I am afraid. I am very afraid.

[Erik Mesoy]

Thanks for the heads-up, Rik! Nice to know that the circumventor I'm using works.

The central source I use for privacy on the internet is PeaceFire. - "You'll understand when you're younger."

You can read about a lot of useful methods there. The sites I've been using are, among others:
www.stupidcensorship.com
www.birdsflyfast.com
www.lettersfromgermany.com
www.purplebananas.com

BTW: This post should also appear as coming from another IP address.

 

[Spartan117]

Spot on - cookie for you.


I've forgotten tp post the 3rd reasion why the "I've got nothing to hide, so it's ok" is invalid, so I'll do that here.
The ones that do have something to hide, will make sure they are hiding it in such a way that it's either not detectable or when discovered unusable. The ones that do have something to hide will not really be bothered by these methods. The ones that think they have got nothing to hide will not hide it and will get victimised.
For those of you that have nothing to hide: please post your credit card number and the expiry date of the card.

yes a very good point... to people with idea ,"its okay, i got nothing to hide"

 

[Xanikk999]

yes a very good point... to people with idea ,"its okay, i got nothing to hide"

I still say i got nothing to hide.

I dont agree with what the government is doing on this and i think its a waste of time.

But im not going to get worried about it. The next president could just as easily reverse this.

Il say it one last time. We arent on the road to fascism.

In fact this isnt even anything new. The government has spied on people throughout the united states history. During war time anyway. And i think this "war on terror" is just a phase.

 

[Spartan117]

In fact this isnt even anything new. The government has spied on people throughout the united states history. During war time anyway.

put the point is not to this extent..new technology has allowed "spying" to be more efficient...

 

[Xanikk999]

put the point is not to this extent..new technology has allowed "spying" to be more efficient...

But what is it about the spying that has you worried?

I dont know if its just me or not but i dont care what some person who i have no relation to knows about me.
I would never see this person or have contact with him. So whats the big deal?

I know they arent supposed to do it. But I just dont think this is going to turn into a real problem.

Definitly not like during the purges in soviet russia during stalins time if you want to compare this to fascism. (I consider soviet russia having fascist ideals and at the same time "communist" even though they wouldnt admit it at the time)

 

[Spartan117]

But what is it about the spying that has you worried?

I dont know if its just me or not but i dont care what some person who i have no relation to knows about me.
I would never see this person or have contact with him. So whats the big deal?

I know they arent supposed to do it. But I just dont think this is going to turn into a real problem.

Definitly not like during the purges in soviet russia during stalins time if you want to compare this to fascism. (I consider soviet russia having fascist ideals and at the same time "communist" even though they wouldnt admit it at the time)

i feel extremely uncomfortable, you will never know what a person can do with that type of info...

i would rather keep to myself and have my info private...

are you concern if somebody else knew your private info...or you not caring applies only to the governemnt knowing your private information?

 

[Rik Meleet]

Xanik, Spartan - what about a solution you both are happy with: Data about a person may only be distributed with the person's consent? ?

That way Xanik can get his data distributed anywhere he likes, and Spartan can prevent it.

Deal ?

 

[Spartan117]

Xanik, Spartan - what about a solution you both are happy with: Data about a person may only be distributed with the person's consent? ?

That way Xanik can get his data distributed anywhere he likes, and Spartan can prevent it.

Deal ?

 

[GermanRuler]

Do bear in mind that it didn't work for the DDR in the end...

Anyway: What do you propose to do about it? The technology exists. It can't be un-invented.

EDIT: I agree that this is scary stuff, and I do not trust any government very far with it. I just don't see how anything can be done about it.

ya but it took 28 years and alot of lives to work itself out

 

[The Yankee]

I'm just trying to see how such information could be used against me. I guess some stuff could be damaging if you were running for office but if you are talking about in a more private context... will I be rounded up as some conspirator or enemy of the state? I would say other things would have to happen to a government independent of the technology/information storage phenomena so while it can be abused it doesn't mean it necessarily will be abused.

You're quite trusting. But such blind trust can be misplaced. After all, there is the expression "Trust, but verify." Which is what I think needs to be done to ensure that it will not be abused.

As for what the information could be used for, I don't know. I don't know what would be illegal in some society (pick any one, doesn't have to be the US or Germany) in 2030, under the leadership of so-and-so. Again, as it becomes easier to track these things, so to must the means to ensure that it doesn't cross the line.

 

[Rik Meleet]

I'm just trying to see how such information could be used against me. I guess some stuff could be damaging if you were running for office but if you are talking about in a more private context... will I be rounded up as some conspirator or enemy of the state? I would say other things would have to happen to a government independent of the technology/information storage phenomena so while it can be abused it doesn't mean it necessarily will be abused.

