NSA

[xelp]

what did you think when Obama said...?

for me it was....china and russia would never let an open discusion about spying...

not many countrys would

what do you think?

 

[clh_hilary]

What does what China or Russia would have done have any relevance to that?

 

[brmstn69]

Given the strangle hold the governments have on the media there it would never happen in Russia or China, the story would never have gotten out and the whistle blower would be dead.

And don't give Obama too much credit, he's just doing damage control. He'd have been much happier if they'd never been caught...

 

[topdog]

What I took away was that Obama was basically fine with everything as it was. But he was willing to put a few ground rules down in writing, if it would make the public feel more comfortable.

Personally, I think that merely collecting information without a judge's order crosses the line. But here is the dirty political reality - everyone in Washington has painted themselves into a corner. They can't scale back the NSA - ever. Because if they do, and then there is a terrorist attack, the "other side" will pin it all on them. (And there will be another event, its just a matter of when.)

So it's a game of musical chairs - and no one wants to be the one caught without security cover. Even if it costs the US public billions of $$$.

 

[c750dt]

The NSA maybe knows what we do with our phones but do they know why kids like cinnamon toast crunch?

Seriously though, while the situation is messed up, I don't worry about some guy in DC or Langley knowing my porn habits. They seem to be quite interested in foreign dealings then they trace them back here. It's like spying on the neighbors while neglecting to pay attention to your dog whom happens to be digging through your kitchen at the moment. Still wrong but still, I consider the state of my hair worth more worry. Also, the harsh reality of this situation is that, as long as other people wish to interfere with us, the folks on our payroll with control of the tanks and such need to keep open ears. I am fully confident they won't interest themselves with your fetishes or drug habits or whatever else unless they involve smuggled Russian arms or such.

They leave the illegal mp3s and pirated movies to Hollywood and the FBI.

 

[topdog]

I know, I get it. "I'm no criminal, so what do I care about data at the NSA? It doesn't change my life one way or the other."

But here's the core of what makes me very uncomfortable:

1. Yeah, lots of companies have data on me: Google, Amazon, Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, eBay, etc. But they only know one piece of my life; they can't see what's going on with the other companies. The NSA links all this information together, and now has a very comprehensive reconstruction of my day-to-day activities. The whole is very much more than the sum of the parts. Only the government is in a position to get the overall picture.
   .
2. In this age, once you collect information and store it electronically, you can't get rid of it. It will live forever because it is almost impossible to destroy it. It exists in too many places, so even if one copy is forced to be erased, it can always be reconstructed either from a backup, a copy, or even put back together from scattered partial copies. We better be very sure we are OK with the long term consequences because the toothpaste is not going back into the tube.
   .
3. So, the question is not just a matter of are people following the rules and do I trust them today. What is going to happen when the next administration comes in with slightly different goals and priorities? And the one after that. How do we know that the NSA is even following the rules - since it would be illegal for anyone to reveal what they know about how things are done? (Like Edward Snowden.)
   .
4. If you worked in law enforcement and knew this data was out there and could make your work 90% quicker, wouldn't you clamor for access? Just think how it would impact the FBI's work on organized crime, gangs, drug cartels... the list goes on. And not just the FBI, what about the Boston police? Wouldn't access to this information help them make a case against the Boston Marathon bombers? New York police have a unit dedicated to watching for Muslim extremists; this would really help them draw lines of responsibility back to overseas contacts. They might prevent another terrorist attack. Every police department has motive to try and force the door open just a bit more.
   .
5. And these are just the relatively legitimate requests. There are already examples of contractors doing their own searches just for kicks on politicians, old girlfriends, etc. . I remember during the Bush administration of bored State Department workers looking up passport records on Hillary & Bill Clinton, John Kerry, old high-school friends, and on and on. This is something that just happens, even though it is against all agency policy.

Bottom line - I am not comfortable with putting this much private information at the fingertips of the government to use for whatever seems legitimate to them at the moment.

Now, that may not bother you at all - and that's how many people feel. But it bothers me that a constitutionally limited federal government feels they have a right to collect and compile a complete dossier on each and every citizen. When Nixon's FBI did this on his "enemies list" the country was shocked. This is so much bigger, and most people don't think it even warrants their attention.

