A brief history of the surveillance debate


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Not exactly circular reasoning, more of a Catch-22.


#3

I think it’s more like “moving the goal posts.” It went from “mass surveillance is fine because…” to “mass surveillance is fine, period” with no example to justify it. I guess the circular reasoning is “mass surveillance is fine because mass surveillance is fine.”


#4

That’s the part that’s been bugging me lately. Somehow we’ve reached a point where it’s assumed the government needs to be able to decrypt your data, log who and when you call, and have access to everything. When did we have that conversation as a nation?


#5

Basically, because people who don’t care about privacy (“What do I have to hide?”) answered polls that said they were okay with the FBI breaking in to terrorists’ cell phones. (Sure the shooting in California was tragic, but basically no more tragic than a bus accident. We’ve been doing much worse to ourselves for ages.)


#6

We’re having it now. Trouble is, the government isn’t listening. Moreover, they’re saying that we’ve already had it.


#7

I read it as a non-sequitur, though with all the negatives maybe it reduces to…a NAND gate?
IRregardless, formal logic is hardly positively correlated with successful political argumentation.


#8

I’m sorry to be a broken record across platforms about this, but I’m with Benjamin Franklin on this one.

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”–Benjamin Franklin, Founder and Ladies’ Man…

“The security state is a farce of fear.” --Indubitably


#9

The more “they” say the “Homeland”, the more I want to run and be an expat writer.


#10

But where to run?!? Is there any place left that counts as “good” instead of just “somewhat less bad”?


#11

Totally.

I can only be here, and American in the New America…


#12

Let’s all pretend history doesn’t exist and that “Gentlemen don’t read each other’s mail” had no consequences positive or negative


#13

Yep. People break into houses - no big deal: we don’t want to make every house a fortress, so we have property insurance instead. People break into my house, and suddenly everything changes.


#14

I would love to see the original sources for both of these quotes. Who said a thing can also have great impact.


#15

It’d really be a thing if there was a place someone could search any particular string of information to get accurate and/or relevant information in return. It could probably be done with “computers” or “networked information systems”, from what my friends tell me…


#16

Yeah, you mean like my computer and Google? I tried that. I find about 1,000,000 references to this brief, undocumented article and nothing on the original quotes. You want to try that again without violating Wheaton’s Law? Like if your search had done better, maybe helping with a link?


#17


#18

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.