We've crossed a threshold in human history. We are going from an existence where it was simply not financially or physically feasible to monitor every person 24/7. In less than two decades, the practical limits on surveillance have basically died. This is a massive and fundamental change in the structure of society and how we deal with this now, is going to shape the future of world society and culture.
Really, it's already past time to start addressing these issues, and more complacency is just going to ensure the most sociopathic systems possible will be cemented into our future. The 4th Amendment needs its own unyielding ideologically pure NRA type organization because if there are no limits on government power, eventually it will start brutalizing people.
What I'm hoping for is reform of the Third Party Doctrine -- Justice Sotomayer has already expressed sympathy with such reform. See her concurrence, specifically, the paragraph starting at PDF page 19: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/10-1259.pdf
The 3PD is the rule that if you share info w/ a third party, even if that party promises you confidentiality, and even if they never actually breach your confidence, then the Feds can just have the data because the 4th Amendment doesn't apply at all (you have no reasonable expectation of privacy). The 3PD conflates "perfect secrecy" with "reasonable expectation of privacy" and not even the NSA can do perfect secrecy under that standard -- Booz Allen Hamilton is a third party after all.
The Supreme Court has applied this to info people consider quite private, like banking, telephone, accounting records. There is a split on jurisdictions with respect to cell tower location, and some jurisdictions even apply the 3PD to medical records because your doctor is after all, a third party.
If the 3PD disappeared, all of this stuff the NSA, CIA, DEA, FBI, etc. do, would have to go through a 4th amendment analysis and a third grader could demonstrate they fail to comply. The only reason Section 215 of PATRIOT Act can even exist without being an instant 4th Amendment violation, is the 3PD. Take away 3PD, and it's all unconstitutional. Fail to address the 3PD, and any proposed reform is just toilet paper.
I'd encourage people to ask their reps/senators what they intend to do about the third party doctrine.
Voting your conscience is not wasting votes. Voting for policies policies you hate by voting for politicians you hate is not only wasteful, it's downright stupid -- like voting to be shot to death over being beheaded, it isn't a real choice. So how about NOT being a nice compliant little lamb and coming up with the guts to resist.
Exactly. And 3d parties don't even have to win to affect the public debate, they just have to make some kind of decent enough showing to get TwoParty candidates worried. But as long as people keep voting for the New GOP (aka Democrats) or the Old GOP (aka Parody of Itself), nothing that these fetid parties agree on will ever change. And sadly, these parties agree on a lot of really crappy shit, like due process free execution & detention, pervasive surveillance, socializing losses and privatizing profits (Wall St.), Executive branch war making authority, that we actually do need to be policeman of the world, exporting jobs in the name of free trade agreements, prison industrial complex, etc. etc.
Any TwoParty voter who opposes these policies, policies which significantly impact major human rights, cannot in good conscience vote for "either" party because he or she then becomes a de facto supporter of those policies.
And finally, the old "but look at the opposition - you can't let that nut win" argument is just pure BS when "both" parties share about 99.99% of their DNA. What real difference is there between 99.5% batshit crazy and 99.6%? Worse than that, we end up with people like Obama, whose mightiest achievement was taking what was a radical expansion of executive power under the GWB administration, and making it the new normal. That's worse than the alternative where at least one party would pretend to care and fight back a little.
This is a third party doctrine issue. The 3PD conflates "perfect secrecy" with "reasonable expectation of privacy". The 3PD is the rule that if you share info w/ a third party, even if that party promises you confidentiality, and even if they never actually breach your confidence, then the Feds can just have the data because the 4th Amendment doesn't apply at all (you have no reasonable expectation of privacy). Even Justice Sotomayer is starting to think that the 3PD is outdated. See her concurrence, specifically, the paragraph starting at PDF page 19: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/10-1259.pdf
If the 3PD disappeared, all of this stuff would have to go through a 4th amendment analysis and a third grader could demonstrate it fails to comply. The only reason Section 215 of PATRIOT Act has the effect it has, and all of these programs are "legal" -- is the 3PD. Take that away, and it's all unconstitutional. Fail to address the 3PD, and any proposed reform is fig leaf.
As for Irony, the Feds are hell bent on getting Snowden, but if the rules that apply to people applied to it, it would have no reasonable expectation of privacy in the documents he released because the Feds shared that info with a third party, namely, Booz Allen Hamilton.
There are millions who never even use Facebook or Twitter. Millions more who use it for news and commentary. Just because a subset of the population publishes every meal they eat, doesn't mean that all people wish to be monitored.
