DrJBHL DrJBHL

Better than nothing. Maybe. No, not really.

▼

Better than nothing. Maybe. No, not really.

from JoeUser Forums

 

We’ve had the Patriot Act (I really don’t like throwing that ‘P’ word around, especially for that) fourteen years. By and large? It’s a real balancing act, which has been abused.

Now, the House has forced the Senate’s hand and hopefully we’ll have a new law which removes the mass data collection the NSA’s been doing. We’ll see.

Now, the House has passed the USA Freedom Act (catchy use of the ‘F’ word) supposedly restraining the NSA’s bulk data collection. Not a word of thanks to Edward Snowden, who revealed the abuse two years ago. Now there’ll be more transparency in the data collection. No doubt they’ll replace it with something else, or have GCHQ, etc. do it for them.

The House passed it 338-88. “Today, we have a rare opportunity to restore a measure of restraint to surveillance programs that have simply gone too far.” - Rep. Conyers.

Something new in Washington: Bipartisanship. To be sure. Why am I worried? When politicians agree, it bodes ill. It usually means that they all agree they have something to hide, which might have been exposed otherwise. I don’t kid myself it’s for the common man. Or is it just for show? After all, the Senate Majority Leader wants to simply hold onto the Patriot Act intact. Maybe the 338-88 vote will force him to realize it just might be the will of the people…not to mention that 2016 is fast approaching.

The bill actually expands data collection from chat apps, video, etc. It also doesn’t limit NSA’s use of search terms and “emergency” (the old ‘ticking bomb’) warrantless search: So, it really doesn’t do much to limit NSA’s mass surveillance and actually enables the worst practices, and allows the government to claim state secrecy, according to Evan Greer (Fight for the Future).

I guarantee the government will try to stretch the boundaries of this bill just as it did with the Patriot Act. I’d bet they have folks working on that even now (Reagan’s “9 most terrifying words” folks).

The Speaker of the House just said (in relation to Libertarians wanting stronger limits), "This is a very delicate issue. I know members would like to offer some amendments, but this is not a place for people to bring out the wrecking ball.”

Wrong. This is EXACTLY the time and place to engage in an honest a full debate. It is never  the time to suppress honest concern over our freedoms. While this reforms the FISA program, it leaves the NSA with immensely powerful tools which they have been shown to misuse.

Section 215 is only that. What about all the rest? That’s where the NSA uses its many ‘tools’, where it expends most of its efforts, and no one’s talking about that. No one’s even saying “thank you” to Edward Snowden for doing something really patriotic: Sacrificing himself for our right to privacy from the surveillance state.

Source:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/05/a-long-awaited-reform-to-the-usa-patriot-act/393197/

90,844 views 32 replies
Reply #26 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting davrovana, reply 25

Did I get too excited? Maybe. But am I the only one who gets angry in response to apathy on this issue? If I am, is that a good thing?

The reality is that it is exactly those rights people get concerned about that entitle reponses/opinions such as Lightstar's to be voiced.

To assert someone whose opinion does not match yours is unacceptable [apathy] is simply wrong - and actually unacceptable in itself, particularly when it impunes on another user's good character.

Stardock's forums have rules of conduct, one of which is to not 'attack' fellow member through insult [or any other mechanism].

Apathy is a right. Anger against someone's apathy is not - here...;)

Reply #27 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Re the Op...it's not immediately relevant to me.  I am not 'managed' by the NSA. [hopefully] as I am not American/in America.

Do I fret invasions of privacy?  Yes, some.  I'd hate it if 'we stand behind every bed we sell' was a reality....would make bedroom antics 'voyeuristic.....'

On the Internet?

No.

I know of people who have been CAUGHT thanks to the internet and it's 'monitoring'...and are currently in jail in the rock spider wing....

Worth every bit of 'intrusion' of privacy...;)

ObjectDock - Access shortcuts and frequently used applications from an animated dock.
Reply #28 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Jafo, reply 27

On the Internet?

No.

I know of people who have been CAUGHT thanks to the internet and it's 'monitoring'...and are currently in jail in the rock spider wing....

