Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 47 posts

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#21

Post by mhurron »

Karunamon wrote: post #17
jalanco wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ouch! Please feel free to elaborate because I'm not sure exactly what you are disagreeing with. I mean, are you saying that you believe that the people given the authority to invade your privacy always have good intentions? Because I don't believe that. In the real world, these authorities are often driven by pressure to "find something", or to "make a quota", or to "prove our worth". And the results often harm innoc…

Well, okay. >(1) if you really believe that, then you would have no problem with a group of strangers searching your house, your bank records, safety deposit boxes, all your digital assets, etc. No, actually I wouldn't, because there's an entire freakin' universe of difference between cops searching your house, destroying things, having your neighbors wonder WTF is going on and having an open profile on a social netw…

Warrentless wiretaping is 'digging through your possessions'. It is 'strip searching your family'. This is not 'oops, I put my drunk picture public on Facebook.'

That email is stored. It is cataloged. It is cross referenced with every other email that is sent. It is referenced with every crime that is investigated that even remotely has the same keywords as that mail. It is indexed in relation to those you associate with and those they associate with. It is used to create a profile of every little subversive or thing you may ever be tangentially associated with and used against you.

This bill allows it to be done warentless because otherwise a warrent would be required.

To relate this to what you choose to put on a social networking site is not even in the same ballpark as what the NSA is doing here.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#22

Post by alayne »

Karunamon wrote: post #17
jalanco wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ouch! Please feel free to elaborate because I'm not sure exactly what you are disagreeing with. I mean, are you saying that you believe that the people given the authority to invade your privacy always have good intentions? Because I don't believe that. In the real world, these authorities are often driven by pressure to "find something", or to "make a quota", or to "prove our worth". And the results often harm innoc…

Well, okay. >(1) if you really believe that, then you would have no problem with a group of strangers searching your house, your bank records, safety deposit boxes, all your digital assets, etc. No, actually I wouldn't, because there's an entire freakin' universe of difference between cops searching your house, destroying things, having your neighbors wonder WTF is going on and having an open profile on a social netw…

Indiscriminate wiretapping and data gathering is worse than targeted strip searching with probable cause. In the U.S., it's a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#23

Post by alrs »

wjamesg wrote: post #20
alrs wrote: post #16

I live in California. I just called Feinstein's office and registered my opinion. According to the staffer, Feinstein supports the extension. Her office can be reached at (202) 224-3841. I called Boxer's office as well. After dialing to speak with a staffer, it rang several times and then hung up. (202) 224-3553.

Good for you, I encourage more to do the same. I interned for my Congressman on Capitol Hill a few years ago. In my opinion, volume calling is the best way to actually get heard. Web forms, emails, faxes: much less so. U.S. citizens, Contact your U.S. Representative: http://www.house.gov/representatives/find Contact your Senators: http://www.senate.gov

If I read the article correctly, the House has already passed this, so there isn't any reason to call your representative.

It's only your senators that matter at this point. Call both of them.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#24

Post by cbc0201 »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #13
Alaskan005 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If it keeps safe, what do I care!" I feel bad for you. Really do. I know it's a not a constructive comment but with him it seems like a lost cause.

You shouldn't dismiss him/her out of hand. This is the way the vast majority of people feel. Until we overcome that, those of us who do care will never succeed in changing anything.

First, to all you liberal's, its not a person but computers scanning our communications and NO, I still don't care!

Are you oblivious to the secret code in Microsoft and Intel's software? What do you think that code is doing and who put it there? Its been there for years tracking us! God knows what we have in our Smart phone's, but its there.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#25

Post by [deleted] »

Shivetya wrote: post #8
w1ntermute wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, the sad truth has been that most average people have responded to this issue by saying that they have nothing to hide and don't mind since it helps catch terrorists. Normally, you could expect Republicans to oppose a big government program like this, but, as we all know, as soon as you say the word "terrorist", they're all suddenly in favor of big government and big spending.

Sadder still, the press would be all over this if the Republicans were pushing it, instead they are complacent. As a conservative I can say that in my experience that Republicans are rarely against big government. In the recent election many I know had to hold their nose as neither Romney nor Ryan were true conservatives.

[deleted]

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#26

Post by ascendant »

cbc0201 wrote: post #24
SoftwareMaven wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You shouldn't dismiss him/her out of hand. This is the way the vast majority of people feel. Until we overcome that, those of us who do care will never succeed in changing anything.

First, to all you liberal's, its not a person but computers scanning our communications and NO, I still don't care! Are you oblivious to the secret code in Microsoft and Intel's software? What do you think that code is doing and who put it there? Its been there for years tracking us! God knows what we have in our Smart phone's, but its there.

Lay off the "all you liberals" crap. If I want zealotry mixed with stereotyping I can go read the comments on any CNN or FOX news article. Leave that crap off of HN please.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#27

Post by jeremyarussell »

mtgx wrote: post #5
cbc0201 wrote: post #3

First, your "Take Action" link doesn't work. Second, I don't really care if "NSA's Supercomputers" are scanning my emails, text messages and even my phone calls. They're not really interested in my activities. Third, I'll let you in on a little secret, Its not just overseas communication! If it keeps safe, what do I care!

New account and first comment here, just to post that NSA can look at your e-mails if they want? I wonder if you're just someone working at NSA and FBI, and who's pushing for these laws. We know that they use "persona management" software to be part of the public conversation.

I find myself agreeing with you, this guy is too much. (Also did you notice how he think's we are all liberals?)

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#29

Post by capnrefsmmat »

cbc0201 wrote: post #3

First, your "Take Action" link doesn't work. Second, I don't really care if "NSA's Supercomputers" are scanning my emails, text messages and even my phone calls. They're not really interested in my activities. Third, I'll let you in on a little secret, Its not just overseas communication! If it keeps safe, what do I care!

Other people have already responded to you, but I think they've fallen into the common trap of assuming that privacy is about having something to hide. Yes, the data collected might be leaked by poor security, and yes, you might not want your neighbors installing cameras in your shower, but that's not the point.

This is an excellent paper on the problem:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565

In short: privacy is not about hiding things. It's about an exchange of power. A government with more information about your life is one with more power to make decisions about you. There are many reasons to oppose this:

* Chilling effects. People may be more afraid to conduct legal activities for fear they will be misconstrued and used against them by the government. ("Sorry, you can't fly anymore.")

* People are powerless to fight decisions the government makes on their behalf, because they do not know what data the government has collected, and all of it is secret. It's not Orwellian; it's Kafkaesque.

* Small bits of information gathered through surveillance can turn into much more interesting information about a person combined. You might not mind revealing each individual tidbit, but what about the picture they paint when combined?

There's more the the argument, which you can read in the article linked. Privacy is not just about secrecy.

Re: EFF: Stop Congress from Reauthorizing the Warrantless Spying Bill

#30

Post by malandrew »

chimeracoder wrote: post #18
alrs wrote: post #16

I live in California. I just called Feinstein's office and registered my opinion. According to the staffer, Feinstein supports the extension. Her office can be reached at (202) 224-3841. I called Boxer's office as well. After dialing to speak with a staffer, it rang several times and then hung up. (202) 224-3553.

> Feinstein supports the extension. Her office can be reached at (202) 224-3841. Don't let this stop you (or anyone) from calling, but it's going to take a lot to get Feinstein to switch her stance on this.

Out of curiosity, why? Is Feinstein one of the main proponents of the extension or something?
Post reply on HN