Well sure, if they're keeping as close of an eye on things as it looks all they'd be doing is tracking your outbound data from your remote location. They aren't under the same "limitations" that comsec are generally under...they get to see both sides of the conversation in real time, without obfuscation (apparently).
You're not saying anything he doesn't already know. The NSA never STOPS watching anyone, and if you've worked for them then they're even more diligent about their tracking.
I'm beginning to think so. After all, isn't a "country" just another Union on the global stage? I haven't seen any that were as benevolent as they claim to be...
While I understand what you're saying (even if I disagree that it's a crime), I think there's a big difference between giving the appearance of committing a crime and just saying that you've committed it. Or maybe it's not a big difference at all:p
If the gold has not been stolen out of Fort Knox and I'm claiming that I've taken all of it I don't think that's necessarily the same as selling a bag of sugar:)
Well, "refusal" implies some semblance of control over our information. Now, I can avoid the hell out of posting on Facebook or G+. I can avoid going to Reddit (hell, or even coming here). What I cannot avoid are things like emailing my resume` to tech companies or making/taking phone calls...these are things that are pretty well necessary in this day and age unless I'm selling carved up driftwood for a living. Since I (and others) aren't being given the option to protect our own information, I think that "poisoning the (data) well" is the next best thing. If the data that they have is complete garbage, it doesn't do them any good to track me.
I wonder if the people of the US are ever going to rise up, or if it just gets much worse before it gets better.
Of course not. As long as we have shiny new toys (even if they don't do a better job than the dull, old toys) we've been bribed to restrict our activities to bitching.
Along the same lines, I've wondered exactly where the line is when "admitting" that you've committed a crime. Obviously I wouldn't suggest that people start talking like they're a terrorist, but is it against the law to "admit" to robbing a bank that hasn't been robbed? Is it against the law to talk in depth about an AK47 that I don't own (as though I do own it)? I would imagine with enough people pretending that they've committed crimes that their monitoring would become useless.
Seriously, what are they going to do? Break into my house and grab me while I'm in the middle of typ
and people are starting to question what we're doing
Hardly. There should be outrage, protests in the streets, strikes and work halts. Instead, it seems the vast majority of the American public, even when they hear about these things, mostly just give a collective "Meh".
I disagree. I'm hearing a lot of the same, followed by "you first". We see what happens to the Edward Snowdens and Bradley Mannings of the world, and it isn't pretty. And what if I step forward but nobody else does?!? Then I'm fucked and still nothing will change. So, you first. Let's see how well you do, then we can gauge weather or not it's worth it. Call me a coward if you want, I don't mind - I wholeheartedly support my right to pursue happiness - and that doesn't include prison time or worldwide manhunts. Or shit, just getting shot in the back of the head in your living room...obvious suicide.
The study indicates that the people HAVE spoken up to the city level, and that the city officials agreed. Apparently things fell apart after that, because as far as I can tell very few higher than that are doing anything about it. That's an indication that the MAJORITY has spoken, and that the CONTROLLING MINORITY has ignored them.
And may I say, how *dare* you put me in the position of defending the idiots in this country.:p
Consider that the public was never consulted about the Act, by the time we found out about it, we started bitching
In the summer of 2002, city councils throughout the country began to boycott the PATRIOT Act claiming they would not comply with its provisions and would not assist the federal government in enforcing the Act
http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2097&context=ulj about 10 pages in.
That means we've been bitching for over a decade - and it's still around. It hasn't been curtailed. It hasn't been slowed down. It has advanced and progressed and we keep letting the cocksuckers get away with it.
I would argue the media organizations have overblown the terrorism angle so they can have 24/7 terror news coverage. Just yesterday with the spanish train derailment the radio broadcaster said "another train derailment happened a decade ago in Madrid, Spain, 350 miles from this trains location, it was connected to a terrorist attack. Authorities have claimed this incident, however, looks like an accident."
Why bring up a terrorist attack a decade and 300+ miles away? I doubt they are even on the same track, run by the same company, or in any other way related -- except by being trains in the same country.
You apparently don't read a lot of news - the only tie-in is that it's a train in the same country, and that's all the media thinks they need. My response, however, is for what you wrote below.
The public becomes afraid, and the public forces the government to do something.
The Patriot Act was largely unread by our representatives, and the People were fighting against it tooth and nail. This wasn't caused by the population saying, "Woe is me, come and save me grandaddy government!" it was the political cronies leveraging a horrible disaster in order to claim more power than they were entitled to. The PEOPLE didn't demand anything other than retribution. The Government doesn't even think they can do anything about terrorism - but it sure is a convenient way to grab as much power as possible, isn't it?
