FBI wants widespread monitoring of 'illegal' Internet activity...

[Eli]

Okay, I understand the no right to privacy on a public network bit. That's understandable.

I also agree that the constitution needs to be amended.

I still don't like it, though. And it has much more to do with what people are saying than what they're downloading.

 

[EGGO]

Wiretapping? I better watch what words come out of my mouth or I'll be labeled a terrorist.
"Osama bin Laden"
"Weapons of mass destruction"
"Al Queda"
"Hillary for President" (Harvey Birdman reference)

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Eli
FUCK that.

No, seriously. WTF?

We aren't a free country anymore...

We are a free country. We're just struggling with what is considered private communications and public communications. It's a battle of the constitution vs. technology.

1) Tapping into phone lines = not legal, well...not admissable. But I did it all the time, sorry - part of my job.
2) To expect privacy on a public network like The Internet is just absurd. It is a PUBLIC network.

 

[Eli]

How are we supposed to handle this, then? Should it be up to the individual users to encrypt their data if they don't want it seen on the public network, then? I guess thats kinda the way it is now already...

But knowing someone was definitely watching makes the sense of it much more urgent.

 

[clamum]

But as for that downloading argument, aren't you downloading everything you view anyway? Not just P2P or what-have-you?

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Eli
How are we supposed to handle this, then? Should it be up to the individual users to encrypt their data if they don't want it seen on the public network, then? I guess thats kinda the way it is now already...

But knowing someone was definitely watching makes the sense of it much more urgent.

If you encrypt then you fall into the "You must have something to hide" group.

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: Eli
How are we supposed to handle this, then? Should it be up to the individual users to encrypt their data if they don't want it seen on the public network, then? I guess thats kinda the way it is now already...

But knowing someone was definitely watching makes the sense of it much more urgent.

If you encrypt then you fall into the "You must have something to hide" group.

Ugh.

It's such a grey area. It makes my head spin. It's amazing that its as balanced as it is currently. How do you deal with that?

The mindset of "If you don't have anything to hide, you dont have anything to worry about" seriously bothers me, but I don't know how to explain it.

 

[newb111]

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: Eli
How are we supposed to handle this, then? Should it be up to the individual users to encrypt their data if they don't want it seen on the public network, then? I guess thats kinda the way it is now already...

But knowing someone was definitely watching makes the sense of it much more urgent.

If you encrypt then you fall into the "You must have something to hide" group.

Ugh.

It's such a grey area. It makes my head spin. It's amazing that its as balanced as it is currently. How do you deal with that?

The mindset of "If you don't have anything to hide, you dont have anything to worry about" seriously bothers me, but I don't know how to explain it.

It's not a problem until they decide that something you do is a crime. It's easy to say it doesn't affect you, until it does.

First they came...

 

[biggestmuff]

Originally posted by: Phokus
Welcome to Bush's America. Apparently we're trying our best to reach the Chinese government's level of a dystopian nightmare.

Just wait. If elected, the Democrats will fix everything. :roll: I'm sure they wouldn't want to have such powerful tools at their disposal.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Eli
How are we supposed to handle this, then? Should it be up to the individual users to encrypt their data if they don't want it seen on the public network, then? I guess thats kinda the way it is now already...

But knowing someone was definitely watching makes the sense of it much more urgent.

HERE ME OUT before the knee jerk reactions. Not directed to you Eli, but coming from somebody that works in the delivery of packets on the intarweb.

How are we supposed to handle this? That is a VERY difficult question coming from a "give me liberty" person that I am. The reason for explosion of The Internet is the very fact that it is public network

The reason The Internet works and why it is so open is because of agreed upon ways of exchanging information. This is all public information and what allowed The Internet to become what it is today. The same could be said of the telephone networks as far as standards were concerned. It gets real complicated and I can't demonstrate it in an intarweb post.

All I can comment on is gubment staying out of it is what allowed The Internet to become what it is. It's the public network that it is that allowed it to take over. It's also being a public network that no expectation of privacy is observed.

Enter virtual private networks.

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Eli
How are we supposed to handle this, then? Should it be up to the individual users to encrypt their data if they don't want it seen on the public network, then? I guess thats kinda the way it is now already...

But knowing someone was definitely watching makes the sense of it much more urgent.

HERE ME OUT before the knee jerk reactions. Not directed to you Eli, but coming from somebody that works in the delivery of packets on the intarweb.

How are we supposed to handle this? That is a VERY difficult question coming from a "give me liberty" person that I am. The reason for explosion of The Internet is the very fact that it is public network

The reason The Internet works and why it is so open is because of agreed upon ways of exchanging information. This is all public information and what allowed The Internet to become what it is today. The same could be said of the telephone networks as far as standards were concerned. It gets real complicated and I can't demonstrate it in an intarweb post.

All I can comment on is gubment staying out of it is what allowed The Internet to become what it is. It's the public network that it is that allowed it to take over. It's also being a public network that no expectation of privacy is observed.

Enter virtual private networks.

I can't tell if you're agreeing that this shouldn't be allowed, or what.. lol

So thats the answer, everyone has their own VPN?

 

[flxnimprtmscl]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Eli
FUCK that.

No, seriously. WTF?

We aren't a free country anymore...

We are a free country. We're just struggling with what is considered private communications and public communications. It's a battle of the constitution vs. technology.

1) Tapping into phone lines = not legal, well...not admissable. But I did it all the time, sorry - part of my job.
2) To expect privacy on a public network like The Internet is just absurd. It is a PUBLIC network.

How is the phone system not a public network? I really fail to see the difference here. Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Eli
FUCK that.

No, seriously. WTF?

We aren't a free country anymore...

We are a free country. We're just struggling with what is considered private communications and public communications. It's a battle of the constitution vs. technology.

1) Tapping into phone lines = not legal, well...not admissable. But I did it all the time, sorry - part of my job.
2) To expect privacy on a public network like The Internet is just absurd. It is a PUBLIC network.

How is the phone system not a public network? I really fail to see the difference here. Maybe I'm missing something.

I'd guess because its actually owned by the telecos.

But, the the internet is essentially owned by the telecos too.

Hmm.

 

[lightstar]

we're quickly becoming the most monitored society in the western hemisphere

 

[sao123]

microchips in your right hand or forehead... lets start the 666 wars right now.

 

[potato28]

WTF?!1? Get out of my Internets!!!!!!!!!

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: potato28
WTF?!1? Get out of my Internets!!!!!!!!!

GET OUT OF MY TUBES!!!

 

[skace]

And in comes the encrypted web browser.

Or should I say.... 100% encrypted web browsing...

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: potato28
WTF?!1? Get out of my Internets!!!!!!!!!

GET OUT OF MY TUBES!!!

They're not your tubes, friend!

 

[RESmonkey]

That's stupid, don't they have other things to be doing? Like solving crimes or whatever is it that the gov't pays them to do?

 

[Xavier434]

There is no line drawn for Big Brother. They just keep pushing the envelope more and more. When is enough going to be enough? Are we really going to be that much safer if all of this stuff continues at rate it is currently?

 

[DivideBYZero]

LOL

 

[txrandom]

Won't this cause the tubes to get even more clogged?

 

[RESmonkey]

My understanding of the tubez isn't much, but if download rates fall, that is epic fail.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

While the internet is a public domain, there is not currently in place AFAIK (or publically disclosed at least) a system to scan ALL data. While yes it is a public domain and network, this is the same thing as having all phone calls routed through servers to scan for keywords/phrases (or just record all of them). Yes the phone has a reasonable expectation of privacy, whereas the internet does not.

This is just another step in the road to 1984...