Worth every bit of 'intrusion' of privacy.

There are certain people and circumstances that must be stamped out - such as rock spiders and the peddling/viewing of child porn - and if the authorities are watching known offenders and/or suspects, then I'm fine with that.  What I'm not fine with is the new legislation that telcos keep every single person's phone and internet data for up to two years or more.... just so's government can scrutinise it and perhaps use some of it against us at a later date.  That means you, me and every other Aussie who uses their phone and internet innocently.

Now it's all well and good to say "but I've got nothing to hide", and perhaps you don't.... TODAY!!!  What if the tax man suddenly decides that you should be paying a much larger slice of your income, trawls through your internet purchases, discovers you bought parts to build a $6000 - $7000 computer and adjusts your tax to 70c in the dollar?  Or that a PC part you purchased back then suddenly becomes contraband because it does shit the government don't like?

So yes, while there are perfectly valid reasons to monitor certain individuals and store their data, government in Australia has been following US/NSA examples and is becoming more and more intrusive... and it will go over the top, scrutinising the affairs of ordinary, every day people with nothing to hide if we don't step up and say no.  I certainly don't want to be living in a police state where government and law enforcement knows when I go for a walk, feed the ducks in the park or drain the lizard.  Exaggeration?  Perhaps, but the last decade has seen government implement even greater controls over every day people, and going by the recent slew of events, a police state is in motion, we just haven't been officially told.

Government should protect our freedom, yes, not take away our freedoms in order to do so. then imposse its will on us through self-serving interests.

Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top

We're getting closer and closer to the time when "pre-crime" is more important to the state (think civil forfeiture) than real crime.  Real criminals will have little difficulty with that sort of regime while ordinary citizens (and petty criminals, admittedly) will more likely be ensnared.

Reply #30 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting davrovana, reply 25

But you yourself rightly took issue with his dismissal of the problem in Reply #14.

As I said...people can disagree, but no name calling. And what I said was that I disagreed, but that the privacy issue has to do with communications, files, etc....not with LightStar's character but rather with all of our Constitutional rights. 

Passion is a good thing, but as I and many others have said (and occasionally regretted not doing) is not to reply immediately, to reply factually, and NEVER personally. As the Godfather said, "It's not personal. It's business."

Reply #31 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

Why is the NSA spying on our (german) Chancellor, the EU parliament, top Austrian & France politicans and alot of different european industry franchises? For sure these people are all TERRORISTS! [sic!]

The NSA is doing industry espionage and spying on NASA partners and friends, and I don't really wanna know why exactly they have to - still it's ethical wrong + A CRIME (where I come from)!

And whenever politicans are trying to take rights, freedom (or anything else) away from the people they simply call it "War on Terrorists" "War for Freedom", "In the name of Democracy" for propaganda reasons...

Quoting psychoak, reply 11

he Branch Davidians are a great example of this.  Koresh was a nut, his followers were nuts, but they were also pretty harmless and generally law abiding nuts at face, involved in a legal gun business with no evidence to the contrary.  Several months before the raid, the AFT was invited to come to the compound and do an inspection, by Koresh himself, when agents were conversing with his gun dealer, the agents wouldn't even talk to him.  Later, the ATF obtained an unneccessary warrant for their raid by misleading a judge on the activities they were partaking in, and a huge convoy of heavily armed agents and vehicles that are basically tanks, roll up on these paranoid nuts who think the end is nigh after refusing to communicate with them and inspect their business when invited to do so.  Is it any surprise that they got the completely reasonable idea that the government had come to kill them all for no reason?  I might get the idea myself if I didn't know they just wanted to do a perp walk and march them all out in cuffs before giving them all their guns back a few months later.
 

I like this example esp. that McVeigh named this incident as his prime motivator for bombing Oklahoma City. So perhaps a bit more tolerance or de-escalation methods towards the Davidians would have saved a boatload of lives (then + years later, as well.)

Reply #32 from Elemental Forums Top

This is an old TED talk from just after Ed Snowden's first leaks. For those interested in exploring the issue of internet surveillance, I think it's incredible food for thought.