Big Brother is Watching You

[O Really]

Good article here... http://entertainment.time.com/2013/06/1 ... picks=true

Starts out about Snowden, but is really more about "team mentality" and people's willingness to take sides with limited if any facts.

[neoplacebo]

Thanks; pretty good stuff. I liked the part about how a lot of people make judgements with regard to "liberal" or "conservative" based solely on whether the person says nice or bad things about Obama. For me that defined damn near all the former "conservatives" from the old BRN forum. As for Snowden, I was surprised to find out his girlfriend is an accomplished pole dancer. Go figure.

[O Really]

It will be interesting to follow the ACLU lawsuit. IMNVHO, it's not about the call data at all. The call data is probably allowed by PATRIOT, but if they can get the call data project ruled unconstitutional, maybe that will bring down PATRIOT. But really, the call data project is no different from the type of work I was familiar with back in the day. Just better technology.

[O Really]

My guess is that the ACLU lawsuit will fail, not on the merits but because supposed national security constraints prevent it from ever getting to the merits.

That's been the fate of others - along with a finding that those bringing suit had no standing, i.e., were not personally harmed. But with the declassification of at least the "existence" part of the phone data along with ACLU being a Verizon customer, those defenses might be a bit more difficult to use this time. If the suit does anything to get a ball rolling that would eventually change PATRIOT, it will be a good thing. But on the issue of the data mining itself, I think it will fail.

[neoplacebo]

I read a yahoo news story a few minutes ago saying that there's an attempt being made to "troll" the NSA this evening at 7pm. The story has a suggested personal email that's just loaded with keywords intended to trip the NSA wires.....the idea is to get as many as possible to send that email to all your contacts so that it will cause as much havoc as possible for them. I don't personally plan to participate, though.

[O Really]

I don't personally plan to participate, though.

Wise choice.

[neoplacebo]

You're welcome; good luck with that ricin.

[JTA]

I only use my browser in incognito mode anyway so jokes on the NSA.

[Ombudsman]

Why would anyone want to punk the National SECURITY Agency? Seems like a stupid response. Even worse than those, "don't buy any gas on this day" memes.

[bannination]

I only use my browser in incognito mode anyway so jokes on the NSA.

It's ok, chrome reports straight to the NSA anyway.

Firefox Private Browsing FTW! They'll never track me!

[O Really]

I don't know Snowden's motives, but I doubt they're the product of rational, self-interest thinking. What he has done is the not-so-violent equivalent of shooting up those who bullied you. There may be some justification, but there's no walking back from the havoc you've created in your life.

But here's the thing. Everybody in the intelligence business knows generally what everybody else is doing. So simply repeating an old story about data-mining phone calls or internet activity of non-citizens doesn't cause that much harm. On the other hand, if he discloses actual events, targets, or operations in progress, he's definitely doing some damage to US security efforts and is no longer a "whistle-blower".

[O Really]

Somebody go read the Verizon "Privacy Practices" and then come tell us how anybody would expect their call record to be "private." The policy starts out saying "we'll protect your privacy..." and then goes on to describe all the ways they'll give information to other Verizon-related entities and to outside entities.

And including...
"
We may disclose information that individually identifies our customers or identifies customer devices in certain circumstances, such as:

to comply with valid legal process including subpoenas, court orders or search warrants, and as otherwise authorized by law;
in cases involving danger of death or serious physical injury to any person or other emergencies;
to protect our rights or property, or the safety of our customers or employees;
to protect against fraudulent, malicious, abusive, unauthorized or unlawful use of or subscription to our products and services and to protect our network, services, devices and users from such use;
to advance or defend against complaints or legal claims in court, administrative proceedings and elsewhere;
to credit bureaus or collection agencies for reporting purposes or to obtain payment for Verizon-billed products and services;
to a third-party that you have authorized to verify your account information;
to outside auditors and regulators; or
with your consent.

Note the part about "valid legal process..." and "outside auditors and regulators..."

Yeah, yeah, I know - nobody reads long fine-print statements of privacy practices or terms of service, or the part on a film that says they'll break your knees for piracy. Maybe they should. Especially before yelling about violations of their "private" information.