Is the NSA program overboard? Personally I don't think so -- I think it should INCLUDE Americans.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but you might want to take a brief glimpse at the Bill of Rights before deciding that it's an appropriate response. You might want to take a look at the Federalist papers of the time, where many of our Founders were writing under pseudonyms (for their own safety, of course). The ability to be anonymous was absolutely CRITICAL to the adoption of our Constitution, and I suspect that many of our founders would be horrified to see how far up inside our asses the Government insists on climbing. They would probably be far more shocked, however, to see the American complacency regarding this sort of invasion of privacy.
My only objection to the program is that, by existing as a government program, lobbiest might take it over and force MPAA/RIAA detection & crack downs.. and then more and more minor cases, until a teenager texts about a kid in his school smoking weed in the bathroom and gets the FBI knocking on his parents door.
Essentially what you're saying here is that you trust the Government, but that you *don't* trust the lobbiests. Who do you think that our representatives are working for? Do you think that they're working for you and your neighbors? Really?
If you had the info Snowden did, you probably wouldn't even be brave enough to release it to the public, much less hand yourself right over to the government whose corruption your just exposed.
A thousand times this ^ . When you deal with the NSA the first thing they do is let you know that they'll be climbing up inside your ass before you get your clearance, and that they will continue to monitor and track you for the rest of your life "just in case" you decide to do what Snowden did.
If your ethics dictate that you'll keep an immoral secret, you have no ethics. Snowden should be lauded, not lampooned.
its not going away no matter how much the govt and media try to get it to go away.
History tells us you're wrong. The US Government wants nothing more than for people to forget this so that they can continue raping the American public. They have had very good success with manipulating our short attention spans by getting involved in other shit that they have no business getting involved with.
I think you misunderstand - they aren't here to recruit people, they're here to find the solution to their problems so that they can go elsewhere to recruit people.
Not if it's done en masse. How many bankers are in jail? That's right - if these 63 biggies decided to dump their data it could be considered to be a form of protest against the Government. Citizens can protest, and since corporations are "people" they have the right to protest as well.
Ok, it's all BS, but it was worth a shot.
The National Security Agency revealed to an angry congressional panel on Wednesday that its analysis of phone records and online behavior goes exponentially beyond what it had previously disclosed.
If it's true that members of Congress are angry, that's favorable news! Maybe they can be persuaded to get off their butts and do something about this.
Don't be fooled - many of them voted the various laws into being, and they've made their entire careers off of convincing the public that they have our best interests in mind. Remember the feigned surprise from the other superpowers? Only to have them get outed by the US Government? THAT should tell you everything you need to know about our politicians. Not only were they unwilling to accept that they had been found out, but the first thing they did was throw all of their "friends" under the bus.
I don't disagree with you, but since the puppetmasters pulling the strings are political, I doubt President Carter's opinion means much. He'll get paid lip service, true enough, but his opinion is not enough to effect change in the Government.
Unfortunately, I suspect the only reason he's spoken up about it is that he doesn't have anything left to lose. He's no longer in the public eye, and I can't even think of the last time that Carter may have been politically relevant. HOPEFULLY his opinion means enough to other people to effect positive change...but I doubt it.
can somebody please pick another letter of the alphabet? e- wore itself out years ago, i- seems to be getting old. Time to move on to the next vowel? oKnife? Might be big in Ireland...
They'll change the name as soon as Apple sues them.
While I agree with you completely, changing the Constitution is only good if the people that are supposed to be following it are actually following it.
It's like the feigned surprise of the other global powers when they discovered that we were listening to them. They were doing the same thing, but had to pretend to be surprised lest their own citizens discover how deeply rooted their own spying programs are. These assholes make a bunch of rules and regulations that look and seem reasonable to normal people, and as long as they continue to pretend that they're following the rules the public doesn't know anything about it. The "rules" are only there to make us happy while we don't know that they're being broken. THAT is what needs to change (and honestly, I doubt it will until the population gets a LOT more educated). It's not that the rules need to exist because they already do...it's that there's no oversight and no recourse for normal people. Any oversight committees immediately get jumped on by the special interests and their oversight becomes undersight really damned quickly.
This still sounds better than what we have in the US, where the politicians close their eyes, run for awhile, then declare "This is what you asked for! No, I'm not going to come all of the way back there...do you realize how far I ran?"
