Verizon & Obama: all your calls are belong to us.

[GasBandit]

Um, yeah, there has been plenty of times it's been pointed out to you how they -won't work-. Either you purposely ignore them or you change subjects every single time. People don't say -I'm done trying to converse with you- so often/frequently because they're wrong, it's because you can't accept reality. What's the saying: If you keep having failed relationships, maybe the problem isn't the other person?

Actually, people don't say that all that often, and when they do, they go right back to conversing with me because it's rarely meant as it is worded. It's usually just an attempt to save face when they realize their position is untenable.

But, if you're the kind of person who is swayed by how many people do similar things, take note that everybody in this thread thinks this is a big deal, and you are the only one who doesn't.

 

[DarkAudit]

If anyone is a fan of The Prisoner, I strongly recommend you watch the episode It's Your Funeral.

The country needs legions of jammers to bury these programs under mountains of false positives.

 

[GasBandit]

Coming soon - a VPN-like service for phone calls.

 

[PatrThom]

Hey, if we're innocent, we have nothing to hide, right?

I don't have time right now to go into detail, but suffice it to say that I agree wholeheartedly.

Mulled this over on the way to work, and arrived at the following, and you can quote me on this:

Building a system where every little thing we do is logged and mined for potential transgressions while simultaneously pooh-poohing our "baseless" concerns about how these data will be used against us is hypocrisy in its most pure state.

--PatrLITTLEGIRL

 

[Anonymous]

I don't believe them for a second when they say they don't know what's in the calls. They say they are not listening in, but seriously, what kind of intelligence can they gather from knowing that X spoke to Y at a certain time for a certain length of time? Not a fucking thing that would be admissible in court. It's bullshit.

 

[Dave]

And I accidentally hit the anonymous button on that one. It was me.

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

You can gain a lot from just that information, if The Wire is to be believed

 

[Dave]

You can gain a lot from just that information, if The Wire is to be believed

The show or the tech news outlet?

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

The show or the tech news outlet?

the HBO show

 

[Dave]

Fiction show. All points now invalidated. Gotcha.

 

[Gilgamesh]

Yet everyone here is using Orwell references, all their points invalidated too?

 

[strawman]

Terrorist: a person who terrifies others.

The government and/or the American public are so scared of another 9/11 that they are willing to give up much of their privacy and some of their liberty.

Sounds like the terror campaign is working. We are all scared out of our wits aren't we?

 

[Cajungal]

My knee-jerk reaction to that is that broad ideas about government and society that transcend a single book are different from specific details about how investigation takes place. Truthfully, though, I can't make a judgment, because I haven't seen the show.

 

[strawman]

If important or useful information can't be teased out of the smallest slivers of information, advertisers wouldn't be paying $$$$ for database of human activity (sites visited, purchases, location, movement, friends, family, etc).

The government not only gets special access to information not even google has, but they can collect all the information google and other human activity aggregators have made useful over time.

Yes, target sends specific advertising to customers they know are having babies based on previous purchases.

Now the government can get court orders to tap phones of US citizens based on little more than the fact that they misdialed their doctors office one day.

 

[GasBandit]

The terrorists won in 1995. It's just been a long slide to the bottom ever since.

 

[Dave]

Yet everyone here is using Orwell references, all their points invalidated too?

Orwellian refers to a non-specific erosion of rights masked in the name of some amorphous threat. Charlie is using a TV show to give specific information about what can be gained from this surveillance. Opples & aranges, my friend.

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

Fiction show. All points now invalidated. Gotcha.

The Wire is based on a non-fiction book written with the author spending a year embedded in the Baltimore Homicide Department, it's semi-legit, not to start a tangent

 

[Gilgamesh]

Orwellian refers to a non-specific erosion of rights masked in the name of some amorphous threat. Charlie is using a TV show to give specific information about what can be gained from this surveillance. Opples & aranges, my friend.

No, Orellian refers to a specific erosion of rights masked in the name of some amorphous threat.... that was written in a fictional book.

 

[GasBandit]

I might seem Machiavellian, but a debate on what constitutes "Orwellian" seems downright Sisyphean.