[O Really]

[
Page 4:

Verizon, Dow Jones, Google, American Express, CVS, Amazon, Ingles and yada infinitim certainly have the ability to mess with us, but they don't have the incentive to do so in the ways that government does and they don't have the ultimate power to do so in the ways that government does. Plus, they face the market restraint of consumers going elsewhere if they get caught going too far...

I disagreed on Page 4, and I still disagree. I would contend that any of those companies, not only has more incentive to mess with us than NSA does, but in fact actually does more messing IRL than NSA is ever likely to. You're in far more danger of having your life go into the tank because of an erroneous report to a credit bureau than because NSA looked at your call record - even if they actually looked at your record, which is a pretty tiny chance in itself.

[O Really]

Perhaps I failed to post my original disagreement. Short attention span, y'know.
But there are actual "enemies" of the government. That's not just a fabrication of the TSA to keep their phoney-baloney jobs. A lot of those enemies are very capable with technology. And then there are those who, maybe not technically "enemies" are up to no good, like the Chinese hackers. I'd be pretty happy to know that the capabilities of our security and intelligence forces are better than anyone elses. At least as recently as 9/11, that definitely was not the case. I suspect there are more real enemies identified under a program such as this than there are instances of harassing political "enemies" or ex-spouses.

[Dryer Vent]

I am certain that I, as a dissident, am more likely to be harmed by my government than I am by a terrorist.

Can't be that cynical. But, then, I was a dissident during the 60s. Yes, some really nasty stuff went down. But, I'd rather take my chances with the US government than with Achmed the Terrorist.

Why are we so up in arms about this now? It's been going on - the same programs - for at least 10 years.

[Ombudsman]

10 ways you give up data without knowing it

[Dryer Vent]

Snowden is suspect in my estimation. Some of the stuff he said he could do has been proven to be impossible. I think he's an Ellsberg wanna be with little evidence to back up his claims.

[Ombudsman]

Snowden is suspect in my estimation. Some of the stuff he said he could do has been proven to be impossible. I think he's an Ellsberg wanna be with little evidence to back up his claims.

His girlfriend is a little off, that's for sure.

[O Really]

...But there are actual "enemies" of the government.

Agreed, I'm just not persuaded that collecting data on 121 million or more American phones and all the PRISM revelations are what we need to go after them.

...And then there are those who, maybe not technically "enemies" are up to no good, like the Chinese hackers.

...On the other hand, if he (Snowden) discloses actual events, targets, or operations in progress, he's definitely doing some damage to US security efforts and is no longer a "whistle-blower".

I heard he may disclose about US hacking of China. That meets your criteria, but in the context of the news being full of how much China is hacking the US . . . I don't know.

I'd be pretty happy to know that the capabilities of our security and intelligence forces are better than anyone elses.

That was the feeling about the fiscally, environmentally and human health destructive nuclear arms race that the US always led. Somehow, we regularly justify our own misdeeds by what others might do and then say, "See, I told you," when they strive to keep up. Convenient that.

At least as recently as 9/11, that definitely was not the case. I suspect there are more real enemies identified under a program such as this than there are instances of harassing political "enemies" or ex-spouses.

Could be, but that doesn't mean that this isn't being used or couldn't be used by a future POTUS to do those things, too. Or, as much of the world fears, that it wouldn't be used to manipulate events in America's "interest" that have nothing to do with terrorism or other threats to American lives. We've seen it before.

I am certain that I, as a dissident, am more likely to be harmed by my government than I am by a terrorist.

I have rarely (if ever) caught you in a logical inconsistency, but it seems there is one above.

"Somehow, we regularly justify our own misdeeds by what others might do and then say, "See, I told you," when they strive to keep up. Convenient that,"

"Could be, but that doesn't mean that this isn't being used or couldn't be used by a future POTUS to do those things, too. Or, as much of the world fears, that it wouldn't be used to manipulate events in America's "interest" that have nothing to do with terrorism or other threats to American lives. We've seen it before. "

As to your likelihood of being harmed, you may be right that you're more likely to be harmed by the government than by a terrorist, but you're way more likely to be harmed by some of our local yokels than by the NSA.

[O Really]

One could get the idea Snowden isn't the most honest guy in the world, at least with regard to his own background...
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/timeline- ... bpfJ-fCaSp