The cops might break the law, engage in criminal behavior, and beat you to deprive of you your rights, thus you should not have any rights to begin with.
What's really scary about this rebuttal is the proposition that people should not have 5th amendment protections. Just how much more obvious does it have to be that we are falling into a police state/authoritarian mindset at an amazingly fast pace -- the very idea that this is up for debate is shocking. And worse, the author does so without even a remote sense of shame or embarrassment.
Actually, this sounds like a Tim Cook fluff piece, like someone is trying to make a subtle point about how Apple is going to be all good because it has Steve Cook, or Tim Jobs -- whatever -- just buy their stock and iPhones.
Maybe she made a wrong turn, maybe bumped something and tried to get out of an insurance claim, then it all just unfolded from there. When our police are as trigger happy as they've become, these sort of unfortunate circumstances become increasingly probable. Or maybe she was trying to commit suicide and our kill-happy police forces were stoked to get a chance to help her.
Don't forget all the extra communication monitoring the will be necessary now.
If the woman was a muslim immigrant or visitor, that will provide an excuse to harass and violate the rights of our new favorite category for discrimination.
If the woman was a white suburban soccer mom, that will prove that the Feds need to monitor everyone, not just select a group for special discrimination.
If she was religious or political, it will provide an excuse to monitor religious groups or activists even more.
If poor, inflict further draconian prison sentences for minor infractions and increase monitoring.
The list can just keep going. No matter who she turns out to be or why she did what she did, it is going to provide the Federales an excuse to further curtail civil rights even though nobody was in any real danger because of the physical barriers - except for the cops injured by deploying those very same barriers.
IF GWB was president, the Democrats would pretend to care about civil liberties, there would be some real hearings on the NSA, Nixon's healthcare plan with the liberal parts stripped out wouldn't be the law, there would be blowback for spying on the press and prosecuting whistleblowers under the Espionage Act at a rate 3x that of all other presidents since it's enactment in the early 1900s, the president might still feel the need to trick or lie his way to getting Congress to approve a war but Libya basically killed the War Powers Act... on and on and on.
What Obama has done, is take what was considered an abusive extension/usurpation of power by the Executive branch, and made it the bipartisan consensus. So yeah, Obama is worse than GWB because instead of rolling back the abuse, he embraced it, extended it, and with the silence of his supporters and party, cemented it forever as the new normal.
What an idiot. How about the fact that I pointed out in my post, that he has exposed a crime on humanity affecting the entire planet. Are you too daft to see that scale matters? You know, the person who randomly plugs strangers' parking meters is doing a good thing, but it doesn't warrant a Nobel peace prize.
Snowden's revelations are much more important to the world as a whole. That the punishment wreaked on the person in Pakistan is much worse than that Snowden has yet received is beside the point. By exposing a corrupt machine that is used in the process of killing numerous innocents around the world through drone attacks is but one example of how Snowden's information can save many lives. Then of course there is the privacy right of the entire fucking planet. Female education abuses in some parts of Pakistan are important, but they just aren't anything like the scale of Snowden's whistleblowing.
Stupid deserves being called out. You really think that by weakening security, inserting backdoors, and compromising NIST, the NSA has had a positive effect on our economy? Did you read any of the links?
Due process free everything, expanding war in Afghanistan, trying to extend Iraq (but failing), war in Libya w/o Congressional authorization, war on whistleblowers and the press, NSA, pro cluster bombs, and on and on.
These are NOT liberal values. Obama is almost as liberal as Nixon, right down to his less liberal health care plan.
Shedding the Federal government is not the same thing as anarchy. There is still state, county, and city government after that. What exactly do the Fed's do? Blow shit up, make enemies around the world, get us further and further into debt, engage in crony capitalism/privatize profit and socialize losses, destroy civil rights, etc. etc.
So yeah, thinking of the Feds being shutdown makes me feel hopeful and happy. Now if the fuckers would just totally go move to N. Korea, the world would be comparative bliss.
You mean more like costing Americans billions in lost jobs, corporate espionage, and identity theft. The NSA is in cahoots with every cracker looking to steal your shit and take your job away:
So while I would agree that NSA is not non-essential, I would agree with that statement only because "non-essential" also implies that the NSA is not a malignant cancer on the health of America (and American values).
Anyway, you've sucked Clapper's dick enough for today's astroturfing quota.
Slashdot Mirror
We've crossed a threshold in human history. We are going from an existence where it was simply not financially or physically feasible to monitor every person 24/7. In less than two decades, the practical limits on surveillance have basically died. This is a massive and fundamental change in the structure of society and how we deal with this now, is going to shape the future of world society and culture.
