They're Watching You

[Kitsune]

Justice Department wants Internet companies to save personal Web surfing data
By Elise Ackerman
Mercury News

The U.S. Department of Justice has told Google, Microsoft and other major Internet companies that it wants them to keep detailed records of where people go while surfing the Web for up to two years.

Originally Posted by BigV

the sh*t just never stops. Why not just have regular mandatory public mass strip searches, maybe at checkpoints?! You just never know what might turn up. *This* is your best shot at catching perverts with a taste for child pornography? Bonus question: Who here thinks this will be restricted to the effort to catch the above mentioned perverts? Hmm? Anyone, anyone? Now who thinks this will be ABUSED to troll for whatever looks...interesting. Like, oh, I don't know... searches for information contrary to the administration's One True Way (tm)?

Special shout out to AG Gonsalez: Go away. When I need a cop, I'll call one.

And in aticipation of the terror-addled knee-jerk reaction "It's in the interest of national security!! If you don't have anything to hide, there's no reason to be opposed to such a plan." To the utterer or thinker (and I use that term very very loosely here), I say bull shit. Privacy, liberty and security are not quantities in some zero sum game. They are not mutually exclusive. I urge you to read the excellent short essay, The Eternal Value of Privacy by Bruce Schneier

[Kitsune]

Of course, you're not allowed to know about any of this despite the pending lawsuits. It would threaten 'merica.

[Stormieweather]

So the people who are surfing legitimately under their own IP addresses can be watched, but the ones who are sneaking around under cloaking services (and probably doing less than legitmate stuff) won't have records of their movements. Now if I were going to go out and set up a subversive site or promote illegal acts, I certainly wouldn't go do it under my own, very traceable IP address.

So what is the point?

Stormie

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by Stormieweather

So what is the point?

The data would be worth billions. And there will be folks lined up to buy it. And we won't know a thing.

[Kitsune]

Originally Posted by Stormieweather

So what is the point?

We are all potential criminals, we are all potential terrorists.

Most importantly, we're giving them an inch so, later on, they can take a mile. A year ago everyone found it okay to monitor international phone calls because the government wasn't doing anything with domestic ones. Now we find it okay to have our call logs monitored because, well, they're not actually listening to the conversations. No one is concerned that their search engine requests are being noted because the government isn't sifting through all of the e-mail we send. When it is made public that the government is tagging conversations and e-mails for key words, no one will mind so much because they were already keeping tabs on who you called and when and, besides, everyone knows your phone isn't a secure method of communication. To do that, you should meet with the person face-to-face, since it is obvious that the government would never place warrantless taps in your house...

No one will be upset unless the government forces the cancellation of American Idol, anyways. The American people are complacent and accepting of big government.

[Beestie]

Welcome to the USSR, comrades.

[BigV]

Thank you, Kitsune for your efforts to support the hygiene of the previous thread.

The links to the quotes did not survive the transition, so here they are

Mercury News story. Many others like it.

The Eternal Value of Privacy.

They're all fairly short, please read them. Then weep.

[BigV]

Stormie:

The point is that tracking everyone's information in the hopes that a evidence of a crime will be found is akin to stopping everyone on the road, looking for, well, looking for whatever they want to find.

Originally Posted by Cardinal Richelieu

“If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him”

Do you want your ISP to hand over six lines of your writing to Cardinal Gonzales?

[Stormieweather]

My point (obviously not well made) is that the truely intelligent criminals capable of catastrophic harm won't be traceable or trackable online.

So this effort by the Justice Department will net them nothing much other than the stupid people who can't be bothered or don't know how to stealth. Or, as you say, they will gain information worth millions which can be used to influence, prejudice, coerce, bully or brainwash the public.

I am 110% against such a thing as I agree that no good can come of it and it is indeed a slippery slope to complete loss of freedom. I've lived in countries where freedom was extremely curtailed, and know exactly how it feels.

Stormie

[9th Engineer]

I'd hate to be their position though. People want them to take action, but there is just no way they have the resources to catch the really dangerous ones that would make the program worthwhile. Plus, if people are getting angery over something capable of only catching your average person, can you imagine the response to a government electronic surveillance program with the power to catch professional hackers??

[tw]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

I'd hate to be their position though. People want them to take action, but there is just no way they have the resources to catch the really dangerous ones that would make the program worthwhile.

That is Rush Limbaugh hype. Do you learn facts from 11 September - and not from George Jr propaganda? Who fired this nation's number one anti-terrorism investigator who was even on the trail of some 11 September attackers (had their names)? A fact posted so many times that, well, you name him.

Let's see. Without all those security resources, two CIA agents specifically warned (George Jr's 6 August PDB entitled “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US.”) of an attack we now call 911. At least four FBI investigation teams were tracking down those attackers. How can this be if resources were insufficient? Why did administration officials stop each investigation? Why did administration officials yell at two FBI agents in Chicago, "You will not start a criminal investigation!" Maybe so that you might promote Rush Limbaugh propaganda? How many times must I post facts?

