Does it make sense to think of a public state as having privacy interests?
1 Like
Just so weâre clear, and I want to make sure this doesnât come off as an attack, but the narrative of progress for LGBT includes a lot of busted heads, lost jobs, and outright deaths for gays who came out of the closet in less enlightened times.
You do know that, right?
3 Likes
Not a Suicide Pact ⌠Sep 1, 2006
GOP voter ID law gets crushed ⌠Oct 13, 2014
If there was ever evidence that a jurist could change their mind upon review of additional subsequent evidenceâŚ
The point of my post is that I am disappointed and surprised Judge Richard Posner has not also revisited his position on personal privacy.
The law currently allows the government to suck up whatever electronic data it wants, from anyone it wants, without probable cause. He is extended the idea to include making it illegal to block the government from doing that. His position is consistent with the law (making it âjustâ) and his position is consistent with his past. Based on your logic he is doing a good job as a judge.
There is a difference between a large organized self outing and demand for civil liberties and those in power having the means to out and discriminate against people one at a time.
Social media enables the first and domestic spying could enable the second.
3 Likes
Agreed, absolutely.
I just wanted to make sure that distinction was acknowledged. You identified the difference with a clarity I missed, and stated it very well.
2 Likes
I see. From your joke about what might have happened to him recently, I thought you were going the other way and wondering why he might have adopted this as a new position, and so was noting that same time difference. Except my misreading, the point and disappointment is the same.
Yes, civil rights struggles arenât without casualties. The open atheist movement has also led to problems for individual atheists. But as with the LGBT community, discrimination against atheists is decreasing because people are beginning to realize how many of their friends and celebrities they like are atheists. This realization couldnât happen if people went on trying to hide their atheism and pretending to be religious as most atheists did until recently.
AgreedâŚitâs time to put this guy out to pastureâŚ
Well, I have a disk drive with several trillion bits of information on it. Iâd gladly mail it to him and he can vacuum through it to his heartâs content if that would satisfy himâŚ
Is this really a privacy question? Isnât the more basic question who owns the phone? If itâs mine, shouldnât I be able to paint it any color I like? Use any encryption algorithm I care to? Isnât that a simpler way to look at it?
1 Like
depending on the nature of the contract you signed to get the phone your âownershipâ of that phone might be somewhat weakly defined.
Wikipedia mentions âPosnerâs ⌠affection for the thought of Friedrich Nietzsche âŚâ
âWill to Powerâ and âĂbermenschâ are staples of the Executive â but the Judiciary?
Also, whatâs this about â[Posnerâs] argument that buying and selling children on the free market would lead to better outcomes than the present situation âŚâ?
The Invisible Hand should not be allowed to fondle children.
1 Like
Thatâs an easy fix. Defining the nature and limits of privacy?
under present conditions this is going to be incredibly problematic. on the one hand you have the pressures and demands of the security state pumped up by the âsuccessesâ of post 9-11 policies and fed by fear-mongering. on the other hand you have the pressures and demands of the corporate world to which politicians of both parties have become very attuned to, especially since the democratic strategy in the late 80s through the 90s has been one of selling out to wall street and big business while throwing the only counterbalance, organized labor, under the bus. mix those together and garnish with the remarkable apathy of most consumers about their information and itâs a problem.
itâs not that a way back is impossible now but it isnât going to be easy.
1 Like
If only they would settle for simple not wanting to deal with, as opposed to actively persecuting, I would spout out all kinds of shit, both true and untrue, simply to get people like him to fuck off. Would that we lived in such a gentle world.
âIâm shocked at the thought that a company would be permitted to manufacture an electronic product that the government would not be able to search,â
Why do I have the suspicion that this guy likes to talk about âsmall governmentâ when it comes to the government doing anything but causing trouble and fucking with people?
Another one of these posts that come up, to which my first instinct to whisper âSHHHHHâ guys, we donât live in a free country anymore, the government thinks it has the right to murder you, spy on every single form of communication, every single activity you have ever been involved in⌠Wait, why am I not saying that?
1 Like
Gets on knees. Places hands in prayer position
God? Please let Anonymous hear about this and decide to hack him and expose everything about him including whether he takes Viagra, every email heâs ever written, etc. you know, because he doesnât (think he will) mind, God.
Thank you for all of our blessings,
Amen
P.S. Could you get on that right away?
2 Likes
There are real problems with this, firstly itâs the inevitable abuse of power angle. The other real thing is he assumes any back door will be kept secret by the Suits which is clearly not the case
1 Like
âFollow me around. I donât care. Iâm serious. If anybody wants to put a tail on me, go ahead. Theyâll be very bored.â â Gary Hart.
5 Likes
The people who have something to hide always seem to say things like this. This brings to mind, âCertainly you may search my car Officer; I have nothing to hide.â
1 Like
