Re: Edward Snowden : Thu Jun 13, 2013 11:42 am  

All a load of nonsense. I personally don't care one bit if the authorities are watching every single thing I do like a hawk. I don't do anything that would interest them anyway, so what on earth is the fuss about?

If doing this saves one life, let alone a few hundred thousand, why not go for it.

[DaveO]

Re: Edward Snowden : Thu Jun 13, 2013 12:04 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

All a load of nonsense. I personally don't care one bit if the authorities are watching every single thing I do like a hawk. I don't do anything that would interest them anyway, so what on earth is the fuss about?

If doing this saves one life, let alone a few hundred thousand, why not go for it.

So you have never done anything, ever, on-line that could possibly compromise your job or personal life even slightly? Never viewed any naughty pictures ? What about details of your finances? Happy for details of those to be kept or monitored in cased you start donating to Al-Qaeda?

Now you may not do any of that but that doesn't mean all the data held about you won't find it's way out into the open or be shared with organisations that have nothing to do with anti-terrorism. In fact it's almost guaranteed someone if not many people will have such details exposed.

They won't have broken any laws but details of their financial circumstances, what sites they look at on-line , even details such as to their sexuality which is no ones business but theirs will be exposed and this can have a serious impact on their lives.

The last government wanted to increase the time you could be held without charge to 3 months. If a future government re-introduced that and then this mine of information meant you got detained due to a case of mistaken identity (which has happened to people already) you would most likely lose your job and God knows what else.

This is why you can't dismiss this as "a load of nonsense". It's actually incredibly dangerous and it's naive to think otherwise.

Re: Edward Snowden : Thu Jun 13, 2013 12:08 pm  

And if having looked through your communications, someone misinterprets something in a way that causes them to believe you are a threat, to the extent that they send armed police to follow you onto public transport?

Not like the police have an entirely unblemished record in terms of using their surveillance appropriately to reach the correct conclusions, is it?

Re: Edward Snowden : Thu Jun 13, 2013 12:25 pm  

I personally find that trying to explain to those so terminally stupid, gullible, or uncomprehending that they can actually state:
"I personally don't care one bit if the authorities are watching every single thing I do like a hawk"
is a monumental waste of time. They have already been assimilated. You just have to shake your head.

Re: Edward Snowden : Thu Jun 13, 2013 12:27 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

And if having looked through your communications, someone misinterprets something in a way that causes them to believe you are a threat, to the extent that they send armed police to follow you onto public transport?

Not like the police have an entirely unblemished record in terms of using their surveillance appropriately to reach the correct conclusions, is it?

Yeah, far better to let the terroristas communicate freely. The paranoia is remarkable. They aren't going to sift through the details of your life, they don't have the time or inclination to do it. All the people moaning about freedom and their privacy on here, probably have Facebook accounts ffs and post their every movement, tea selection, illness and mood swing on there.

A lot of you obviously have things to hide. Just get a cellar with a good lock and a concealed entrance.

Re: Edward Snowden : Thu Jun 13, 2013 12:32 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Yeah, far better to let the terroristas communicate freely. The paranoia is remarkable. They aren't going to sift through the details of your life, they don't have the time or inclination to do it. All the people moaning about freedom and their privacy on here, probably have Facebook accounts ffs and post their every movement, tea selection, illness and mood swing on there.

A lot of you obviously have things to hide. Just get a cellar with a good lock and a concealed entrance.

If you seriously believe terrorists communicate their plans in insecure emails, voicemails and texts (which even the dumbest tabloid journo these days can hack) then you're either incredibly naive or on a massive trolling mission.

Re: Edward Snowden : Thu Jun 13, 2013 12:32 pm  

It's rather sweet to see the faith that some people have in the authorities, including the security services and police.

Re: Edward Snowden : Thu Jun 13, 2013 12:35 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

<snip>

As I've suggested previously, if only those with something to hide object, then how about CCTV inside every home in the country?

It would certainly put paid to at least some domestic violence and some child abuse, and allow very fast detection and judicial action on much more, since those crimes mostly take place in the home.


If the invasion of privacy by the state becomes normalised, what guarantee that 'security' concerns will not, at some time in the future, also include ensuring as little dissent as possible and a totally compliant populace?

[DaveO]

Re: Edward Snowden : Thu Jun 13, 2013 2:32 pm  

Mintball wrote:

If the invasion of privacy by the state becomes normalised, what guarantee that 'security' concerns will not, at some time in the future, also include ensuring as little dissent as possible and a totally compliant populace?

Indeed. If this kind of monitoring had been available in the last century Alan Turing would have probably been locked up before he got anywhere near helping win WWII at Bletchley Park and those awkward Suffragettes would have had the state undermining their campaign for the vote.

There are already plenty of examples of where such information has been misused as illustrated in those links I posted earlier in the thread which I can only assume Saddened has not read.

Or he has and is playing the law of averages and assumes the next unfortunate victim won't be him so it's OK if they pay the price for his "freedom".

A bit like the bring back hanging brigade who think the odd mistaken execution of an innocent person is merely unfortunate 'cause its bound not to happen to them.

Re: Edward Snowden : Thu Jun 13, 2013 2:45 pm  

Mintball wrote:

As I've suggested previously, if only those with something to hide object, then how about CCTV inside every home in the country?

Wouldn't bother me one bit. If they want to watch me eating my tea, playing on the Xbox and scratching my nads, so be it.

I don't see what the authorities are doing wrong here that the likes of Facebook and in particular Google are doing.