 

[tonka]

At least the crime fighters have a real case to make. We need this to stop terrorism. Maybe we don't, but the case can be made.

I see a time when your profile will be pretty extensive, and will be widely available. Want a job, or an apartment...you better smell like roses.
And the commercial tracking? I bought Charmin (toilet paper) the other day. I paid cash. Within an hour, there were Charmin coupons in my gmail inbox. Pretty creepy.

And it's not just online. Cameras are being installed all over. Major cities, busy stoplights, apartment buildings. Will it makes us safer from predators? Probably. But it will also stop the simple naughty joys of life. Ever fuck in the laundry room? I sure did in my younger days.

I am concerned for myself? Not really. I'm not the "other". I'm an older, middle class, Irish American guy in Boston. The cops haven't stopped me in thirty years. I'm invisible to them. And except for some naughty downloads, my online profile is probably a snooze as well. (Except for Charmin. They love me!).
But I do worry about how " the others" will be treated with this higher level of scrutiny.
And I do not have much faith that we have a higher level of fairness to match the scrutiny.

 

[reasek1]

I am surprised that there hasn't been more in the way of complaints and protests. Most people seem pretty blasé about the surveillance and information gathering. This might be because 'Joe Soap' feels he is just an average, peaceful citizen and therefore has nothing to worry about... however consider that you might have nothing to worry about today, but what if some time down the road you decide to join a gay rights group and protest about a particular issue... if you then start to look like a trouble maker the information needed to destroy you would have already been collected.

So the next question becomes do you trust the current government not to abuse the information they are collecting? Even if you do, will you trust the next government, maybe a Republican government? You might get to the point where you wouldn't protest about anything, just to be safe.

The main justification seems to be the 'war on terror', however it seems to me that terrorists would be well able to encrypt data and find ways to evade government surveillance, such that the only people really being spied on are peaceful citizens, who would not bother evading surveillance.

"Information is power", and with so much in depth information we can only conclude that the government already has far too much power.

I, for one, would be much more nervous about getting involved in any form of activism today, that I would have been say in the seventies. It's a sad thought... it's like we are starting to move backwards, not forwards, in terms of some of the most basic rights.

 

[bigsal]

I am surprised that there hasn't been more in the way of complaints and protests. Most people seem pretty blasé about the surveillance and information gathering. This might be because 'Joe Soap' feels he is just an average, peaceful citizen and therefore has nothing to worry about... however consider that you might have nothing to worry about today, but what if some time down the road you decide to join a gay rights group and protest about a particular issue... if you then start to look like a trouble maker the information needed to destroy you would have already been collected.

So the next question becomes do you trust the current government not to abuse the information they are collecting? Even if you do, will you trust the next government, maybe a Republican government? You might get to the point where you wouldn't protest about anything, just to be safe.

The main justification seems to be the 'war on terror', however it seems to me that terrorists would be well able to encrypt data and find ways to evade government surveillance, such that the only people really being spied on are peaceful citizens, who would not bother evading surveillance.

"Information is power", and with so much in depth information we can only conclude that the government already has far too much power.

I, for one, would be much more nervous about getting involved in any form of activism today, that I would have been say in the seventies. It's a sad thought... it's like we are starting to move backwards, not forwards, in terms of some of the most basic rights.

:agree:

In a few simple words, you have expressed a basic concept of democracy and individual liberty that Western governments (democratics) ignore in the name of alleged security.

The worrying thing, as you have rightly pointed out, is that people ignore the consequences that can lead to poor management of all those personal data.
For confirmation, ask all the oppressed people of many countries (Russia, China, to name only the major powers).
Unfortunately, many of them can no longer respond, because they are dead or disappeared into thin air.

 

[ritsuka]

It has nothing to do with "terrorism" and everything to do with stifling dissent and uprising here at home. The Obama administration has prosecuted more whistle-blowers then all past presidents combined; it's disgustingly hypocritical to claim there is an "open discussion" when he is salivating at the thought of locking Edward Snowden up for life, and when he claims he has a right to murder 16 year old US citizens abroad whenever he wants to. The illegal NSA spying is unconstitutional, and using the "war on terror," which has taken more innocent lives then terrorism as a justification is false.

 

[Mari0]

They also spy you while you're have fun playing Angry Birds on your smartphone...