Slashdot Mirror
Well sure, if they're keeping as close of an eye on things as it looks all they'd be doing is tracking your outbound data from your remote location. They aren't under the same "limitations" that comsec are generally under...they get to see both sides of the conversation in real time, without obfuscation (apparently).
You're not saying anything he doesn't already know. The NSA never STOPS watching anyone, and if you've worked for them then they're even more diligent about their tracking.
Actually Iraq's chemical weapons program came mostly from Germany and France. Not everything bad in the world is America's fault.
[citation needed]
I'm beginning to think so. After all, isn't a "country" just another Union on the global stage? I haven't seen any that were as benevolent as they claim to be...
While I understand what you're saying (even if I disagree that it's a crime), I think there's a big difference between giving the appearance of committing a crime and just saying that you've committed it. Or maybe it's not a big difference at all :p
:)
If the gold has not been stolen out of Fort Knox and I'm claiming that I've taken all of it I don't think that's necessarily the same as selling a bag of sugar
Well, "refusal" implies some semblance of control over our information. Now, I can avoid the hell out of posting on Facebook or G+. I can avoid going to Reddit (hell, or even coming here). What I cannot avoid are things like emailing my resume` to tech companies or making/taking phone calls...these are things that are pretty well necessary in this day and age unless I'm selling carved up driftwood for a living. Since I (and others) aren't being given the option to protect our own information, I think that "poisoning the (data) well" is the next best thing. If the data that they have is complete garbage, it doesn't do them any good to track me.
I wonder if the people of the US are ever going to rise up, or if it just gets much worse before it gets better.
Of course not. As long as we have shiny new toys (even if they don't do a better job than the dull, old toys) we've been bribed to restrict our activities to bitching.
I wonder how many "hacking attempts from China" are actually from NSA...
Along the same lines, I've wondered exactly where the line is when "admitting" that you've committed a crime. Obviously I wouldn't suggest that people start talking like they're a terrorist, but is it against the law to "admit" to robbing a bank that hasn't been robbed? Is it against the law to talk in depth about an AK47 that I don't own (as though I do own it)? I would imagine with enough people pretending that they've committed crimes that their monitoring would become useless.
Seriously, what are they going to do? Break into my house and grab me while I'm in the middle of typ
and people are starting to question what we're doing
Hardly. There should be outrage, protests in the streets, strikes and work halts. Instead, it seems the vast majority of the American public, even when they hear about these things, mostly just give a collective "Meh".
I disagree. I'm hearing a lot of the same, followed by "you first". We see what happens to the Edward Snowdens and Bradley Mannings of the world, and it isn't pretty. And what if I step forward but nobody else does?!? Then I'm fucked and still nothing will change. So, you first. Let's see how well you do, then we can gauge weather or not it's worth it. Call me a coward if you want, I don't mind - I wholeheartedly support my right to pursue happiness - and that doesn't include prison time or worldwide manhunts. Or shit, just getting shot in the back of the head in your living room...obvious suicide.
The study indicates that the people HAVE spoken up to the city level, and that the city officials agreed. Apparently things fell apart after that, because as far as I can tell very few higher than that are doing anything about it. That's an indication that the MAJORITY has spoken, and that the CONTROLLING MINORITY has ignored them.
:p
And may I say, how *dare* you put me in the position of defending the idiots in this country.
In the summer of 2002, city councils throughout the country began to boycott the PATRIOT Act claiming they would not comply with its provisions and would not assist the federal government in enforcing the Act
http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2097&context=ulj about 10 pages in.
That means we've been bitching for over a decade - and it's still around. It hasn't been curtailed. It hasn't been slowed down. It has advanced and progressed and we keep letting the cocksuckers get away with it.
I would argue the media organizations have overblown the terrorism angle so they can have 24/7 terror news coverage. Just yesterday with the spanish train derailment the radio broadcaster said "another train derailment happened a decade ago in Madrid, Spain, 350 miles from this trains location, it was connected to a terrorist attack. Authorities have claimed this incident, however, looks like an accident."
Why bring up a terrorist attack a decade and 300+ miles away? I doubt they are even on the same track, run by the same company, or in any other way related -- except by being trains in the same country.
You apparently don't read a lot of news - the only tie-in is that it's a train in the same country, and that's all the media thinks they need. My response, however, is for what you wrote below.
The public becomes afraid, and the public forces the government to do something.
The Patriot Act was largely unread by our representatives, and the People were fighting against it tooth and nail. This wasn't caused by the population saying, "Woe is me, come and save me grandaddy government!" it was the political cronies leveraging a horrible disaster in order to claim more power than they were entitled to. The PEOPLE didn't demand anything other than retribution. The Government doesn't even think they can do anything about terrorism - but it sure is a convenient way to grab as much power as possible, isn't it?
