DoJ to Snowden: Hope your 15 minutes were worth it, pal

[garbon]

not only do we let email providers see who we send emails to, but also the content.

Does that seem right to you?

Ummm, seems pretty standard. After all the emails exist because they are stored somewhere.

[Syt]

Of course, but do you think it should be that non-participating parties have access to your private communications in that way?

[jimmy olsen]

Venezuela and Nicaragua offer Snowden asylum

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/05/19309635-venezuela-nicaragua-offer-asylum-to-nsa-leaker-snowden?lite

[garbon]

Of course, but do you think it should be that non-participating parties have access to your private communications in that way?

I don't see how they are actually private communications.

[Zanza]

What constitutes private communication to you then? Sound waves can also be captured with a microphone or some other sound recording device. Would it be okay if the government recorded all conversations in public areas?

[garbon]

I think you're verging in getting shrill and I don't think those situations are comparable as the latter involves a state wasting fantastic amounts of money. That said I think it would be foolish to just assume privacy in a public location given the proliferation of recording devices.

[Zanza]

Shrill? I just try to understand a position that I don't share. My default position is an expectation of privacy. Everywhere, all the time. Maybe not from my fellow citizens, but certainly from the government. The government should generally only ever collect data for a clear-cut purpose and not just because it can.

And not being a person of public interest, the courts would also protect my privacy against most of my fellow citizens, e.g. recording or photographing me and e.g. publishing that just because I am in a public place is not legal here.

I must admit that I am surprised, even bewildered, that Americans, who I had so far seen as very skeptical regarding their government, seem pretty nonchalant about this.

[Eddie Teach]

I must admit that I am surprised, even bewildered, that Americans, who I had so far seen as very skeptical regarding their government, seem pretty nonchalant about this.

One of the signs our nation is in decline.

[The Brain]

You have to remember that America thought it was a great idea to publically champion the systematic use of torture. And this wasn't some isolated nutcase, this was broad government policy that was supported by the American voter. I'm not even making this shit up, which is hilarious.

[Zanza]

Garbon's concern about the costs of such a program apparently being his only concern shows a certain shallowness.

[Eddie Teach]

Garbon's concern about the costs of such a program apparently being his only concern shows a certain shallowness.

I don't think it's shallowness, rather he just doesn't care if people are watching or listening to him. Sheilbh has expressed similar sentiments.

[garbon]

I must admit that I am surprised, even bewildered, that Americans, who I had so far seen as very skeptical regarding their government, seem pretty nonchalant about this.

For the most part, I think that my government is pretty incompetent.

Secondly, I've grown up just assuming that most of my info is easily accessible. Even if the gov't hadn't scanned my letters or copied my emails in bulk, it isn't like it would take someone a lot of investigative research to find information on me. Hell, things like facebook encourage you to give them information on you / google stores information on my web searches as linked to my google profile. Or we could get someone backwards in office who decides to release for instance names of people that like to view a particular type of porn - I guess I might find that mildly embarrassing but then again if I was looking at it online, I assumed someone had that info.*

Lastly, I think Eddie is kinda right. I am who I am and find it unlikely that the gov't is going to, for instance, print out my complaints about my place of work and forward them to my boss (or for that matter out me to members of my family that I don't talk about my sexuality with). Could happen though I guess but not something I'm overly concerned with and I think would be a clear abuse of power if they did so unprompted.

*So then the discussion devolves to me on how easy the gov't can get my info and I will say I will agree that we shouldn't be trying to make that easier when the government hasn't stated a legitimate reason.

Biggest objection I then have, and I don't think it shallow, is the money aspect as it isn't like all of this surveillance is cheap. And I don't think there is anything wrong with suggesting that the gov't definitely shouldn't be surveilling if it can't justify the spend.

[Razgovory]

Shrill? I just try to understand a position that I don't share. My default position is an expectation of privacy. Everywhere, all the time. Maybe not from my fellow citizens, but certainly from the government. The government should generally only ever collect data for a clear-cut purpose and not just because it can.

And not being a person of public interest, the courts would also protect my privacy against most of my fellow citizens, e.g. recording or photographing me and e.g. publishing that just because I am in a public place is not legal here.

I must admit that I am surprised, even bewildered, that Americans, who I had so far seen as very skeptical regarding their government, seem pretty nonchalant about this.

'Cause we don't care about the privacy of people in other countries?  That is sorta why we have a CIA, to spy on people in other countries.

[Zanza]

'Cause we don't care about the privacy of people in other countries?  That is sorta why we have a CIA, to spy on people in other countries.

The latest bit was about the US postal service photographing all mail and supposedly keeping that information for ten years now. It's just a guess, but I think that mainly aims at Americans, not foreigners. What astounds me is not that you don't care about the privacy of foreigners, but that don't seem to care about your own privacy in all of this.

[Zanza]

For the most part, I think that my government is pretty incompetent.

What if you find out that they are actually quite competent in joining together data on you from a variety of sources to have a very precise picture of you at the push of a button? I fear that their incompetence is not so much in gathering that data, but rather in making sure it doesn't become public or is misused by individuals with access.

*So then the discussion devolves to me on how easy the gov't can get my info and I will say I will agree that we shouldn't be trying to make that easier when the government hasn't stated a legitimate reason.

Ok, then I guess we are in agreement.