Skip to main content

View Diary: PRISM: What It's Really All About (196 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't mind at all (4+ / 0-)

    that my local chain grocers print out coupons based on what I buy. If I can get two bucks off dog food next time I need it, I'm glad to. I don't mind that I get an email notice from my pharmacy that this or that is on sale, or they've a new dollars-off on OTCs I buy regularly. That's targeting me for things I actually consume, and I've no problem letting them know what I consume so they can do that.

    Neither of my local chain grocers nor my favorite pharmacy for which I have that discount recording card have the power to show up at my house armed to the teeth and search my home and property, steal it all out from under me if they find something they can charge me with. They have no power to throw me in jail on trumped-up charges just because I'm loud and In Their Way.

    The gub'mint has that power. They can stay the fuck inside their pen, thank you very much. That fence was put right where it is for very good reasons.

    •  you realize that by doing that (0+ / 0-)

      you are still giving out information about yourself?

      See this is what gets me, the complete hypocrisy of saying how dare our government in a regulated fashion look at what is essentially the street signs of the internet while those same people saturate the web with their personal infromation.

      And no I'm saying that precisely applies to you but the fact you can be so outraged and then blase suggests that you are.

      In the time that I have been given,
      I am what I am

      by duhban on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 09:34:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I have nothing to hide, duhban. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Don midwest, LilithGardener

        My life is (literally) an open book. But that makes me not a bit happier that the government has surrupticiously stolen my digital self as if it counted for something real. The state has much more power than I do. The grocery store and pharmacy don't.

        You can sign off on any governmental overreach you like. Volunteer for it! You have no reason or right to surrender any of my privacy - or who I care not to be private to for commercial reasons - just because you don't care. My rights are not yours to surrender. Never were, never will be.

        •  stolen? (0+ / 0-)

          what the government is looking at is 'public' and has no expectation of privacy attached to it.

          When they start hacking email and so on without a warrant you'll have a point.

          In the time that I have been given,
          I am what I am

          by duhban on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 10:25:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  right now, if you use encrypted email you are (4+ / 0-)

            flagged and they are saved for future cracking....

            If all they are interested in is the metadata than why the hell are they saving encrypted email's contents when the metadata is in plain text and visible....

            That is what you say they are doing and only that without a warrant correct?  What is their reasonable articulable suspicion that allows them to archive the contents of my emails when my metadata shows no suspicious patterns?

            Why do they give a damn about the contents of my email anyway considering I show no suspicious patterns? Why am I suddenly lumped with terrorist sympathizers and other unsavory characters....meek little me who just actually gives a damn that what I write to someone isn't read by any bozo that feels like it

            There are many different completely legal and logical reasons to use encrypted email including privacy concerns.  Why is that right of mine being abridged...When did it become illegal to write in code to your friends?

            Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
            I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
            Emiliano Zapata

            by buddabelly on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 11:20:33 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  is that really a surprise? (0+ / 0-)

              the vast majority of email isn't encrypted so of course they are going to want to know what it is.

              And no I am not saying that that should mean they can. But then again a rational adult conversation on the matter seems to have be voided in favor of paranoid libertarian fantasies.

              As for what they are doing, they are saving as much as they can and using the metadata as a fliter.

              In the time that I have been given,
              I am what I am

              by duhban on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 11:35:45 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  they admitted they were separating out and saving (4+ / 0-)

                the content of all encrypted emails whether or not there were suspicious patterns and they went to the same category as known terrorist sympathizers!

                Don't you find that to be an outrageous violation of the right to privacy and search and seizure?....Remember we aren't talking metadata and we aren't talking supposition or conspiracy theory, they admitted this openly and proudly.

                This alone imo is reason for investigation,and if it isn't prosecutable then we need to get on that PATRIOT act repeal and add some serious privacy protections to boot......

                Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
                I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
                Emiliano Zapata

                by buddabelly on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 12:49:21 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  yes because as of right now there is (0+ / 0-)

                  no legal reason they can not.

                  If you would like to change that then let's get on it but your rights, my rights, anyone rights' in the digital age have never been well defined.

                  It's why I support a consitutional convention to define them.

