The Nsa And You!

[Commander Riker]

Chuck... it's known that the internet is not a secure place... but it's super shitty of our government to become more and more closed in their actions... through secrecy... while putting everyone else under the microscope for no apparent reason.

I was starting to wonder what happened to this guy... but then I just assumed they told him that if he didn't go along with the program, he'd get to ride in a special motorcade in Dallas....... in a sweet convertible. :-|

[Fudge_Brownie]

listen, all our phones have GPS enabled tracking now. Virtually none of us are doing anything they don't know about anyway.

look up, smile and wave.

Wave... to Apple, or Google. Sure. But the government should not be welcome to the data you gave to a private company without reason. You need to distinguish the difference. Alain asked something along these lines earlier and I'm not sure you replied : Would you welcome the PD to search your home as part of a monthly search of all homes? You don't have to be home, so it's no more inconvenient than the digital equivalent. Or how bout we put a camera in the home? (Like that web camera you probably already have )

[Che'_Moderator]

I was starting to wonder what happened to this guy... but then I just assumed they told him that if he didn't go along with the program, he'd get to ride in a special motorcade in Dallas....... in a sweet convertible. :-|

He was a shitty choice for president, thats what happened to him. That said, its not really his fault. He was very green and had not been part of any oversight committees. At the time of his election I held a higher clearance. So its kinda hard to comment on the inner workings of nation security when you have no idea how it works... No idea why anyone who voted for him is surprised how he 180ed on some issues. RE Fudge: 1 word. ARPANET. Remember whos playground you are on.

[Commander Riker]

He was a shitty choice for president, thats what happened to him. That said, its not really his fault. He was very green and had not been part of any oversight committees. At the time of his election I held a higher clearance. So its kinda hard to comment on the inner workings of nation security when you have no idea how it works... No idea why anyone who voted for him is surprised how he 180ed on some issues. RE Fudge: 1 word. ARPANET. Remember whos playground you are on.

Oh, I know. I get that. Also, I know that he's not solely responsible for most of the actions of the government. He's labeled as a leader, but is really just a spokesperson. "Hey, this is what we're doing, and I will be a figure head for which you to praise or hate... just ignore what we're doing." He did say though "Hey, I'm not going to be down with our government doing X..." Now he speaks the opposite. They must have told him the armored coupe was in the shop, and they would have to take the convertible again.

The internet is not an inherently secure place, but I believe that we should strive to protect privacy as best that we can. It's one thing to say one should not expect privacy while on the internet, but it's also another to setup the pathways for constant surveillance or backdoors by the government. It's scary to me when the government is positioning itself to have the legal authority to call anyone a terrorist. My personal dissent, in the future, may be against the law, because I might a terrorist.

[flyfishing3]

How many govt employees do we have reading every email?

There would be 0 unemployment.

How many employees are listening to you talk on phone?

Newt would have us using children to listen

[Burn-E]

Mike, it doesn't matter whether they're reading every email or listening on your phone. The point is that the Constitution states they cannot collect that information without three key things:

1. Probable cause

2. A warrant issued by a judge

3. A full description of the place and persons they are pursuing and what specific items / persons they expect to seize

So, their interpretation of the PATRIOT ACT is an unconstitutional act and the manner in which they've interpreted the Executive Order they are operating under in this collection of data has already been ruled illegal. They can ask businesses to keep that information and hold it for a period of time so that in the future if they identify a suspect they can then pursue issuing warrants to explore that specific information. We already do that with the IRS where the expectation is that every individual must retain 6 years of records to be able to verify you properly reported. There's no reason the intelligence community couldn't get a requirement in place for businesses to retain their records for a similar period of time.

Instead, they went over the top and decided for their own purposes they needed to own those records. Something which the Constitution labels as unreasonable search and seizure. If warrantless wiretaps is an illegal act then so is collecting phone records without a warrant.

Whatever you think of their reasoning - and its specious logic if you've ever really stopped to consider it - it doesn't matter because the Constitution says you can't do it. And in 2011 a Judge on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ruled that the NSA had overstepped its bounds in this very same program but the Administration has gone out of its way to keep that ruling secret.

There is no transparency here and a government agency is violating the law and the Constitution in the name of what Col. Nathan R. Jessup would declare is their job of standing atop the wall and guarding our society from the evil masses in the world outside. But here's the thing, they serve not at the President's pleasure but at the pleasure of the people. This is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. No one, not even the protectors, especially the protectors of society, no one is above the law.

And why are they doing this? Supposedly to stop terrorism. What massive panopticon has been erected in the name of security and in the process has eroded the rights of us as citizens? It's breathtaking when you step back and consider what lengths we have allowed the government to go in the name of securing the homeland.

