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

Internet companies should not be monitoring terrorists or anyone else

techfruit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 49 posts

Re: Internet companies should not be monitoring terrorists or anyone else

#11

Post by Swizec »

firasd wrote: post #8
retube wrote: post #2

Why not? We expect and demand that banks monitor billions of transactions between 100s of millions of customers for evidence of money laundering and terrorism financing - and fine them billions of dollars when their controls or oversight are deemed insufficient. I expect most us agree that banks _should_ be held accountable for the legitimacy of their customers behaviour. Why should the same standards not be demanded…

A couple differences that I believe are relevant: a) Bank balances are a more controlled system from the beginning. They 'know' how much is in your account and when you transfer it they 'know' how much and to whom. Meanwhile, Google, Facebook and so on are not keeping active track of the nature of your conversations within chat and email in such a tightly controlled way. When I say "Hey, what's up" to a friend in Fac…

> Meanwhile, Google, Facebook and so on are not keeping active track of the nature your conversations within chat and email in such a tightly controlled way.

The question is, should they? I'm sure banks weren't always as tightly regulated and didn't keep as tight a track of everything as they do now.

Should we ask web giants to start behaving in a more regulated way for various reasons ranging from the ability to get alibi from "I posted this on Facebok at X and couldn't possibly have been where you say I was", to the ability to have court evidence of what people were/are up to. If data isn't kept to a certain standard it becomes too unreliable in such cases.

On the other hand, do we actually need banks to have such a tight control over everything? Yes, we expect it. But do we need it?

Re: Internet companies should not be monitoring terrorists or anyone else

#13

Post by moe »

retube wrote: post #2

Why not? We expect and demand that banks monitor billions of transactions between 100s of millions of customers for evidence of money laundering and terrorism financing - and fine them billions of dollars when their controls or oversight are deemed insufficient. I expect most us agree that banks _should_ be held accountable for the legitimacy of their customers behaviour. Why should the same standards not be demanded…

We expect and demand that banks monitor billions of transactions between 100s of millions of customers for evidence of money laundering and terrorism financing

I most certainly don't expect that from my bank.

I expect most us agree that banks _should_ be held accountable for the legitimacy of their customers behaviour.

I disagree. Banks are not law enforcement.

Re: Internet companies should not be monitoring terrorists or anyone else

#14

Post by firasd »

Swizec wrote: post #11
firasd wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A couple differences that I believe are relevant: a) Bank balances are a more controlled system from the beginning. They 'know' how much is in your account and when you transfer it they 'know' how much and to whom. Meanwhile, Google, Facebook and so on are not keeping active track of the nature of your conversations within chat and email in such a tightly controlled way. When I say "Hey, what's up" to a friend in Fac…

> Meanwhile, Google, Facebook and so on are not keeping active track of the nature your conversations within chat and email in such a tightly controlled way. The question is, should they? I'm sure banks weren't always as tightly regulated and didn't keep as tight a track of everything as they do now. Should we ask web giants to start behaving in a more regulated way for various reasons ranging from the ability to get…

In terms of court evidence, I believe internet companies are responsive to warrants (although some fight requests they consider unreasonable with more vigor than others.)

My reading of the article suggests this is more about active and ongoing surveillance, which gets into greyer areas (the feasibility of such monitoring, potential bias in algorithms, as well as issues like the concept of "pre-crime" and the legal concept of "prior restraint"...)

Re: Internet companies should not be monitoring terrorists or anyone else

#15

Post by [deleted] »

moe wrote: post #13
retube wrote: post #2

Why not? We expect and demand that banks monitor billions of transactions between 100s of millions of customers for evidence of money laundering and terrorism financing - and fine them billions of dollars when their controls or oversight are deemed insufficient. I expect most us agree that banks _should_ be held accountable for the legitimacy of their customers behaviour. Why should the same standards not be demanded…

We expect and demand that banks monitor billions of transactions between 100s of millions of customers for evidence of money laundering and terrorism financing I most certainly don't expect that from my bank. I expect most us agree that banks _should_ be held accountable for the legitimacy of their customers behaviour. I disagree. Banks are not law enforcement.

[deleted]

Re: Internet companies should not be monitoring terrorists or anyone else

#16

Post by retube »

moe wrote: post #13
retube wrote: post #2

Why not? We expect and demand that banks monitor billions of transactions between 100s of millions of customers for evidence of money laundering and terrorism financing - and fine them billions of dollars when their controls or oversight are deemed insufficient. I expect most us agree that banks _should_ be held accountable for the legitimacy of their customers behaviour. Why should the same standards not be demanded…

We expect and demand that banks monitor billions of transactions between 100s of millions of customers for evidence of money laundering and terrorism financing I most certainly don't expect that from my bank. I expect most us agree that banks _should_ be held accountable for the legitimacy of their customers behaviour. I disagree. Banks are not law enforcement.

Well even if you don't, regulators certainly do!

Re: Internet companies should not be monitoring terrorists or anyone else

#17

Post by amirmc »

rwmj wrote: post #7

It's also impossible. "I'm going to kill some soldiers when I get back" might refer to my super secret terror plot, or my PlayStation-related plans for the evening.

Here's my solution to that. Gather all the information possible, including things you've purchased so that I know whether or not you actually have those games or any of your friends do (and whether you actually play them). Assess, whether any major life changes have occurred for you based on all my data-mining and algos and assign a risk-factor for that particular statement. Monitor/filter your subsequent (or even previous?) communications (SMS, calls) for anything that might increase the risk-factor. If it's above a certain threshold, dispatch a discrete drone to follow you around 'just to be sure' (it's ok, you won't even know it's there). Maybe one day, I might decide to have armed drones, you know, 'just in case'. Oh, and make all of this automated because software is eating the world and what not (bugs? what bugs?).

Obviously, I say all of the above tongue-in-cheek but it wouldn't surprise me if there are people in government (or the security services) who actually think that way.

Re: Internet companies should not be monitoring terrorists or anyone else

#18

Post by waterlesscloud »

retube wrote: post #16
moe wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We expect and demand that banks monitor billions of transactions between 100s of millions of customers for evidence of money laundering and terrorism financing I most certainly don't expect that from my bank. I expect most us agree that banks _should_ be held accountable for the legitimacy of their customers behaviour. I disagree. Banks are not law enforcement.

Well even if you don't, regulators certainly do!

Regulators want more power. That surprises no one.

Re: Internet companies should not be monitoring terrorists or anyone else

#19

Post by jjgreen »

rwmj wrote: post #7

It's also impossible. "I'm going to kill some soldiers when I get back" might refer to my super secret terror plot, or my PlayStation-related plans for the evening.

> I'd love a boiled egg

> Me too, I could murder some soldiers

Re: Internet companies should not be monitoring terrorists or anyone else

#20

Post by icantthinkofone »

retube wrote: post #2

Why not? We expect and demand that banks monitor billions of transactions between 100s of millions of customers for evidence of money laundering and terrorism financing - and fine them billions of dollars when their controls or oversight are deemed insufficient. I expect most us agree that banks _should_ be held accountable for the legitimacy of their customers behaviour. Why should the same standards not be demanded…

Might you be one of those who reels in horror that Google electronically sniffs your email to serve you ads?
Post reply on HN