You saying I or anyone doesn't have privacy doesn't mean anything. Again, it is a scale from two extremes and everything in between. For example, what I am doing right now aside from typing on the computer is not publicly known- so yes, I do have some privacy.
The whole issue here is that we want some information to remain asymmetric in the market. Someone might know it, but everyone does not- that is privacy. If these companies were upfront about the data collection, etc. then that is one thing if they had the data. But when the government seizes it, that is a whole other. Again going back to my example, I know what I am doing right now, my grandmother in the room next door knows what I am doing, but just because she knows does not mean I am okay with the government forcing her to tell them what I am doing right now.
You don't need to be online to live. You don't even need a bank account, but it's nice to have one.
While it would be difficult to live without a digital footprint, it's not impossible. I know people and places who do just fine with a minimal footprint. Why would Big Brother focus on one person out of 300 million who is cashing a their check at a bank in some small town in a "fly over" state?
You could live like that, the world would also pass you by. Unless you want to go the way of the Amish and purposely restrict your level of tech in order to live a more primitive lifestyle, you're going to have to plug in.
So I'll say it again, complaining about the gov't snooping when the stuff they're seeing is already known by everyone with means, it's not a violation of privacy. If you want to call it adding insult to injury, fine but don't cry foul while ignoring the last 20 years of globalization.
Why would the world pass me by? Is that like "keeping up with the Joneses" meme?
Reading books, magazines and newspapers doesn't leave a digital foot print. Do I really need to know the latest on Angelina's mastectomy the moment the news comes out or can I wait until next week when it comes out in Time magazine?
Sure but no more mailing people (the PO logs everything, same as the phone companies and ISPs), no more internet, no more phone, no more TV, no more car (unless you want some obsolete jalopy), etc. You'd be a more advanced version of the Amish, the more the world progressed, the more obvious this would become.
You seem to consider yourself very advanced in this regard, but if you look at the public reaction to this issue or similar issues, it is quite clear that the vast majority of people still value some privacy. And unlike some other issues like whether global warming is real, whether or not privacy is important to someone is a matter of opinion. You may be okay with being a part of the Truman show, but most of us are not and I don't think privacy will ever completely be gone because for one logistically it would be too hard (asymmetric info will always exist) and more importantly, there is a market for privacy.
Last edited:
Are you sure about that? With new information coming out recently, that has been debunked. They CAN listen in without a court order. In fact, I'll have to find the info, but I believe the court admonished them for defying the law and listening in without subpoena. Nothing was done, of course.
I don't believe anything coming out of their mouths right now. We're being spied on by our own country plain and simple. And I DON"T like it. I have nothing to hide, but I am not a criminal to be spied on!
Heck, they didn't even have to listen into the Tsarnaev's phone calls..they had direct info from Russia to watch the Boston bombers, but that didn't help, did it?
I think you are mixing up technological advances with personal growth.
Regardless of how highly technical you are and how backwards technically/"Amish" I might be, we're both very likely to be dead within the century. Can you take it with you?
I think you are mixing up technological advances with personal growth.
Regardless of how highly technical you are and how backwards technically/"Amish" I might be, we're both very likely to be dead within the century. Can you take it with you?
And those advances have killed privacy. More privacy = less tech and limited contact with civilization.
Everybody values privacy, but we all also value not being dead. Privacy doesn't exist by itself. Increasingly in todays world, privacy is something that exists at the expense of national security, and how much these weigh on a balance scale against each other, is something very few of us know about. It could be quite some time before we all get the real facts on how much of each of these things is appropriate, and until then, maybe we all ought to settle down a bit (and keep listening to the information suppliers).
Nothing is perfect. Everything involves trade offs.
It's like the NSA spying. Do we want complete security or complete freedom? How much freedom are we willing to give up for security?
Unless you want a revolution, we're to far gone to worry about such things I'm afraid. Freedom is slavery.
Yes, I'm familiar with the Ministry of Truth, but I don't believe we're that far gone...yet. We're just leaning in that direction.
There are no guarantees. The more security, the less chance of getting killed. Less liberty too.
Yes, I'm familiar with the Ministry of Truth, but I don't believe we're that far gone...yet. We're just leaning in that direction.
Yet? We've been living 1984 since the Patriot Act created a loophole in the Bill of Rights. The gov't just isn't as overt and when they are obvious, they're open about it.
US intelligence services are spying on the European Union mission in New York and its embassy in Washington, according to the latest top secret US National Security Agency documents leaked by the whistleblower Edward Snowden.
One document lists 38 embassies and missions, describing them as "targets". It details an extraordinary range of spying methods used against each target, from bugs implanted in electronic communications gear to taps into cables to the collection of transmissions with specialised antennae.
Along with traditional ideological adversaries and sensitive Middle Eastern countries, the list of targets includes the EU missions and the French, Italian and Greek embassies, as well as a number of other American allies, including Japan, Mexico, South Korea, India and Turkey. The list in the September 2010 document does not mention the UK, Germany or other western European states.
One of the bugging methods mentioned is codenamed Dropmire, which, according to a 2007 document, is "implanted on the Cryptofax at the EU embassy, DC" – an apparent reference to a bug placed in a commercially available encrypted fax machine used at the mission. The NSA documents note the machine is used to send cables back to foreign affairs ministries in European capitals.
The documents suggest the aim of the bugging exercise against the EU embassy in central Washington is to gather inside knowledge of policy disagreements on global issues and other rifts between member states.
New NSA leaks show how US is bugging its European allies | World news | The Guardian
The newly published top-secret documents, which the newspaper has released with some redactions, give further details of how Prism interfaces with the nine companies, which include such giants as Google, Microsoft and Apple. According to annotations to the slides by the Washington Post, the new material shows how the FBI "deploys government equipment on private company property to retrieve matching information from a participating company, such as Microsoft or Yahoo and pass it without further review to the NSA".
NSA slides explain the PRISM data-collection program - The Washington Post
I was against the Patriot Act in the beginning. It was stupid to be more worried about dying in a terrorist attack than about giving up our Constitutional rights. Unfortunataly, too many Americans are wusses. Look at "We, the People" collectively reacted to both 9/11 and, a decade later, the Boston Marathon bombings.
Similar threads
