Do you care that it violates your privacy or is it a fair trade off for national security?
sort by best latest
old but still wrong, eh?
Government watches when we interact with others for reasons of commerce, and security. My neighborhood pays an off duty officer to patrol at night. Everyone did not agree.to the idea--they do not pay . dues. Is that an invasion of privacy.
If you have security roaming the neighborhood they could be useful in crime prevention but the proximity also means they do gain personal details that some aren't comfortable having them know. They should probably move if they disagree with it.
The chilling things is that they DON'T need a court order to track suspects. That's the whole problem-- the secret court has authorized the mass gathering of phone records regardless of who they are "for future pattern detection". Been going on 7 yrs
They do not need permission from the secret court because everything is out there in public for the pickings. I have a relative who will not use e-mail, but talks on her cell phone for hours--for a few dollars, someone can capture of conversations.
That's all we can do, wonder because it's not likely we'd ever be told the good, bad, and ugly from a trustworthy independent source.
Haha! I didn't think about the increase in traffic. Maybe they will check out our blogs too!
haha! Great point! :)
Haha, maybe the cat videos are secretly coded. LOL
I understand where you're coming from David, it's just that I've always respected other's privacy & would not snoop on them. There is a lot of info to be gained even if it seems harmless. If someone's a real threat only they should be snooped.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, ...
massive data collection is like predicting weather patterns from chaos, the whole point is that they are not looking for individuals. The premise is looking for political movements. Google BlueCRUSH
I agree. I was raised to not snoop on others but that's just me. If there is real cause to snoop on a suspect, only they should be snooped on within the means of the law. It's the wide net being cast that I don't like, not new but I don't like it.
Holy cow. That statement made by the FBI agent on CNN that they can "go back and look at digital communications in the past"... Can't get much clearer than that. Thanks for the source.
I went to infowars.com--there are thousands of sites like that . If you dig hard enough, you can discredit all of them. All these sites are just another version of talk radio, most of which has no credibility., in my opinion as a former reporter.
the whole point of data exhaust collection is to see patterns that can not be measured with spot checks. SO that mean everyone, everywhere, all the time.
No it means a representative sampling--much like a political poll--is needed in order to extrapolate certain conclusions.
I never watch MSNBC or Fox--if you watch both, you will go crazy. We have always been watched. It is just more efficient now. I am sure it would be easy to trace the phone no. for the house I lived in 55 years ago--what would it prove and who cares.
2 answers hidden due to negative feedback. Show
2 answers hidden due to negative feedback. Hide