Slashdot Mirror


Using Your Privacy Against You

guttentag writes: "Christian Science Monitor Reporter Warren Richey suspects he may have stumbled onto a credit card fraud ring that uses Internet merchants to quietly funnel night-vision rifle scopes to Middle Eastern terrorists and privacy policies to cover their tracks. Even if these are isolated incidents, it's worth noting that the privacy rules intended to protect us can also work against us."

3 of 279 comments (clear)

  1. You don't say... by ebbomega · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Can we please moderate the whole story?

    If I had the points I'd be giving it Flamebait with all five points....

    Jesus Christ. Yes, it's true that privacy helps criminals do crimes, but it's not like I'm going to install a camera in my bedroom so that the police know in case a crime happens to occur within the bounds of my room.

    I know of a similar group that had the general mantra that Security compromises Freedom, and quite frankly The Party in 1984 scared me more than two liner jets flying into the World Trade Center ever did.

    Point of the matter is the only way to ensure stuff doesn't get smuggled to the Enemies of State is to keep your eyes on the entire populous 24 hours a day. Unfortunately, then we forfeit our general human decency of free will.

    Honestly, every person who is capable thereof has a right to commit a crime. They also have a right to face the consequences of that crime. And that is what a lot of these security-mongers don't seem to understand.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we SHOULD go out and kill people and break every law in the book. What I'm saying is that with our free will we should be perfectly well allowed to do it to our capabilities and face the consequences. Me, personally, I don't think I'd want to go to jail, so as a result I won't do any crimes that would get me there. But there are crimes I break. I smoke Marijuana, I drive above the speed limit and I serve alcohol to minors (not all at the same time, mind you...). But I'm well aware of the consequences and I feel it is my right to break those laws, just as it is the government's right to punish me for doing so.

    --
    Karma: Non-Heinous
  2. Privacy verses Terrorism by Diabolical · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course privacy is being used against us. It allways has and always will be. Every country has it's examples of this fact.

    But would it be worth it to give up our privacy to maintain a false feeling of security? Terrorists will always be able to get their hands on weapons and other stuff to use against us. Whether it is through buying stuff with stolen creditcards or use of a malafide dealer or manufacturer. Weapons and other military stuff are being produced all over the world.

    In the light of 9/11 would we have to give up our privacy? For what? The hijackers used frigging hobby knives and some of them weren't even known terrorists. The absense of privacy is not a threath to them. It is to us though...

    What's more important is that our governments will not be a totalitarian one and our every move would not be under scrutiny by the government. I like my privacy although i know that my name and other information is going through hundreds of databases each day. I would never like the idea of a government knowing every little thing i say or do though. What's preventing a government of misuse of all that information?

  3. FUD by idiots by jsse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    someone used her account information to send a $1,800 US-made night-vision scope with infrared capability to an address in the United Arab Emirates

    Let me get this straight: this author use two unique instances to conclude that 1) piracy helps terrorists, and 2) Internet merchant helps terrorists.

    This is incredibly idiotic, how could /. even repost such an article written by people as dumb as ox? I'm sure this guy has a collection of Dummy's books on his shelf.

    To author:get a clue! The goods was NOT magically shipped to Middle East electronically, it's sending to a real address physically. The supplier must be well aware what goods is to be shipped to what destination. Just because the paymant is done on the Internet and he concluded that Internet merchant is to be blamed?

    Also I'm not convinced that piracy helps terrorists in any way in this case. If the supplier shipped suspicious goods to problematic countries without question, then they should take full responsiblity.

    We have enough news sites that crowded with editors who have subliminal intelligence and clue. I'm very annoyed that /. even post this article, making people thought /. is standing in ths same line with such news sites.