                  In the time that I have been given,
                  I am what I am

                  by duhban on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 09:57:20 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  To use the mail analogy (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  buddabelly, Joieau

                  - that would be like an assumption that anyone who has a locked mailbox, must be receiving mail worth cataloging, and the government has a right to create and store a full duplicate of your mail, just in case they ever have a reason to open it.

                  Yes, a lot of people still have unlocked mailboxes at the end of the driveway, and the public nature of you postal address doesn't give anyone the right to follow the postman and look through your mail.

                  "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                  by LilithGardener on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 12:07:42 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  yup, there really is no justification under our (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    LilithGardener, Joieau

                    Constitutional framework for this action...It assumes guilt simply because a person wants some privacy....

                    I would love to see everyone and i mean everyone start using at least PGP while using trucrypt on their drives...Lock that shit down and force them to either crack it or give up...

                    I was reading a security site the other day and supposedly to brute force a 256bit PGP private key would take all the energy the universe produces in a minute or something equally ridiculous.......and a lot of time, their most precious resource.

                    I would love something like a thumbdrive with something like Puppy linux, Tor, a tor browser and PGP for dummies that could just be plugged in and automatically encrypt everything encryptable....

                    Lets give em a real big file if they want to start a file.....

                    Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
                    I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
                    Emiliano Zapata

                    by buddabelly on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 01:54:18 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Exactly - lets start sending each other (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Joieau, buddabelly

                      articles from the New York times, encrypted, with cryptic subject lines. Just a dozen or so articles per day. And forward encrypted articles to our think tanks. And forward encrypted images to Congress Critters.

                      "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                      by LilithGardener on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 02:15:24 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

            •  why, why, why? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Joieau

              That is the burning question!

              Takin it to the Streets! time to GOTV

              by totallynext on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 03:32:29 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Wow - someone has really drunk the koolaid (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Joieau
            and has no expectation of privacy attached to it.

            "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

            by LilithGardener on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 07:45:53 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  some one is clueless how the internet works (0+ / 0-)

              for metadata to even function it HAS to be public.  Otherwise it's like demanding mail be delivered without knowing the state, zip code, city or even address (depending on how restrictive you want to go)

              Get a clue

              In the time that I have been given,
              I am what I am

              by duhban on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 09:32:05 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  This reliance on "expectation of privacy" is (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Joieau

                being distorted by black and white thinking.

                Expectations of privacy are not all or none. Europeans get this, latin and south americans get this too. There is such a thing as semi-public space, and partial expectation of privacy.

                To use your choice - the mail.

                Yes the government needs to know your address for a number of functional reasons.  Yes, organizations to which you give your address have a right to store your address for the functional purpose of delivering the mail.

                A long time ago corporations decided on their own to sell name and your address, to data collectors - we all know that horse left the barn a long time ago.

                Yes, definitely the the US Postal Service needs to know your address for the explicit purpose of being able to deliver mail to you.

                I don't have a problem with the USPS imaging all the mail - because of the enormously disruptive crimes that can be perpetrated through the mail.

                But no one has a right to drive along behind the postal delivery truck and sift through your mailbox to see what was delivered that day, even if your mailbox sits unlocked at the end of your long driveway.

                In your black and white world, if private mailboxes have no expectation of privacy then anyone, e.g. as that RW org in NC has every right to go and look at your mail every day before you pick it up.

                There is more nuance to the issue - and I'm sure you know that.

                "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                by LilithGardener on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 11:54:13 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  see this is how I know you don't know what (0+ / 0-)

                  you are talking about.

                  Because it is a black and white thing. Either metadata is public or it isn't.

                  And what you don't seem to understand is metadata is not the actual information. It's a mailing address and PRISM is really no different then that postal program.

                  In the time that I have been given,
                  I am what I am

                  by duhban on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 01:38:25 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  There is no point to your attack other than to (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    duhban, Joieau

                    simply attack. I'll look forward to your next post on stoichiometry, but in diaries about PRISM and Snowden, I'll pass yours by - because I have nothing to prove to you.

                    FWIW, I commented for the benefit of others who haven't stumbled into black and white thinking about internet and privacy.