[Fudge_Brownie]

RE Fudge: 1 word. ARPANET. Remember whos playground you are on.

Historically. But as far as I knew, today the backbone is mostly private groups who collect money to provide the service. Not a government-run entity. SIPR? Sure... all theirs.

And while the government may have some entitled vote for bringing us this magical gift, I'd say the private world has contributed equally to the party. Arguably to have a majority-vote.

[survolvo]

Alain asked something along these lines earlier and I'm not sure you replied : Would you welcome the PD to search your home as part of a monthly search of all homes? You don't have to be home, so it's no more inconvenient than the digital equivalent. Or how bout we put a camera in the home? (Like that web camera you probably already have )

You are still avoiding this question...

[Che'_Moderator]

Historically. But as far as I knew, today the backbone is mostly private groups who collect money to provide the service.

Funded with federal tax dollars.

[Burn-E]

Funded with federal tax dollars.

Which if you'll recall means it belongs to the people. Our tax dollars not the federal government's. We provide them to the government in order to provide the services that we as people require.

But whatever your military background might be Chuck, surely you remember that DOD reports to the CIC and to whom does he report? The people.

So what you're saying when you make the statement that the internet evolved from ARPANET is that it evolved in a program funded by the taxpayers of the United States of America. It belongs to us, not the military.

The response to anyone who makes a statement like that is, that's our playground and you serve at our pleasure. We respect what you do and honor the fallen who died for this country, but in the end, let's not forget who is in charge.

[Che'_Moderator]

Which if you'll recall means it belongs to the people. Our tax dollars not the federal government's. We provide them to the government in order to provide the services that we as people require.

But whatever your military background might be Chuck, surely you remember that DOD reports to the CIC and to whom does he report? The people.

The gov is not coming into your house. If you do not like the policy, stop using the internet. If I wanted I could read every PM and every email notification sent through this server, and the others I manage. CC info, addresses, private messages, photos, FB logins and so on. But I do not. Why? Because who cares. In the 15 year history of VS I think I have read maybe 10 PMs and a hand full of emails and that was to curb abuse that was reported. Using your tax dollar logic, you should go ask for some seat time in a F35

[flyfishing3]

You are still avoiding this question...

My standard answer.

i'm not doing anything i shouldn't be, so i have nothing to hide or fear.

[Fudge_Brownie]

Funded with federal tax dollars.

Which is why I acknowledge they are entitled to some say, morally/ethically. But legally? Do they have any rights to what we use today? Because I haven't seen anything to support that.

And I'm pretty certain all gov contracts and all gov work must be done in compliance with the constitution. DoD actually warns their users better than the Gov warns their own people about surveillance. At this rate, I can't figure out why they keep bothering with warning banners for their own people on their own networks... As for VS, it's your private server and your private surveillance. I'm not talking about Comcast watching my ISP traffic, I'm talking about the Gov requiring Comcast provide it to them.

[Burn-E]

The gov is not coming into your house. If you do not like the policy, stop using the internet. If I wanted I could read every PM and every email notification sent through this server, and the others I manage. CC info, addresses, private messages, photos, FB logins and so on. But I do not. Why? Because who cares. In the 15 year history of VS I think I have read maybe 10 PMs and a hand full of emails and that was to curb abuse that was reported. Using your tax dollar logic, you should go ask for some seat time in a F35

They don't have to come into my house. They gather it off an unsecured network that was purposely designed to be open. The question is whether I should be paying them to take those actions. And whether they are held accountable for those actions. If I was concerned about my communications over open lines I would make sure to use the appropriate level of encryption or method of communication.

And who's to say I haven't asked for a ride in an F35?

It's still our money. It's still our property. We entrust the government and military and all of the other agencies with a stewardship which means they are accountable for what they do with the responsibility and money we provide them. If they fail at their jobs or violate the limits of their stewardship then it is our right as the governed to revoke their stewardship.

i'm not doing anything i shouldn't be, so i have nothing to hide or fear.

No, you just don't care so long as it doesn't impact you directly. If and when the day comes that it does impact you directly, the raging hippy will awaken and cry about why is any of this allowable? Rights are rights - you're vigilant about them or you squander them and wonder where they went when they've disappeared due to complacency.

We live among sheep - partisan sheep at that:

[Che'_Moderator]

And I'm pretty certain all gov contracts and all gov work must be done in compliance with the constitution.

I know you do not actually believe that. Not saying it should not be that way, just telling the others its not that way and it never will be. Even carnivore was only voluntarily pulled and then put right back up.