The end of privacy....

listening to MSNBC, they say that we have to be willing to give up out internet privacy in order to combat future terrorism...supposedly the terrorists used Instant Messaging through the internet to plan for the attack. what does everyone think about this...? that means talking about graffiti or anyother criminal act through instant messaging could get you into some serious shit. of course those in support would say that if youre a decent law abiding citizen, you would not have the need to talk of criminal acts,and therefore you should never get into any serious trouble over it.

Regardless of involvement in criminal activity, the lack of privacy is a serious situation that we need to review. Even if we were able to somehow monitor the millions of exchanges on the Internet daily, there would still be ways to quickly and confidentially conduct interactions with others. Beyond that the corporate world made the internet what it is today and much of their confidential information is exchanged via this medium. I doubt they would support an action of this type.

Originally posted by sectorTVA:

of course those in support would say that if youre a decent law abiding citizen, you would not have the need to talk of criminal acts,and therefore you should never get into any serious trouble over it.

yeah, this is a common right wing excuse for civil rights infringement, if you're not a drug user you don't have to worry about drug testing... the fact is, not matter what, they are asking us to give up freedoms provided for us by the founding fathers of our country, freedoms placed in effect presumably to facilitate our pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. I don't like peeing in a cup, I don't like the govt. monitoring my communications, digital or otherwise. These things make me UNhappy and hinder my pursuit thereof.

Sadly, it may be true that terrorists and criminals may use the various forms of telecommunications to their own nefarious ends, however, for me, that is the price of freedom.

I said it early yesterday, but I guess it bears repeating:

The man who gives up freedom for security winds up with neither

------------------

2 Can Sam

Chris Matthews of MSNBC's hardball is pretty pissed off that the United States Intelligence knew immediately after seeing the passenger list, which passengers were the terrorists due to the fact that the names of the terrorists who piloted the planes were on a list that the United States Intelligence had compiled regarding people with possible terrorist links with Osama Bin Laden. He stated that we should have watched these people as soon as they set foot on American soil, and monitered their activities while they were in the US. Interesting...note that Chris Matthew is pretty far right on the political spectrum.

maybe also we have a no more blinds-on-your-window policy. everyone will feel safer when they can see what is going on at any given place.

(joke).

but really, that sucks if true.

there are worse things to worry about though.

True this might be the future. But most of us I think don't really have that much too hide. I personally don't think they are going to worry or prosecute kids smoking weed or talking about graff. I think they would be looking for info on discussions that pose harm to society. If a bill were to be voted on within a reasonable amount of time, I think it would pass. With all the justified panic government would have an easy job convincing the public that it for our benefit.

Pistol, I'm sorry, but I will not be lulled into thinking the police will apply the laws in their most liberal context, conversely, I must expect the worst possible application, simply because it is the worst POSSIBLE application, as of now, laws are firmly in place and I see no reason to abridge the precious few freedoms I still have

------------------

2 Can Sam

the only thing they can't monitor presently,

is pgp email.

there is no 'giving up our internet privacy' becuz we

don't have any. its a matter of when and who has the motivation

to peep, not IF it can be done.

trying to secure something that isn't secure

by any means now, is monumental in complexity....

not to mention that efforts to do so would probably violate

constitutional rights....the net is a massive grey area..

i think its safe to say drastic restrictions put on

internet communications is not going to happen....

but who knows.............privacy on the net

is laughable........there is barely any real security or 'privacy' on the net

other than PGP that i'm aware of......

and thats straight from the NSA employee

who invented it.