                    A reasonable expectation of privacy is a legal test, a kind of standard by which to conduct a legal inquiry, in cases where explicit legal definition of privacy has not yet been defined under the law. It's a useful test, but not a bright line test. There are shades of gray and we clearly need legal definitions about what public information may be collected, for how long it may be kept, and especially for what purposes the information may be used.

                    E.g. Your vehicle license plate is in some ways similar to metadata. It is a requirement for using a vehicle on public roads. Your license plate is on display for anyone and any camera to record anywhere you go in public. In jurisdictions that have license plate readers installed on police cars your license plate can be photographed dozens of times a week, including in your own driveway, where it snaps a picture of you and your kids getting out of the car.

                    We get into the gray zone when someone - without public over site - decides that all those public images are to be deposited in a regional database that can be accessed by any PD or LE entity without a warrent. A lack of "reasonable expectation of privacy" is not a bright line that makes such public data automatically open to anyone who wants to collect it.

                    Voter registration is public data. No reasonable expectation of privacy right? Yet the NYPD was prohibited from asking questions about political affiliation when protestors were arrested. The NYPD was compelled to erase the database that had assembled of public protests and political affiliation of those arrested.

                    We should all become more familiar with what a reasonable expectation of privacy means and how it has already been denied as a basis for UNREASONABLE collection and storage by law enforcement.

                    "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                    by LilithGardener on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 02:04:20 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

          •  My mail is not 'public'. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LilithGardener

            Nor is my email, my telephone conversations, etc. If you believe the government has a right/reason to open your mail (snail or email) and listen in on your phone conversations without even the slightest nod to probable cause and duly sworn legal warrant, you'll have to provide me with a list of specific, NOT-secret legislation and policy before I'll buy it. Law and policy which has existed since well before the goddamned PATRIOT Act while you're at it, because the PATRIOT Act is blatantly unconstitutional, will be effectively challenged, and is very likely to be struck down.

            •  um the metadata is (0+ / 0-)

              because that's how the internet functions

              At some point to send data you have to give it instructions. Please let me know when you understand the difference between metadata and the contents because till then you do not have the knowledge to have this conversation.

              In the time that I have been given,
              I am what I am

              by duhban on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 11:21:10 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Most people discussing PRISM, etc. already know (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Joieau

                what meta data is. People who don't already know what meta data is are people who do not care to know much about the Patriot Act or civil liberties.

                Please stop pretending otherwise.

                You're spamming this kindergarten IP lesson in lieu of making any point or contribution to the discussion.

                "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

                by LilithGardener on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 12:13:04 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  A reasonable expectation of privacy - we (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Joieau

          should all become more familiar with how the test has been applied and how it is NOT a blanket permission for anyone to collect and store public information for any future purpose they may so choose.

          Reposting from my comment below:

          A reasonable expectation of privacy is a legal test, a kind of standard by which to conduct a legal inquiry, in cases where explicit legal definition of privacy has not yet been defined under the law. It's a useful test, but not a bright line test. There are shades of gray and we clearly need legal definitions about what public information may be collected, for how long it may be kept, and especially for what purposes the information may be used.

          E.g. Your vehicle license plate is in some ways similar to metadata. It is a requirement for using a vehicle on public roads. Your license plate is on display for anyone and any camera to record anywhere you go in public. In jurisdictions that have license plate readers installed on police cars your license plate can be photographed dozens of times a week, including in your own driveway, where it snaps a picture of you and your kids getting out of the car.

          We get into the gray zone when someone - without public over site - decides that all those public images are to be deposited in a regional database that can be accessed by any PD or LE entity without a warrent. A lack of "reasonable expectation of privacy" is not a bright line that makes such public data automatically open to anyone who wants to collect it.

          Voter registration is public data. No reasonable expectation of privacy right? Yet the NYPD was prohibited from asking questions about political affiliation when protestors were arrested. The NYPD was compelled to erase the database that had assembled of public protests and political affiliation of those arrested.

          We should all become more familiar with what a reasonable expectation of privacy means and how it has already been denied as a basis for UNREASONABLE collection and storage by law enforcement.

          "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

          by LilithGardener on Mon Jul 08, 2013 at 02:38:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site