Many public services are closed "bacause they are not cost-effective". At the same time more and more money is pumped into state institutions that register data and eavesdrop. If those services would have been cost-ineffective ; funding for them would probably be cut as well.
With that in mind I do believe the information that is gathered and stored can be used effectively. (against me (?)).

 

[Ayatollah So]

EDIT: I agree that this is scary stuff, and I do not trust any government very far with it. I just don't see how anything can be done about it.

Haven't read the full thread yet, but:

What we can do: get at least as much info on our governments as they are getting on us. Or die trying. Technology cuts both ways - I hope.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Many public services are closed "bacause they are not cost-effective". At the same time more and more money is pumped into state institutions that register data and eavesdrop. If those services would have been cost-ineffective ; funding for them would probably be cut as well.
With that in mind I do believe the information that is gathered and stored can be used effectively. (against me (?)).

Seems a pretty tenuous argument for claiming that the mass of information gathered can be used effectively. But, let's be honest, Rik, you're not going to be reassured by what anyone posts here - you've clearly made your mind up on this one.

There is a clear conflict between (a) the general needs of law enforcement & crime prevention in the 21st century and (b) the need to ensure the privacy of all of our personal information. Rightly or wrongly, there is a huge concern in the US & UK (at least) about the threat of terrorism. There should be a significant concern across all of the industrial world (at least) regarding the international and complex possibilities for crime offered by technology. Criminals and terrorists will, obviously enough, not make it easy for anyone to discover them - if we refuse our intelligence services the possibility of accessing more information, then we need to accept a higher risk of terrorism not being detected and prevented, and higher rates of sophisticated crime going unpunished.

That may well be a price worth paying, of course. As many have said in this thread, this kind of thing normally only goes in the direction of recording more and more information, and who knows what the political situation will be in 30 years time ? However, as Joe Strummer once said, "Okay, so let’s agree about the price" - this is not a case of governments and intelligence services being out to get you personally, but a potential impact on you of something they believe is necessary to keep you safe from real threats.

 

[Spartan117]

ever seen enemy of the state?...

but seriously

 

[The Yankee]

There is a clear conflict between (a) the general needs of law enforcement & crime prevention in the 21st century and (b) the need to ensure the privacy of all of our personal information. Rightly or wrongly, there is a huge concern in the US & UK (at least) about the threat of terrorism. There should be a significant concern across all of the industrial world (at least) regarding the international and complex possibilities for crime offered by technology. Criminals and terrorists will, obviously enough, not make it easy for anyone to discover them - if we refuse our intelligence services the possibility of accessing more information, then we need to accept a higher risk of terrorism not being detected and prevented, and higher rates of sophisticated crime going unpunished.

You make a valid point, but how is this new round of technological explosion any different from previous rounds when criminal elements sought to use those to their advantage?

 

[Xenocrates]

If civil liberties were being attacked from one direction only, I'd see how people could be unmoved about it, but:

http://www.alternet.org/story/36553

That's quite an impressive list of evidence supporting the argument that fascism is upon us. I'd copy and paste a bit, but the whole article is worth reading.

I was impressed by this comment after the article:

Right now Americans are spending over 4 hours per day in front of the TV.

Before TV, this time was spent building Social Capital (that is socializing with actual people, joining clubs, being active in their churches, teaching their kids, etc).

The only way Democracy can exist is with enough Social Capital. Otherwise the slide towards totalitarianism is inevitable.

From a sociological perspective this is right. The lack of trust that one American has for another is due to a combination of Capitalism/individualism and brain-rotting TV, which is also reducing our ability to communicate and therefore form cooperatives. It's probably true that the last common communal behaviour of Americans is religion; hence the dusk of democracy has a religious tinge.

Something similar is happening here in the UK, but there do seem to be more US posters here who have fallen for the jingoism and propaganda.

 

[Ayatollah So]

I should have read Verbose's post before posting my own (#92). Anyway...

So the technology is there.

Is your government required by law (which is being upheld) to conduct its business in public and in a manner transparent to the citizens?

If so, I think we're OK for the time being. No reason to be complacent, but as long as we can look at our respective governments looking at us the citizens the situation isn't grave. (It does require functioning and critical public media.)

I agree with your prescription. Unfortunately we are not doing as well in the USA as perhaps you are in Sweden. The sunshine laws are not very adequate, they are not well enforced (Bush's bypass of FISA courts is particularly painful), and our media is a poor excuse.