Is the NSA program overboard? Personally I don't think so -- I think it should INCLUDE Americans.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but you might want to take a brief glimpse at the Bill of Rights before deciding that it's an appropriate response. You might want to take a look at the Federalist papers of the time, where many of our Founders were writing under pseudonyms (for their own safety, of course). The ability to be anonymous was absolutely CRITICAL to the adoption of our Constitution, and I suspect that many of our founders would be horrified to see how far up inside our asses the Government insists on climbing. They would probably be far more shocked, however, to see the American complacency regarding this sort of invasion of privacy.
My only objection to the program is that, by existing as a government program, lobbiest might take it over and force MPAA/RIAA detection & crack downs.. and then more and more minor cases, until a teenager texts about a kid in his school smoking weed in the bathroom and gets the FBI knocking on his parents door.
Essentially what you're saying here is that you trust the Government, but that you *don't* trust the lobbiests. Who do you think that our representatives are working for? Do you think that they're working for you and your neighbors? Really?
If you had the info Snowden did, you probably wouldn't even be brave enough to release it to the public, much less hand yourself right over to the government whose corruption your just exposed.
A thousand times this ^ . When you deal with the NSA the first thing they do is let you know that they'll be climbing up inside your ass before you get your clearance, and that they will continue to monitor and track you for the rest of your life "just in case" you decide to do what Snowden did.
If your ethics dictate that you'll keep an immoral secret, you have no ethics. Snowden should be lauded, not lampooned.
its not going away no matter how much the govt and media try to get it to go away.
History tells us you're wrong. The US Government wants nothing more than for people to forget this so that they can continue raping the American public. They have had very good success with manipulating our short attention spans by getting involved in other shit that they have no business getting involved with.
I think you misunderstand - they aren't here to recruit people, they're here to find the solution to their problems so that they can go elsewhere to recruit people.
Not if it's done en masse. How many bankers are in jail? That's right - if these 63 biggies decided to dump their data it could be considered to be a form of protest against the Government. Citizens can protest, and since corporations are "people" they have the right to protest as well. Ok, it's all BS, but it was worth a shot.
The first paragraph of TFA is:
If it's true that members of Congress are angry, that's favorable news! Maybe they can be persuaded to get off their butts and do something about this.
Don't be fooled - many of them voted the various laws into being, and they've made their entire careers off of convincing the public that they have our best interests in mind. Remember the feigned surprise from the other superpowers? Only to have them get outed by the US Government? THAT should tell you everything you need to know about our politicians. Not only were they unwilling to accept that they had been found out, but the first thing they did was throw all of their "friends" under the bus.
I don't disagree with you, but since the puppetmasters pulling the strings are political, I doubt President Carter's opinion means much. He'll get paid lip service, true enough, but his opinion is not enough to effect change in the Government.
Unfortunately, I suspect the only reason he's spoken up about it is that he doesn't have anything left to lose. He's no longer in the public eye, and I can't even think of the last time that Carter may have been politically relevant. HOPEFULLY his opinion means enough to other people to effect positive change...but I doubt it.
can somebody please pick another letter of the alphabet? e- wore itself out years ago, i- seems to be getting old. Time to move on to the next vowel? oKnife? Might be big in Ireland...
They'll change the name as soon as Apple sues them.
While I agree with you completely, changing the Constitution is only good if the people that are supposed to be following it are actually following it.
It's like the feigned surprise of the other global powers when they discovered that we were listening to them. They were doing the same thing, but had to pretend to be surprised lest their own citizens discover how deeply rooted their own spying programs are. These assholes make a bunch of rules and regulations that look and seem reasonable to normal people, and as long as they continue to pretend that they're following the rules the public doesn't know anything about it. The "rules" are only there to make us happy while we don't know that they're being broken. THAT is what needs to change (and honestly, I doubt it will until the population gets a LOT more educated). It's not that the rules need to exist because they already do...it's that there's no oversight and no recourse for normal people. Any oversight committees immediately get jumped on by the special interests and their oversight becomes undersight really damned quickly.
I can't imagine he'd answer to anything at all since he's deaf.
That's why we're migrating away from an actual cash based system...all they have to carry is a credit card.
This still sounds better than what we have in the US, where the politicians close their eyes, run for awhile, then declare "This is what you asked for! No, I'm not going to come all of the way back there...do you realize how far I ran?"