backtop

Internet Binary Heroes: Big Brother's Big Ears
Rob Mach (Blog) - November 12, 2007 12:25 PM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 83 comment(s) - last by Oregonian2.. on Nov 14 at 3:22 PM
'

 

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Whoopie
By thejez on 11/12/2007 12:43:30 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure this is a huge deal... I've always assumed everything I did on the PUBLIC internet was viewable by anyone anyway.... if i want privacy online i use encryption...




RE: Whoopie
By aharris on 11/12/2007 12:49:09 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure I'd rely on encryption alone to keep my data safe in this case.

Secure browsers that bounce your connection half-way across the world before hitting your destination are about the only thing I'd trust.


RE: Whoopie
By JackBeQuick on 11/12/2007 12:52:56 PM , Rating: 2
TOR, which describes exactly what youre talking about, has been proven several times over to not be a very secure implementation. A large majority of the exit nodes monitor the outbound traffic.


RE: Whoopie
By thartist on 11/12/2007 12:50:14 PM , Rating: 3
i REALLY REALLY wonder hard on why people are so frenetic about "internet privacy". Don't everyone realise that they are just a number in the mass doing what everyone else also does, which is watch news, porn, buy stuff, send love/PR/ordinary mails and stuff?

WHY DOES AVERYONE THINK THEY ARE DOING SUCH AN IMPORTANT THING THAT NEEDS THE MOST STRICT OF PRIVACIES?

Does anyone think Google and whatever sci-fi organization are spying him/her laughing at their love confessions or gay fantasies???

It's the "american panic seed". Wake up.

PD: Of course, nothing grants anyone the right to spy others.


RE: Whoopie
By FITCamaro on 11/12/07, Rating: -1
RE: Whoopie
By James Holden on 11/12/2007 1:00:02 PM , Rating: 3
It's not just a liberal or conservative thing. What if the ISP was the one recording all those calls / Internet traffic? Are you OK with some AT&T tech browsing through your Internet history in his spare time?


RE: Whoopie
By Ringold on 11/12/07, Rating: 0
RE: Whoopie
By milomnderbnder21 on 11/12/2007 4:48:22 PM , Rating: 2
Funny to actually see who always brings up the partisan aspects, generally using party affiliation as a pejorative. I come and start reading just to see how long it takes to find someone using 'liberal' in that manner.

Even more amusing when those people like to talk about how angry and offensive these 'liberals' are, and largely intimate how liberal viewpoints are destroying the country or political discourse. Such irony.

God forbid people actually respect that someone has a different viewpoint, and actually has reasons behind that viewpoint, and isn't just an incompetent for not agreeing with you.

So here, I'll reinforce your viewpoint of 'angry liberals,' even though I'm not sure I could describe myself as liberal: you, and people like you, are the problem with modern political discourse. You hate the other side, simply because they don't think like you.

Debates aren't a discussion of facts (like how government has abused its wiretapping ability, or how an administration has been shown to lie about important things and so not deserve credibility), they are composed of petty, close-minded insults.

Thanks for preventing substantive dialog about important issues.


RE: Whoopie
By FITCamaro on 11/12/07, Rating: -1
RE: Whoopie
By James Holden on 11/12/2007 1:27:57 PM , Rating: 1
Quit assuming these companies are some super intelligent, benevolent entities. They aren't.


RE: Whoopie
By clovell on 11/12/2007 5:27:00 PM , Rating: 2
Don't be so conceited as to think all big companies are out to get you.


RE: Whoopie
By Pythias on 11/12/2007 1:20:30 PM , Rating: 2
`
quote:
Because when you say a phrase like "government monitoring" to the masses, liberals fuel it to make them believe that every email you send or page browse you make is being carefully scrutinized by someone to make sure you're not doing or saying anything but the government approves.


No kidding. Like anyone would have the resources to filter out all the crap. The proof is that nobody is being carted off by the men in black, so I guess I'm still safe from teh ebil gubment conspiracy.

I'd give you a +1 but I traded all my mod votes for porn.


RE: Whoopie
By James Holden on 11/12/2007 1:35:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The proof is that nobody is being carted off by the men in black

That's just one extreme, and its a far one. You're telling me you can't think of any other illicit uses of this data?


RE: Whoopie
By Pythias on 11/12/2007 1:42:06 PM , Rating: 3
Spamming me with with time share pitches and penis enlargement promises?


RE: Whoopie
By FITCamaro on 11/12/07, Rating: -1
RE: Whoopie
By SeeManRun on 11/12/2007 1:09:36 PM , Rating: 5
Spying on people without a reason is a form of guilty until proven innocent. Do you want to have to explain why you are reading a web page that contains materials that could be used for nefarious purposes when it is simply innocent curiosity? It is a slippery slope when you start giving up your rights; when is enough enough.


RE: Whoopie
By Oregonian2 on 11/12/2007 1:34:21 PM , Rating: 1
That means nobody would ever be guilty. Nobody can be arrested or whatever until sometime AFTER being "spied" upon, so nobody can possibly be proved guilty. The evidence couldn't be collected until after the trial where guilt was proven. Catch-22.


RE: Whoopie
By SeeManRun on 11/12/2007 7:09:56 PM , Rating: 2
It is called evidence, and unfortunately usually something does have to happen before the culprit can be caught. Otherwise it definitely is guilty until proven innocent. When someone is murdered, you look at the evidence and seek out the killer. But you cannot arrest someone without a crime (intent to murder is a crime, if it can be proven).

This wiretapping is exactly the opposite. You hope to catch someone by listening in on their conversations, and reading their email, and you may catch a few people doing nefarious things, but at what cost is the question?

People have to be given the right to commit crimes to have any freedom. This money could be better spent on preventing crime by looking at root causes and trying to fix them. Increases socioeconomic status, increased education... Remove the incentives for crime or terror, and it goes down. This is a solution to a problem that should be unacceptable to anyone that claims to enjoy freedom.


RE: Whoopie
By Oregonian2 on 11/14/2007 3:22:14 PM , Rating: 2
How is evidence collected without "spying" on someone who isn't presumed innocent? Investigation is inherently based on "spying" on a person's personal life. And unless one guesses with dead-on accuracy as to who did-it using a really good psychic, people who are innocent will be "spyed" upon. And prior to conviction, even the guilty party is an innocent person who's being "spyed" upon.

Use an example a white collar crime of electronically breaking into bank records and transferring money improperly. It's been going on for years. How is the presumed innocent culprit caught without setting up "spying"? Even if they should ONLY catch the actions of the person doing it (unlikely), they will have spyed upon someone who is not yet convicted and therefore presumed innocent. Spying upon an innocent (at the time) person -- in the gathering of evidence!


RE: Whoopie
By clovell on 11/12/2007 4:43:16 PM , Rating: 2
> Spying on people without a reason is a form of guilty until proven innocent.

You say that, and it sounds very bad, but I don't see how you reach that conclusion. Our legal system doesn't work like that.


RE: Whoopie
By MPE on 11/12/07, Rating: 0