Really, it's already past time to start addressing these issues, and more complacency is just going to ensure the most sociopathic systems possible will be cemented into our future. The 4th Amendment needs its own unyielding ideologically pure NRA type organization because if there are no limits on government power, eventually it will start brutalizing people.
What I'm hoping for is reform of the Third Party Doctrine -- Justice Sotomayer has already expressed sympathy with such reform. See her concurrence, specifically, the paragraph starting at PDF page 19: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/10-1259.pdf
The 3PD is the rule that if you share info w/ a third party, even if that party promises you confidentiality, and even if they never actually breach your confidence, then the Feds can just have the data because the 4th Amendment doesn't apply at all (you have no reasonable expectation of privacy). The 3PD conflates "perfect secrecy" with "reasonable expectation of privacy" and not even the NSA can do perfect secrecy under that standard -- Booz Allen Hamilton is a third party after all.
The Supreme Court has applied this to info people consider quite private, like banking, telephone, accounting records. There is a split on jurisdictions with respect to cell tower location, and some jurisdictions even apply the 3PD to medical records because your doctor is after all, a third party.
If the 3PD disappeared, all of this stuff the NSA, CIA, DEA, FBI, etc. do, would have to go through a 4th amendment analysis and a third grader could demonstrate they fail to comply. The only reason Section 215 of PATRIOT Act can even exist without being an instant 4th Amendment violation, is the 3PD. Take away 3PD, and it's all unconstitutional. Fail to address the 3PD, and any proposed reform is just toilet paper.
I'd encourage people to ask their reps/senators what they intend to do about the third party doctrine.
Voting your conscience is not wasting votes. Voting for policies policies you hate by voting for politicians you hate is not only wasteful, it's downright stupid -- like voting to be shot to death over being beheaded, it isn't a real choice. So how about NOT being a nice compliant little lamb and coming up with the guts to resist.
Exactly. And 3d parties don't even have to win to affect the public debate, they just have to make some kind of decent enough showing to get TwoParty candidates worried. But as long as people keep voting for the New GOP (aka Democrats) or the Old GOP (aka Parody of Itself), nothing that these fetid parties agree on will ever change. And sadly, these parties agree on a lot of really crappy shit, like due process free execution & detention, pervasive surveillance, socializing losses and privatizing profits (Wall St.), Executive branch war making authority, that we actually do need to be policeman of the world, exporting jobs in the name of free trade agreements, prison industrial complex, etc. etc.
Any TwoParty voter who opposes these policies, policies which significantly impact major human rights, cannot in good conscience vote for "either" party because he or she then becomes a de facto supporter of those policies.
And finally, the old "but look at the opposition - you can't let that nut win" argument is just pure BS when "both" parties share about 99.99% of their DNA. What real difference is there between 99.5% batshit crazy and 99.6%? Worse than that, we end up with people like Obama, whose mightiest achievement was taking what was a radical expansion of executive power under the GWB administration, and making it the new normal. That's worse than the alternative where at least one party would pretend to care and fight back a little.
This is a third party doctrine issue. The 3PD conflates "perfect secrecy" with "reasonable expectation of privacy". The 3PD is the rule that if you share info w/ a third party, even if that party promises you confidentiality, and even if they never actually breach your confidence, then the Feds can just have the data because the 4th Amendment doesn't apply at all (you have no reasonable expectation of privacy). Even Justice Sotomayer is starting to think that the 3PD is outdated. See her concurrence, specifically, the paragraph starting at PDF page 19: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/10-1259.pdf
If the 3PD disappeared, all of this stuff would have to go through a 4th amendment analysis and a third grader could demonstrate it fails to comply. The only reason Section 215 of PATRIOT Act has the effect it has, and all of these programs are "legal" -- is the 3PD. Take that away, and it's all unconstitutional. Fail to address the 3PD, and any proposed reform is fig leaf.
As for Irony, the Feds are hell bent on getting Snowden, but if the rules that apply to people applied to it, it would have no reasonable expectation of privacy in the documents he released because the Feds shared that info with a third party, namely, Booz Allen Hamilton.
There are millions who never even use Facebook or Twitter. Millions more who use it for news and commentary. Just because a subset of the population publishes every meal they eat, doesn't mean that all people wish to be monitored.
Sorry but this is not example of logic or reason:
What's really scary about this rebuttal is the proposition that people should not have 5th amendment protections. Just how much more obvious does it have to be that we are falling into a police state/authoritarian mindset at an amazingly fast pace -- the very idea that this is up for debate is shocking. And worse, the author does so without even a remote sense of shame or embarrassment.
