People of the U.S lost it because they allowed this to happen by "not caring about it". And the whole privatized everything is bollocks. See what the costs of "health care", "college education" and most importantly "how the cops" have become. Health care and education has to be free if the people in the society is to remain intelligent. Even by the scale of economics, providing with good health care for free would cost much less that what it currently costs. The police is severely lacking accountability that it much needs. Read the original article linked in here. Think about it.
Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is irrelevant
321–329 of 329 posts
Re: Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is irrelevant
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
I left the NSA a few months ago largely for these reasons. While I knew I personally couldn't do much (if anything) to stem the onslaught against human rights, I knew at the very least I didn't want my life's work contributing to it. So I left, leaving behind a very secure sysadmin position with good salary, six weeks of paid vacation and incredible health benefits. Now I'm a 1099 independent contractor for a financi…
You probably had some serious inner battle about this. I applaud you for taking a stand, these kinds of decisions aren't easy. It gives me hope that there are still people out there who care more about doing the right thing than tapping to a source of money. Tangentially, I read somewhere months ago there was an effort by a group of activist people who built a tent near the NSA building and invited the people working…
I didn't interact with any of the people you're referring to, so I can't comment on that situation.
Thanks, it was a difficult decision and took me a while to come to, but I knew I couldn't continue working there in good conscience.
Re: Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is irrelevant
#323Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many groups agree within themselves. But they disagree with other groups. Who can judge which group it right? What are the odds that it happens to be the group you're in, not all the others that previous generations were in or people in other cultures are in. Quick test - is looking at a photo of a naked child evil?
Quicker test - do you have a point, or are you just trying to bog down this conversation about privacy with a defeatist "we have to let murders/rapists get away with it" argument?
I'm concerned that you seem to have made a clear distinction between good and evil when really there is none. Certainly we can apply our own society's general ideas, but it's not black and white in any way. Even murder is acceptable in many cultures. For example killing of soldiers during a war.
Re: Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is irrelevant
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quicker test - do you have a point, or are you just trying to bog down this conversation about privacy with a defeatist "we have to let murders/rapists get away with it" argument?
I'm concerned that you seem to have made a clear distinction between good and evil when really there is none. Certainly we can apply our own society's general ideas, but it's not black and white in any way. Even murder is acceptable in many cultures. For example killing of soldiers during a war.
It's a placeholder, and talking about it is distracting from the point (the "point" being maybe we can have both privacy and safety, and that the dichotomy is false). There is undeniably some activity that we can both agree is evil, and therefore we can talk about Evil without having to figure out exactly what that activity is.
Or rather, we could if you were being intellectually honest.
Most people, if given the choice, will nearly always pick safety over privacy. It's simply not enough to say you can't have both, because privacy will eventually get thrown out by the electorate, of any country.
Re: Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is irrelevant
#325Whenever I read one of these articles I am wondering why the examples of WHY mass surveillance affects ME as average Joe negatively have to be so weak / contrived: For example, imagine someone convinced by the argument "nothing to hide nothing to fear". Would this example convince them that in fact they do have to fear something? "You might think twice about contacting or meeting people (exercising your freedom of as…
I'm sure there are more direct examples, but I watched a video about Sesame Credit recently and it paints a rather dystopian picture of what's possible when you mix surveillance and gamification. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHcTKWiZ8sI
Re: Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is irrelevant
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm inclined to agree. I'd like to see more active ostracisation against software developers that have worked for organisations like the NSA and GCHQ. If we can make it a career ending job, it will dramatically reduce their ability to recruit. However, I'd also like to see general software development think more closely about the role it has in normalising these things. Next time you start to create an account system…
Are you giving the green light to guilt via association? Just because someone worked at GCHQ that does not mean they have done something unethical. Said person could have in fact done something very important for their country. Who are you associated with that I (or society) doesn't like? Maybe your career should be ended for working with an organisation that has done something unethical whether you were involved or…
>Are you giving the green light to guilt via association? Just because someone worked at GCHQ that does not mean they have done something unethical.
