I can remember when I was a small child, journalists were a threat to power; in fact, they brought down the President of the US. But that was a long time ago.
Prime example here why mass surveillance IS a threat to free speech and press. You donât have to look far to find USians âbraggingâ about the USâs alleged superior approach to free speech (see recent BB article) but when the connection between surveillance and stifling of free speech in the US comes up ⌠crickets
Well, if the govt is not doing anything wrong theyâd have to hide, they have nothing to fear from the nosy journos.
And again this makes me feel like the war is lost. STARTTLS? Maybe theyâll use HTTPS, too? Fucking hell, once a nation-state has gotten into the network, a nation-state mind you, with a real army of CS majors hell-bent on staying there, what the everloving shit is STARTTLS or HTTPS going to do? Make the cutesy little lock icon show up in Chromeâs âOmniboxâ?
Could you at least link to me when insinuating that Iâm ignorant and/or unconcerned about mass surveillance and its effects?
I appreciate snide innuendo as much as the next guy; but much of the potential of the internet is lost without the âhyper-linksâ.
Why isnât the website who once proudly boasted to itâs readers: âIf you read Boing Boing, the NSA considers you a target for deep surveillance.â ⌠have HTTPS?
Signed,
A Most Definite (& Innocent) Target for Deep Surveillance
To be fair, the majority of Americans here at BB is not of the NSA-loving variety.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
