that creating a system like this capable of analyzing the information in real-time and remaining portable is a technological impossibility. A much more thorough analysis can be provided in the facilities in Washington, and will only look at data that is in direct relation to the warrant and the targeted individual. Problem is, no one knows what data they actually are analyzing. If the data can be sifted through this data looking for information related to the targeted information, how large a leap is it for this same system to look for other trends, keywords, etc. It does not cost the taxpayers any money, and additional man-hours are not needed to do this research. The new cases opened in the weeks following the investigation were all a direct result of law biding citizens providing anonymous tips. The fact that this system is in use has nothing to do with the increasingly concerned anonymous citizen of the country.
And one day, we will be asking ourselves with the technology that is available today, how does one actually deliver a tip to the FBI that is anonymous, since they have tapped the phones, can trace snail mail and have video record of any person within 500 feet of any Bureau office? Yet, with all this technology, an amazingly increasing number of law biding conscientious citizens are managing to provide the anonymous tips to remove criminals from the streets, so everything is alright, isn't it?