Actually, this sounds like a Tim Cook fluff piece, like someone is trying to make a subtle point about how Apple is going to be all good because it has Steve Cook, or Tim Jobs -- whatever -- just buy their stock and iPhones.
that's a fair critique of my comment. sadly.
Maybe she made a wrong turn, maybe bumped something and tried to get out of an insurance claim, then it all just unfolded from there. When our police are as trigger happy as they've become, these sort of unfortunate circumstances become increasingly probable. Or maybe she was trying to commit suicide and our kill-happy police forces were stoked to get a chance to help her.
Don't forget all the extra communication monitoring the will be necessary now.
If the woman was a muslim immigrant or visitor, that will provide an excuse to harass and violate the rights of our new favorite category for discrimination.
If the woman was a white suburban soccer mom, that will prove that the Feds need to monitor everyone, not just select a group for special discrimination.
If she was religious or political, it will provide an excuse to monitor religious groups or activists even more.
If poor, inflict further draconian prison sentences for minor infractions and increase monitoring.
The list can just keep going. No matter who she turns out to be or why she did what she did, it is going to provide the Federales an excuse to further curtail civil rights even though nobody was in any real danger because of the physical barriers - except for the cops injured by deploying those very same barriers.
Suicide more likely.
It is obviously worse. The part you are missing:
GWB policies are the New Normal because of Obama and Democrats.
IF GWB was president, the Democrats would pretend to care about civil liberties, there would be some real hearings on the NSA, Nixon's healthcare plan with the liberal parts stripped out wouldn't be the law, there would be blowback for spying on the press and prosecuting whistleblowers under the Espionage Act at a rate 3x that of all other presidents since it's enactment in the early 1900s, the president might still feel the need to trick or lie his way to getting Congress to approve a war but Libya basically killed the War Powers Act ... on and on and on.
What Obama has done, is take what was considered an abusive extension/usurpation of power by the Executive branch, and made it the bipartisan consensus. So yeah, Obama is worse than GWB because instead of rolling back the abuse, he embraced it, extended it, and with the silence of his supporters and party, cemented it forever as the new normal.
What an idiot. How about the fact that I pointed out in my post, that he has exposed a crime on humanity affecting the entire planet. Are you too daft to see that scale matters? You know, the person who randomly plugs strangers' parking meters is doing a good thing, but it doesn't warrant a Nobel peace prize.
Snowden's revelations are much more important to the world as a whole. That the punishment wreaked on the person in Pakistan is much worse than that Snowden has yet received is beside the point. By exposing a corrupt machine that is used in the process of killing numerous innocents around the world through drone attacks is but one example of how Snowden's information can save many lives. Then of course there is the privacy right of the entire fucking planet. Female education abuses in some parts of Pakistan are important, but they just aren't anything like the scale of Snowden's whistleblowing.
Yeah, but it is realistic to think a smaller problem could be tackled.
Stupid deserves being called out. You really think that by weakening security, inserting backdoors, and compromising NIST, the NSA has had a positive effect on our economy? Did you read any of the links?
Don't forget SWAT raids on those dangerous and seditious home poker games.
It's a Salon article but I had to use the google link because salon put a " in the URL and I don't want to try to figure out how to deal with that.
Due process free everything, expanding war in Afghanistan, trying to extend Iraq (but failing), war in Libya w/o Congressional authorization, war on whistleblowers and the press, NSA, pro cluster bombs, and on and on.
These are NOT liberal values. Obama is almost as liberal as Nixon, right down to his less liberal health care plan.
NSA
Due process free detention
Due process free execution
War on Some Drugs (aka, New Jim Crow)
Shedding the Federal government is not the same thing as anarchy. There is still state, county, and city government after that. What exactly do the Fed's do? Blow shit up, make enemies around the world, get us further and further into debt, engage in crony capitalism/privatize profit and socialize losses, destroy civil rights, etc. etc.
So yeah, thinking of the Feds being shutdown makes me feel hopeful and happy. Now if the fuckers would just totally go move to N. Korea, the world would be comparative bliss.
Fuck yeah!
Preventing terrorism?
You mean more like costing Americans billions in lost jobs, corporate espionage, and identity theft. The NSA is in cahoots with every cracker looking to steal your shit and take your job away:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4282043&cid=44996569
So while I would agree that NSA is not non-essential, I would agree with that statement only because "non-essential" also implies that the NSA is not a malignant cancer on the health of America (and American values).
Anyway, you've sucked Clapper's dick enough for today's astroturfing quota.