Neat stuff (non-lulz but interesting things)

[Dr. Zaius]

doublethink, or unperson

comrade

[K2]

What Rummy said. When you put things on the Internet that are not publicly visible/searchable, there is a reasonable expectation of privacy that is being violated here. I would liken it to renting out a storage unit and storing some furniture. Just because it's on property owned by another company and no longer in your house doesn't mean it's not still your furniture. The police would still need a warrant to search that unit.

[Dtrain323i]

[quote author=Neptune link=topic=1507.msg268087#msg268087 date=1370984914]
If you put it out on the internet, it's not yours, anymore.  Some dude outside your house with a laptop can get the info.  It's akin to shouting your business in a crowded area.  They're not actually coming into my house, looking through my stuff.  It's not mine.  So...big deal?  If I leave shit outside my house, people can look through it and, most of the time, I won't know or care.

The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution states

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

In 1791, it would have been common to consider my papers to include letters sent to me, and my diaries. Photography didn't arrive for another 30 years, but I imagine most in 1791 would consider locks of hair or other sentimental mememtos to be "effects," not to mention, wallets/purses, and I imagine by the time photos came around in 1820/30 that they, too, would be considered personal effects.

Telephones didn't come around till the late 19th century, and while there was always some risk that a switchboard operator would listen in, as the technology matured, there came an increased expectation of privacy. After all, this is where the "wiretapping" comes from. You know, in the phrase, "warrantless wiretapping."

Today, if I want to converse with dtrain, whether by phone, or by text, or by e-mail, or send him a naughty instagram, I'm most likely to do it via my phone. My phone, I most definately consider to be a personal effect. It contains my address book, my correspondences (papers), my photos (thanks Karrde!), and even my banking information.

If you hold to the view that the Internet isn't covered by the 4th amendment, as you propose, then what you are saying is that as technology advances then our Constitutional rights shrink. In your view, in order for me to retain the types of rights granted by the highest law of the land, I would need to eschew technology in order to retain those rights. So, basically, if I wanted real Constitutional protection I should live like the Amish.

I think clinging to this view is, at best, naive, as if you wish the US to remain an economic and technologic force in the world, then you can't peg essential rights and expectations to 18th century technology. Our strength as a nation has grown in proportion to the fact that we've been a hotbed of technological development.

Now, let's say something I do becomes illegal.  Either a) there's a good reason and they won't arrest me now if I stop doing it OR b) it's bullshit and enough people will get mad enough to change it.  Either way, I'm safe.

You are not safe. Please consult Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent. Did you not see what happened to aaronsw? He was a a tireless campaigner for internet freedom, helped get Creative Commons and Reddit off the ground, and it's widely believed that overzealous targeting lead him to kill himself.

I'm worried about people getting all butthurt about something that is protecting them.  And yes, I honestly believe that looking for terrorists is something that protects people.  This was the goal of the program, mind you, and I'm not that cynical that I believe it was intentionally being used for something else.

If it's the goal of the program, then the program should be measured in terms of its effectiveness. To measure effectiveness, you need transparent oversight. So,
- How many lives have been saved by wiretapping all of American and all sovereign nations that digitally communicate with America?
- How many terrorist plots have been foiled by this program?
- How many terrorists are behind bars because of this program?

Like I said, I'm not worried about hypotheticals.

Actually, until you can quantify the benefits of this program - how many terrorists have been captured and how many lives have been saved, then you are trafficking in hypotheticals. We had advanced notice from Russia about the Boston Marathon bombers and our dear intel leaders, with all this pervasive data, didn't stop that. The beauty of this leak is it enables people to democratically say: Show us the evidence. Put up or Shut up.

To quote a framer, and eminent Philadephian, Ben Frankin, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

[/quote]

I was going to come in here and lay down some freedom but Rummy stole my thunder. There's really nothing that I can add to what he said other than to reinforce the idea that even if PRISM was limited purely to anti-terrorism purposes, then why did it not stop the Boston Marathon bombers? Why didn't it stop the underwear bomber or the shoe bomber? If the goal is to stop terrorist attacks then it has an abysmal track record.

But honestly, none of that matters to me. I'm of the mind that I will give up security for liberty. I'd much rather roll the dice on a terrorist attack than live with the knowledge that a government agent is watching over my shoulder.

[zaneyard]

how do you know that it didn't stop a bunch of terrorist attacks and you just don't know about it and those two are the few that slipped through the cracks?

[Elder]

how do you know that it didn't stop a bunch of terrorist attacks and you just don't know about it and those two are the few that slipped through the cracks?

What if? Maybe they did they wouldnt disclose information like that if they happened to foil a "potential" bombing for fear of a martyr effect.
Or in another case the less information the public has the better off they usually are.

Case in point from my personal experience:
There is benzene contamination in a local aquifer and the community points at the local mining company for being the ones who caused it. This is untrue it was old underground storage tanks from abandoned gas stations.
The reason that they blame the mining company: They regularly donated large sums of money to the community to help clean the plume of benzene and help those in the community.
This was an act of self interest in preserving the community that they operate in and the unexpected backlash of when they tried to help.
Something to learn mining companies are not evil and are the only reason we are able to live our lives as we currently know them.

Again the gist of what im saying is finger pointing on he said, she said, is what concerns people, and also our society of "you fucked up" is what people like to see, are used to seeing, and enjoy seeing it.
Also the concern of hidden agenda and diabolical plots is moronic in the highest regard.
No one with the resources has the time to waste on insignificant you, and the people that do have the time rarely have any resources.

