181–190 of 374 posts
And I think here lies the opportunity for challenging this in court.
The endgame is clear. Mass surveillance combined with AI agents. Would almost be like having a personal government spy watching each individual person.
Yup, it makes living in stalinist Russia seem like a libertarian paradise People don't seem to understand how incredibly oppressive society is becoming
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A lot of us strongly push against these types of measures not because we have anything to hide nor because we are on the side of the criminals. I had this view as well until I realized it’s predicated on living in a high trust society. At some point you reach a critical mass of crime that is so rampant, and the rule of law has so broken down that it’s basically Mad Max out there, and then these idealistic philosoph…
"He who gives up a little freedom for security deserves neither"
I think a better way to phrase it would be:
> he who gives up a little freedom for a little security ends up with neither
The problem for all 5 eyes (or 9 or 14) is that our co-operation dates back to the cold war and the institutions and thinking have not caught up to current geo-political and technical changes. If anything we are accelerating our co-operation at a time when many voters are seriously questioning the future of the US alliance. I wish some of our leaders would be more forthcoming about the amount of foreign pressure thei…
Silence? Didn't Canada's prime minister give some very loud speeches regarding the US and the changing geopolitical landscape, and start making deals in response to such?
Regarding warrantless searches and access ... reading the text of the bill (OP link) warrants seem to be required. Simple, right? Well, no, this is a recently inserted block of text in the bill (confirm at the link above): Exception (2. 7)(b) However, a copy of the warrant is not required to be given to a person under subsection (2. 6) if the judge or justice who issues the warrant sets aside the requirement in respe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
The Prisoner’s Dilemma has been shown to have significantly limited applicability in real-world scenarios. This has been covered again and again and again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Why would you think Canada is fine when the government can freeze your accounts at will? Why should Trump's actions be the measure to okay to Canada's measures against personal freedom? Trump and Canada can both take away personal freedoms and both are bad.
And again, the only argument against this is "well you don't want to have the government have power to deem anyone as in breach of public safety in case there is a tyrannical government that misuses this power"
which is hilarious because people think a tyrannical government is going to give 2 fucks about laws in the first place, which is literally happening today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"He who gives up a little freedom for security deserves neither"
I never understood this quote. I happily gave up the freedom of driving without a seatbelt for security, what does that say about me?
It's about giving up freedoms you might never get back, because it's not your decision anymore after giving them up.