If the NSA would like to declassify it's employees job history in a credible and verifiable fashion, I'd be keen to take this on a case by case basis.
It is possible that the NSA is hiring engineers for benign reasons. If that's the case, I assume they are not classifying that work. After all, the government should not be withholding information from the public without cause.
As it stands, it is reasonable, in light of the revelations of the last several years, to suppose that any engineer who cannot reveal their work history with an intelligence agency has performed unethical work. This is what's known as "preponderance of evidence".
>Who are you associated with that I (or society) doesn't like?
What a fascinating question. So many insights to your character. I'm entitled to associate with whom I like, and your seedy, toad-like implication that for even suggesting such a thing as personal accountability, I must be a state enemy has the delicious tang of a low quality KGB-centric TV serial. You know, the kind in which the plucky all-american hero fights back against the oppression of a totalitarian russian government. It would be funny if global law enforcement wasn't looking towards digitally predicted thought crime as a genuine goal.
So speculate freely, because the real answer is terribly dull: I'm a normal citizen, posting my opinions on an internet forum and associating with you.
Re: Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is irrelevant
#327Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you giving the green light to guilt via association? Just because someone worked at GCHQ that does not mean they have done something unethical. Said person could have in fact done something very important for their country. Who are you associated with that I (or society) doesn't like? Maybe your career should be ended for working with an organisation that has done something unethical whether you were involved or…
>Are you giving the green light to guilt via association? Just because someone worked at GCHQ that does not mean they have done something unethical. If the NSA would like to declassify it's employees job history in a credible and verifiable fashion, I'd be keen to take this on a case by case basis. It is possible that the NSA is hiring engineers for benign reasons. If that's the case, I assume they are not classifyin…
That question provides zero insight into my character but it does shed some light on your lack of intelligence.
I don't actually care who you associate with - it was a thought game - you are saying that you are for guilt via association (or at least I assumed you were) which I was I tried to throw that principle back in your face. Jeez, do you need jokes explaining to you too?
The fact you think my inability to talk about some secret work I have done means that I've done something unethical is ridiculous.
Re: Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is irrelevant
#328Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Are you giving the green light to guilt via association? Just because someone worked at GCHQ that does not mean they have done something unethical. If the NSA would like to declassify it's employees job history in a credible and verifiable fashion, I'd be keen to take this on a case by case basis. It is possible that the NSA is hiring engineers for benign reasons. If that's the case, I assume they are not classifyin…
That question provides zero insight into my character but it does shed some light on your lack of intelligence. I don't actually care who you associate with - it was a thought game - you are saying that you are for guilt via association (or at least I assumed you were) which I was I tried to throw that principle back in your face. Jeez, do you need jokes explaining to you too? The fact you think my inability to talk…
>The fact you think my inability to talk about some secret work I have done means that I've done something unethical is ridiculous.
The evidence we've seen so far says no, it's not ridiculous. Prove otherwise any time :)
Re: Why privacy is important, and having “nothing to hide” is irrelevant
#329Earlier quoted context omitted.
That question provides zero insight into my character but it does shed some light on your lack of intelligence. I don't actually care who you associate with - it was a thought game - you are saying that you are for guilt via association (or at least I assumed you were) which I was I tried to throw that principle back in your face. Jeez, do you need jokes explaining to you too? The fact you think my inability to talk…
>The fact you think my inability to talk about some secret work I have done means that I've done something unethical is ridiculous. The evidence we've seen so far says no, it's not ridiculous. Prove otherwise any time :)
Isn't history full of examples of people doing secret government work, that wasn't unethical, that they could not share outside of their immediate team?
Alan Turing helping to crack the enigma code comes to mind.
You're now assuming all intelligence work is unethical? You're childlike arrogance and ignorance is tiresome.