America has always had more than sufficient resources. But to mask administration incompetence, spin instead blames CIA, FBI, and other intelligence organizations for failure. Failure? They could not get political extremists in George Jr's administration to even believe Al Qaeda existed. Did Rush Limbaugh forget to mention that reality when Rush was high on drugs?

Fact: there was no shortage of resources to stop terrorism. Instead, those resources (such as Richard Clark's Counterterrorism Security Group) were demoted, disempowered, and ignored.

So what does an incompetent MBA do? He hires more subordinates; creates more layers of bureaucracy. Are we any safer because George Jr added layers of bureaucracy called Fatherland Security and Intelligence Czar? Of course not. Katrina is just another example of what more bureaucracy did. Potter Goss was still wasting his productive days personally briefing a president who does not read his PDBs.

Where does top management incompetence get corrected by more layers of bureaucracy and dictatorship powers? We have an intelligence failure. We have a president who does not even read his memos.

Having been warned 6 weeks earlier in a PDB, then Andy Card whispers into his ear, "A second plane has just struck the World Trade Center. America is under attack." What does a real leader do? Ask any questions? No. Issue any orders? No. Authorized fighter aircraft to protect America? No - not once. Get up and discover what is happening? No. Instead he just sits there for 15 minutes reading a children's book; waiting for someone to tell him what to do. Why will a big security agency solve this presidential intelligence failure?

America has always had sufficient resources to protect Americans. Clinton stopped an LAX bombing, attacks on Americans in Egypt, the bombing of Aman Radisson, and maybe attacks on NY Times Square and Toronto. All these attacks to occur simultaneously - 1 Jan 2000 - were stopped because a president had intelligence. All these attacks stopped because America has always had sufficient resources to avert terrorism. These are well published facts. Knowing these facts, then where did America not have sufficient security? Without using Rush Limbaugh propaganda, where is this security failure?

The United States has always had more than enough resources to stop terrorism - once hype and myth from Rush Limbaugh propaganda is eliminated. Think like an engineer. When did America not have sufficient security? When the president does not even read and then lies - blames CIA, FBI and others who actually did their job. Why do some Americans think the CIA failed. Too many Americans still listen to Rush Limbaugh propaganda. The CIA, et al properly warned and tried to stop impending attacks. One was even fired for doing his job. In each case, a mental midget administration help create 11 September.

We never needed more security. We have an intelligence failure - in the brain of our president.

[dar512]

Of all the "sky is falling" messages to come out in the last ten years, this is the first one to really worry me. Maybe it's because I'm such a techno-geek. Maybe it's because it came so soon after the domestic call logging news. But this is just the sort of thing that will be innocent-seeming to some, but could very well be the first whisper from the voice of big brother.

[BigV]

9th Engineer:

I have never been to prison. I don't know about you, but I reckon we both have read and watched enough to get a common read on how much liberty, privacy and freedom the inmates enjoy. Practically zero, am I right? Do we agree? 100 percent monitoring of communications, movement, actions, everything, all the time, forever and ever. And it's freaking expensive too. Costs more to jail someone in federal prison than to send them a student to college. (No, I don't have the numbers to four significant digits.)

And still, crime happens in prison. Inmates are terrorized by other inmates. There are well documented cases of horrible abuses of power by the jailers. There is no escaping evil in human society, regardless of how tightly constrained that society is. It is not possible.

When I hear you or others say "I want the government to take action" or "Protect me!!", my response is that life is dangerous. The very perfume of freedom flows from the secret, delicate centers of two of our great nations most precious flowers, liberty and privacy. As my analogy hopefully illustrates, taking away the flowers deprives us of the pleasure of the pefume without protecting us from any of the danger.

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

Plus, if people are getting angery over something capable of only catching your average person, can you imagine the response to a government electronic surveillance program with the power to catch professional hackers??

You're right. I'm pissed off now, and more would be worse. Tragically, there is no amount of surveillance that will accomplish the putative goal. Already we're crushing the living heart of what makes us Americans, the land of the free and home of the brave, by surrendering our freedoms and capitulating to fear.

The ONLY answer is to stop drinking the kool-aid. Don't be afraid. Do be diligent in retaining your rights. Don't give terrorists the victory over America by giving away the traits that make us Americans.

[MrVisible]

Originally Posted by BigV

...I don't know about you, but I reckon we both have read and watched enough to get a common read on how much liberty, privacy and freedom the inmates enjoy. Practically zero, am I right?...

And still, crime happens in prison. Inmates are terrorized by other inmates. There are well documented cases of horrible abuses of power by the jailers. There is no escaping evil in human society, regardless of how tightly constrained that society is. It is not possible.

Okay, now that's just frackin' brilliant. I hereby announce my intention to use that analogy with great abandon for the forseeable future.

[Kitsune]

And prisoners always fall into their roles. It makes me wonder what will happen to American society if they all know they're being watched, being listened to, being monitored. What role will people fall into when you treat everyone like a criminal?