Also i remember this old ps2 video that i watched way back when

We're at War - Planetside 2 Machinima

[A. Crow]

What if? Maybe they did they wouldnt disclose information like that if they happened to foil a "potential" bombing for fear of a martyr effect.
Or in another case the less information the public has the better off they usually are.

You know, a lot of people think this is how the shit like this is handled by the government.  

It's not.  People literally get in fights to take credit when something actually works.  No, this hasn't succeeded in stopping shit, or else we'd have heard about it; there wouldn't be a big sign that said "Secret NSA program lead to the arrest of 5 potential terrorists today."  There'd just be an FBI spokesman looking very proud that someone else did the work and he gets to look good for the cameras.

The NSA has a mandate to do some shady stuff, but that's supposed to be directed at foreign entities.  It's necessary.  Right now, they're gathering information on everyone, and parsing through it after the fact.  Maybe they're doing a good job of that.  But, knowing the type of people that get hired into these analyst positions, it's just as likely they're reading ex-girlfriend's emails.  

I'd like to point out characteristics of our government:

1. In the world of the federal government, potential is absolute- if something has the potential to do something, then it will do that thing.    
2. Mission creep is a systemic cancer.  No one can stay inside their own freaking lane, every organization want's a piece of every other organization's pie.  

It was just publicly announced that the NSA has the capacity to have a lot of damning information on pretty much anyone in the country.  How long do you think it's going to take for that potential to be used outside it's original (albeit also horrible) intent?

 

[Didzo]

Imagine what a world it would be if the resources spent by the NSA (or any number of government organizations) were directed to objectives that are statistically a greater threat to the well being of individuals within the nation than terrorist attacks.

[FlyingMongoose]

Imagine what a world it would be if the resources spent by the NSA (or any number of government organizations) were directed to objectives that are statistically a greater threat to the well being of individuals within the nation than terrorist attacks.

That money is better spent fighting obesity! This nations greatest health risk (apart from smoking).

[Sogo]

[quote author=Didzo link=topic=1507.msg268115#msg268115 date=1371016638]
Imagine what a world it would be if the resources spent by the NSA (or any number of government organizations) were directed to objectives that are statistically a greater threat to the well being of individuals within the nation than terrorist attacks.

That money is better spent fighting obesity! This nations greatest health risk (apart from smoking).
[/quote]

Second greatest? Have you seen the kind of damage they can do on motorized carts in grocery stores?

[CaffeinePowered]

[quote author=FlyingMongoose link=topic=1507.msg268116#msg268116 date=1371017141]
[quote author=Didzo link=topic=1507.msg268115#msg268115 date=1371016638]
Imagine what a world it would be if the resources spent by the NSA (or any number of government organizations) were directed to objectives that are statistically a greater threat to the well being of individuals within the nation than terrorist attacks.

That money is better spent fighting obesity! This nations greatest health risk (apart from smoking).
[/quote]

Second greatest? Have you seen the kind of damage they can do on motorized carts in grocery stores?
[/quote]


http://www.reddit.com/r/fatpeoplestories

Enjoy

[Elder]

[quote author=FlyingMongoose link=topic=1507.msg268116#msg268116 date=1371017141]
[quote author=Didzo link=topic=1507.msg268115#msg268115 date=1371016638]
Imagine what a world it would be if the resources spent by the NSA (or any number of government organizations) were directed to objectives that are statistically a greater threat to the well being of individuals within the nation than terrorist attacks.

That money is better spent fighting obesity! This nations greatest health risk (apart from smoking).
[/quote]

Second greatest? Have you seen the kind of damage they can do on motorized carts in grocery stores?
[/quote]

Have you ever had to fix one?

Sent using pen and paper ferried by carrier pidgeon

[Sogo]

[quote author=Sogo Payne link=topic=1507.msg268127#msg268127 date=1371044083]
[quote author=FlyingMongoose link=topic=1507.msg268116#msg268116 date=1371017141]
[quote author=Didzo link=topic=1507.msg268115#msg268115 date=1371016638]
Imagine what a world it would be if the resources spent by the NSA (or any number of government organizations) were directed to objectives that are statistically a greater threat to the well being of individuals within the nation than terrorist attacks.

That money is better spent fighting obesity! This nations greatest health risk (apart from smoking).
[/quote]

Second greatest? Have you seen the kind of damage they can do on motorized carts in grocery stores?
[/quote]

Have you ever had to fix one?

Sent using pen and paper ferried by carrier pidgeon
[/quote]

I personally haven't, but an acquaintance had to fix one, and explain that being 650 pounds and riding one will throw the axle out to the mountain of a woman riding it.

[A. Crow]

a good read on why privacy matters

[Dtrain323i]

I just look at it like this: There are so many things that are illegal on the federal level that congress itself doesn't even have an accurate estimate (Some people peg the number of federal statutes at ~25,000). So even if you think you're going about your day as a law abiding citizen, you could very well be in violation of any number of federal laws that can make you a felon.

[Eschatos]

Bastion used to look like this:
A look at the Bastion prototype

[k0ala]

In the end this is how we're kept in check. They will store the mountain of data until any one of us gives them a reason to go digging. All we have to do is cross the wrong county clerk, dogcatcher, or police sergeant, and we are in for a world of hurt. Our only defense against having our Skype sessions read before a court is that we have to remain too small to matter, for our whole lives.

[zaneyard]

I can only hope that one day I'm important enough for the government to spy on me.

[A. Crow]

You already are, Citizen. 

[Versus]

lol

[HeK]

You already are, Citizen. 

*cough*