 

[PatrThom]

I think what really grinds my gears is that all this evidence is being collected, but you think I'll ever be able to subpoena any of it to establish an alibi or support an argument? Nooooooooo. I now have a reasonable expectation that the Government is keeping records on everyone's location and phone calls, but if someone gets hauled in front of a judge on a burglary charge, it would be trivial to request the records proving the subject was actually several miles from where the incident occurred, yet the Gvt will probably be more interested in keeping their data secret.

--Patrick

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

Actually now the "The Wire" tangent is relevant!

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat..._prism_and_other_programs_not_a_big_deal.html

but he thinks we should “be more incensed at the notion of an American executive branch firing missiles at U.S. citizens and killing them without the benefit of even an in absentia legal proceeding” than by what the NSA is doing with these surveillance programs.

Agreed

 

[PatrThom]

I suppose that depends on what method they use to determine where to point the missiles.

--Patrick

 

[MindDetective]

Let's get this in the right thread:

Anonymous might have gotten involved? I don't know this source, though.

 

[Anonymous]

I don't believe them for a second when they say they don't know what's in the calls. They say they are not listening in, but seriously, what kind of intelligence can they gather from knowing that X spoke to Y at a certain time for a certain length of time? Not a fucking thing that would be admissible in court. It's bullshit.

In 2004, when I worked as an operator for MCI, we were informed during training class that the FCC can and does record the content of a "random sampling" of phone calls made through every exchange within the US and that, at the time, they used innocuous looking trucks (they really weren't all that innocuous looking, they were completely blank trucks, utterly devoid of any insignia or logos... so, in other words, conspicuous as all hell) to scan and record cellular calls, so they didn't have to worry about losing connection to a call if the person making the call passed from one cellular node to another. So yeah, the whole "no one is listening to your calls" is complete and utter bullshit. Of course, that information was covered in the non-expiring NDA we all had to sign in order to be certified to work at the center.

 

[Gared]

You know, in light of all of these disclosures, I can't help but wonder who really requested the take-down of MegaUpload, and which agency really turned the intel for the operation.

 

[strawman]

The next thing to worry about is whether the government is securing this data well enough.

Can you imagine the furor if, for instance, anonymous got ahold of even a day's worth of phone call meta data?

Or a telemarketing association?

The fact that they're collecting it means it can be stolen in one fell swoop.

 

[Gared]

Well, luckily, the US government is pretty good about safeguarding their computer systems. I mean, it's not like China recently got caught breaking into the Pentagon's computer system and stealing several dozen weapons system blueprints, or anything.

 

[PatrThom]

That's the thing about collecting interesting information all together in one place. It makes that information easier to target after someone else has done all the work of gathering it for you.

--Patrick

 

[Zappit]

Before we get into the certified clustermuss that a game of semantics would turn into, could we just take a step back and recognize that Gas and Charlie are actually agreeing on something?

This thread is a goddamn unicorn.

 

[PatrThom]

This thread is a goddamn unicorn.

More like a Tasmanian Devil, actually. Rarely seen but well-known that it will try to bite your face off.

--Patrick

 

[GasBandit]

Before we get into the certified clustermuss that a game of semantics would turn into, could we just take a step back and recognize that Gas and Charlie are actually agreeing on something?

This thread is a goddamn unicorn.

I know, kids, I'm scared too.

 

[DarkAudit]

The government has been electronically spying on its citizens for years.

The Big Snoop.

Only the names have been changed to protect the careers of those seeking reelection.

 

[GasBandit]

 

[strawman]

Dear government,

You can run secret operations that affect a few people all the time, or secret operations that affect everyone some of the time, but you cannot conduct secret operations that affect everyone all the time.

 

[PatrThom]

I think what really grinds my gears is that all this evidence is being collected, but you think I'll ever be able to subpoena any of it to establish an alibi or support an argument? Nooooooooo. [...] the Gvt will probably be more interested in keeping their data secret.

Bank robbery suspect wants NSA phone records for his defense

Oh, the anticipation is...exquisite.

--Patrick